players in the past were somehow superior that the current players and theres just no way that current players can measure up to old players. the game today is worse than it was in the "old times".
If anything, the opposite is true. there are a lot more people now than compared to the past. for ex. the population now is almost three times the population in 1920. which means a LOT more talent. also in a lot of cases, the old players mentioned played a large part or even their whole careers during WW so the talent pool was even shallower.
"the MVP has to be from a playoff team".
it's about who the MOST VALUABLE player is... means the player who has contributed the most to his team.. if a team doesnt make the playoffs, it doesnt mean that a player on the team's isn't valuable. it's NOT the best player on a playoff team award.
Cy Young has to win 20 or he's not good enough.
do they even realize how utterly useless and circumstancial wins are as a way of judging pitchers ??? i truly feel sorry for RJ.
"stealing bases wins and fast runners on the bases help teams win and speed is essential. "
the truth is that stolen bases are overrated in today's game. it has been mathematically determined over and over that a success rate of anything less than 75% actually harms the team. on average, getting caught stealing usually harms your team twice as much as it would've helped if the attempt had been successful. the problem i have is not necessarily with stolen bases but how much the "old-schoolers" overrate it and how they are abused by some managers. if youre able to achieve a 80% success rate when youre stealing, it's fine by me. just dont get thrown out 4 out of 10 times because it actually hurts your team.
the gist is, in the "old times", when no one used to hit home runs, stolen bases, sacs bunts etc. were cooler cos the run expectancy wasn't that high and adding one run meant much more than it does now. the risk was actully sometimes worth it. the "old schoolers" dont realize the change in the game and value steals etc. as if it was still 1905. in today's game giving away outs like that just isnt worth it.
and then people say that having fast runners on base helps even if they dont steal.. thats not totally true as well. even though the runner distracts the pictcher but he also distracts the hitter as well, even moreso than the pitcher according to some studies which suggest that hitters actually hit worse when theres a "speedy" runner on base. also hitters quite often take strikes in order to allow a runner the opportunity to steal. taking all those extra strikes reduces the quality of the at-bat and the probability of the hitter getting a hit.. ya know, yet another way steals can come back to bit you in the ass.
edit: changed title cos i didnt like it.
[size=10]Manny Ramirez....$20 million
Pedro Martinez....$17.5 million
Curt Schilling...$12 million (and a $2 million bonus)
Never hearing a Yankee fan chant 1918 again...priceless. [/size]
thetongueofire wrote:players in the past were somehow superior that the current players and theres just no way that current players can measure up to old players. the game today is worse than it was in the "old times".
If anything, the opposite is true. there are a lot more people now than compared to the past. for ex. the population now is almost three times the population in 1920. which means a LOT more talent. also in a lot of cases, the old players mentioned played a large part or even their whole careers during WW so the talent pool was even shallower.
This why expansion doesn't have that of an large effect on the quality of play. I have yet to see any strong evidence that expansion lowers the "quality" of play a significant amount. Right now there are probably at least 50 players in the world that are far better players than the 50 worst players in the major leagues. But because of the inherent inefficiencies in player movements the best players don't always play in the majors.
thetongueofire wrote:"the MVP has to be from a playoff team".
it's about who the MOST VALUABLE player is... means the player who has contributed the most to his team.. if a team doesnt make the playoffs, it doesnt mean that a player on the team's isn't valuable. it's NOT the best player on a playoff team award.
I agree with this.
Most Valuable Player Period. Playoffs, or no playoffs. Doesn't matter.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
thetongueofire wrote:"the MVP has to be from a playoff team".
it's about who the MOST VALUABLE player is... means the player who has contributed the most to his team.. if a team doesnt make the playoffs, it doesnt mean that a player on the team's isn't valuable. it's NOT the best player on a playoff team award.
I agree with this.
Most Valuable Player Period. Playoffs, or no playoffs. Doesn't matter.
possibly in the present day expansion doesn't show any more signs, but right after the last 2 times there was expansion in baseball it would have had the biggest effect on pitching. that is 10 to 12 players that are probably going to be called up from the minor leagues. and some #4 starter could end up being moved up to a #2 starter or something. that would have an effect for a few years you would think.
football on the other hand i don't think has caught up with it's last expansion, at least at qb. 32 teams and probably only 27 pro quarterbacks.
and as we all sit here tonight on a baseball chat sight we could argue that expansion quite possibly has taken away our fantasy hockey seasons possibly for a full year or two??
scince the big unit undoubtedly will be cheated out of the cy young this year, i make a bid for randy johnson mvp. it's a fact you cannot control wins and losses, and everyone knows the milestones he reached his % of wins out of 51 total (16), should have been 22- 9 at least this post could turn into a short novel so...
roadrunner wrote:possibly in the present day expansion doesn't show any more signs, but right after the last 2 times there was expansion in baseball it would have had the biggest effect on pitching. that is 10 to 12 players that are probably going to be called up from the minor leagues. and some #4 starter could end up being moved up to a #2 starter or something. that would have an effect for a few years you would think.
Are you talking about the 1993 and 1998 expansions?
What I've come to realize is that in any industry where there is a finite number of jobs there will always be more talent than actual jobs. Think about it this way. I am a manufacturing engineer. Every year new people graduate from college bringing more qualified people to the job market. Do these new people "dilute" the engineering profession. No, they increase it because there is now more competition for a finite number of jobs.
In baseball there are many players not in the majors who are better players than at least 100 players in the majors. Take for instance Dallas McPherson on the Angels. He had a huge year in the minors. He is one of top propects. Is it a reach to believe that he can outplay the Neifi Perez's, the Terrance Longs, and the Rickie Ladees of the world? But because of the player structure of the major leagues the best players don't always get to play because they are being blocked by other star players.
I don't necessarily think that the players are better today. I do think that because of equipment, medicine, supplements, nutrition, etc., there are better athletes today. There is a difference.
LCBOY wrote:What I've come to realize is that in any industry where there is a finite number of jobs there will always be more talent than actual jobs. Think about it this way. I am a manufacturing engineer. Every year new people graduate from college bringing more qualified people to the job market. Do these new people "dilute" the engineering profession. No, they increase it because there is now more competition for a finite number of jobs.
In baseball there are many players not in the majors who are better players than at least 100 players in the majors. Take for instance Dallas McPherson on the Angels. He had a huge year in the minors. He is one of top propects. Is it a reach to believe that he can outplay the Neifi Perez's, the Terrance Longs, and the Rickie Ladees of the world? But because of the player structure of the major leagues the best players don't always get to play because they are being blocked by other star players.
Very good point ... Never really gave it much thought, but you are right ..
Minnesota has a couple of guys that have no place to play either, but they could easily be starting for most ML teams. There are tons of examples now that I stop and think about it.
thetongueofire wrote:"stealing bases wins and fast runners on the bases help teams win and speed is essential. " the gist is, in the "old times", when no one used to hit home runs, stolen bases, sacs bunts etc. were cooler cos the run expectancy wasn't that high and adding one run meant much more than it does now. the risk was actully sometimes worth it. the "old schoolers" dont realize the change in the game and value steals etc. as if it was still 1905. in today's game giving away outs like that just isnt worth it.
You relaize that you are talking about the game before Ruth right?
this change in the game happened in 1920. Most of the people around at that time, or those oldschoolers are .... ... dead.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by thetongueofire » Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:53 pm 
