mak1277 wrote:Off the top of my head I can't remember the year, but there was (at least) one season where Ruth out-homered every other TEAM. I'll take that.
yea and remember ruth threw bunch of shutouts also, but not sure if he was a slugger that same season
Ruth would have been a good fantasy pitcher 1915-1917. The hitting starts a couple years after that. Hmm, the guy could of hit 150 more HR if the Sox didn't make him pitch
hmm, how is it a fallacy that a home run also provides arun and an rbi?
A stolen base may lead to a run, but it doesn't necessarily have to. And it certainly doesn't provide a home run or rbi.
I'm not implying that there is some double dipping going on. Christ, sometimes people miss a larger point in their effort to nitpick.
I wish we could find this article. The point being, that there was no way you could lose the hr category if you had ruth. Unless you totally took the worst players of the area, you would sweep all the hitting cats. 177 runs, 59 home runs, 171 rbi, while batting .378? Think of what ichiro did for team averages that year? Actually, its like if ichrio suddenly became a power hitter and didn't lose average. I don't see how Ruth's 1921 season is even debateable to be honest. The next highest hr producer (mixed) had 24 home runs. If you played in a normal league, the rest of the power would be too carved up for anyone to do anything about ruth's disproportionate effect. There were only (I believe) 14 other guys who even broke 100 rbi, and the high 120's is the next closest anyone comes to him.
As for your career examples, what do any of those have to do with the fact that the year in question, no one held a candle to the Babe? We aren't talking about 1922-1931, we are talking about 1921... and he provided double-digit steals. This is the most monstrous season--especially when you consider that fantasy is a game of relativity. I can't think of a player who has outproduced his peers by such a wide margin in any other season.
great gretzky wrote:hmm, how is it a fallacy that a home run also provides arun and an rbi?
A stolen base may lead to a run, but it doesn't necessarily have to. And it certainly doesn't provide a home run or rbi.
I'm not implying that there is some double dipping going on. Christ, sometimes people miss a larger point in their effort to nitpick.
It's not nitpicking, it's a common misconception that somehow a HR is more valuable than a SB in today's standard 5 x 5 fantasy because you also recieve a run and rbi.
great gretzky wrote:I wish we could find this article. The point being, that there was no way you could lose the hr category if you had ruth. Unless you totally took the worst players of the area, you would sweep all the hitting cats. 177 runs, 59 home runs, 171 rbi, while batting .378? Think of what ichiro did for team averages that year? Actually, its like if ichrio suddenly became a power hitter and didn't lose average. I don't see how Ruth's 1921 season is even debateable to be honest.
Yes, Ruth's 1921 is incredible. Notice I aknowledged that after guessing Cobb's 1911. The only way a player could have higher fantasy value is if he was far and above #1 in a catagory like Ruth is (or more than onecat ) and/or some combination of that and positional scarcity. Rogers Hornsby at 2B would have been very valuable.
Last edited by nuggets on Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
i think the origonal question was more asking "who's stat line would you like to have this year" not "who would you liked to have had in the year they played"
i.e. Ruths 1921 stat line blew away the competition for 1921, but it may not be the most helpful to your team today.
that Larry Walker line is pretty sick, i'd probably take that, although Ricky's 130SB season you'd lock up SB and could concentrate on power from everyone else
Dan Lambskin wrote:i think the origonal question was more asking "who's stat line would you like to have this year" not "who would you liked to have had in the year they played"
That's an interesting take on it...Couldn't take Henderson's 1982 because he only hit .267 and had 51 rbi, 10 HR.
I'd probably take Charley Radbourn's 1884 or maybe Hugh Duffy's 1894:
160 R
18 HR
145 RBI
48 SB
.440 (237 hits)
Or Gehrig's 1931
163 R
46 HR
184 RBI
17 SB
.341 (211 hits)
In the end the season which might take them all is Jimmie Foxx's 1932, provided he get the catcher eligibility.
well then, in that case pedro's sub 1.00 whip year was out of hand. Didn't he have 300ks?
BTW, I have read the information with steals being more valuable than hr's, and I think there is a lot of merit to it.
Although, the simple fact remains that a guy who contributes to three categories is be definition more important than a guy who is hollow and only contributes one. Although, depending on steal totals, obvisouly an overwhelming amount of one category can net more points than good production in three.
Point being, I don't think you can summarily say one way or the other, since it depends on a specific player. But all else being equal, I am going to try and have 3/5 of my score be good, rather than 1 or 2 at the most like the sb guy gets.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by nuggets » Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:46 pm 
