i hate "old-schoolers" - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

i hate "old-schoolers"

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: i hate "old-schoolers"

Postby Sticky Spice » Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:35 am

thetongueofire wrote:stuff i dont like about 'em...

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.


Forget population growth, how about the fact that MLB is no longer a racist country club. How many blacks, latinos, asians, and hell even australians were there then? Now think how many make up the game today. 8-o 8-o 8-o
Sticky Spice
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Cafe Musketeer
Posts: 1158
(Past Year: 42)
Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: At the bottom of the Ancient Cave

Re: i hate "old-schoolers"

Postby TonyCee » Fri Oct 15, 2004 1:07 pm

wrveres wrote:
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.


lol @ dead.
TonyCee
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1068
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: i hate "old-schoolers"

Postby Melo255 » Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:05 pm

Sticky Spice wrote:
thetongueofire wrote:stuff i dont like about 'em...

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.


Forget population growth, how about the fact that MLB is no longer a racist country club. How many blacks, latinos, asians, and hell even australians were there then? Now think how many make up the game today. 8-o 8-o 8-o


Exactly. I can't keep up with what is and isn't racist anymore so forgive me if I've stepped over some invisible boundary but since baseball consists of around what? lets say...30-40% minorities, basketball 90%, football 70% including almost all of the superstars in their respective sports can you imagine saying I'm sorry but everyone who isn't white has to watch from the sidelines like it was for most of the early 20th century? Now THAT would be diluting the talent pool.
Image
Melo255
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1411
Joined: 5 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: PAO Thira 13

Re: i hate "old-schoolers"

Postby thetongueofire » Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:05 pm

segregationalist MLB is a very good point. ;-D

Lo also mentioned that we have better training, equipment etc. today. i'm not talking about comparing specific players from different eras cos theres no tottally accurate way to do that. i just find it extremely hard to believe those who say that the the quality of mlb has declined cos of the reasons mentioned in this thread. and this is one of the factors i think you have to take into account when comparing current players to players from the past. cos the current player has prolly had to play in a more competitive league, if anything at all.
[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
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3622
Joined: 8 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: i hate "old-schoolers"

Postby thetongueofire » Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:10 pm

wrveres wrote:
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.


i realize that most of Babe Ruth's homies are dead but where did i say i was talking about that time specifically...

anyways, heres the latest run expectation table (Baseball Prospectus) based on 2003 data...

(refer to end of mi post for table ;-D )

just play around and see what happens.. for ex, if youre on first with no outs. right now, youre worth 0.9116 expected runs. you decide to take off. if you make it, you would be worth 1.1811 expected runs a gain of .2695 expected runs. so far so good. but in a parallel universe you dont get a good enough lead and youre thrown out. what happens ? theres one out and no one base. the run expectancy drops to .2783, a loss of .6333 expected runs. the loss is about 2.35 times more than the gain. see where i'm going with this ? just for kicks, do it for a couple more different scenarios.

my point is, in the past the run expectancy was obviously not as high, so giving up that one out and losing that baserunner didnt hurt as much. but now since they can score runs more easliy, giving away an out isnt worth it as the out can be used far more productively. taking these kind of unjustified risks and giving up outs and baserunners quite often stifles big innings.


<pre>

Bases Outs
0 1 2
------------------------------------
empty 0.5219 0.2783 0.1083
1st 0.9116 0.5348 0.2349
2nd 1.1811 0.7125 0.3407
1st 2nd 1.5384 0.9092 0.4430
3rd 1.3734 1.0303 0.3848
1st 3rd 1.8807 1.2043 0.5223
2nd 3rd 2.0356 1.4105 0.5515
1st 2nd 3rd 2.4366 1.5250 0.7932

</pre>
[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
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3622
Joined: 8 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: i hate "old-schoolers"

Postby DK » Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:14 pm

wrveres wrote:
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.


RING! RING!

Mr. Veres, there's a Joe Morgan on the line for you...
Image
DK
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 9533
Joined: 22 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: on deck

Postby Tavish » Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:18 pm

Not to hijack your thread, but I don't understand new-schoolers who think the current brand of baseball is more exciting than that played in the 70s and 80s. Station to station movement, relying on the 3-R HR, and the constant flow of RP has the game at about the lowest point of interesting play that I have ever seen.


I'm not saying this about anyone in particular, the thread just got me in the mood to jump on the vent bandwagon.
Image

Bury me a Royal.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 11067
(Past Year: 34)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby SaintsOfTheDiamond » Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:26 pm

Tavish wrote:Not to hijack your thread, but I don't understand new-schoolers who think the current brand of baseball is more exciting than that played in the 70s and 80s. Station to station movement, relying on the 3-R HR, and the constant flow of RP has the game at about the lowest point of interesting play that I have ever seen.


I'm not saying this about anyone in particular, the thread just got me in the mood to jump on the vent bandwagon.


I see what you're saying Tav. Part of it for me is the pace of play. Batters stepping out, the RP parade, etc is what makes it unbearable at times. This era is the only baseball I've ever really known though, so that may be part of it. :-?
Image
Member #4 of the Inaugural Yadier Molina Fan Club!!!
SaintsOfTheDiamond
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe Ranker
Posts: 6480
Joined: 6 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Swiping second

Postby thetongueofire » Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:39 pm

i'm 17 so i really dont know if baseball was more intersting in previous eras... but kinda like me a lot of nu skulers arent really old enough to have an opinion on how interesting baseball was in the past.
[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
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3622
Joined: 8 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby boogshine » Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:46 am

1) ESPN Classic

2) MVP: In any given year, especially under the 8-team playoff format, there is a player who has thrown his team on his back and carried them a la Vlad this year. The MVP doesn't have to be from a playoff team, but it sure helps. The non-playoff MVP should be the extremely rare exception, such as Barry this year, where we all know the Giants would have been hard-pressed to win 60 without him, but instead were viable contenders. MVP coming from a last place team or a team that was never in it? I have to disagree with that pick since if the guy were really valuable to his team, they would have won a few more games.
The Boo Guy.
boogshine
Little League Legend
Little League Legend


Posts: 22
Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: clevername and 9 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Tuesday, Jul. 29
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

LA Angels at Baltimore
(7:05 pm)
Seattle at Cleveland
(7:05 pm)
Chi White Sox at Detroit
(7:08 pm)
Milwaukee at Tampa Bay
(7:10 pm)
indoors
Philadelphia at NY Mets
(7:10 pm)
Washington at Miami
(7:10 pm)
indoors
Arizona at Cincinnati
(7:10 pm)
Toronto at Boston
(7:10 pm)
Colorado at Chi Cubs
(8:05 pm)
NY Yankees at Texas
(8:05 pm)
Oakland at Houston
(8:10 pm)
Minnesota at Kansas City
(8:10 pm)
Atlanta at LA Dodgers
(10:10 pm)
St. Louis at San Diego
(10:10 pm)
Pittsburgh at San Francisco
(10:15 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact