Jim Thome hits 600th homer

[Future Walk-On]

if Major League baseball split into two leagues --
One being "drug-free" and the other being anything allowed including steroids...
I have my strong suspicions that the steroid league would get all the best athletes and draw the most fans by far... kinda ironic -- but it's what the fans love and want to see.......
remember the steroid-fueled battle between Sammy Sosa & Mark McGwire then Bonds' push for 70 HR?
Even at the time most of us knew they were on steroids but we didn't care and we wanted to watch & follow intensely.

remember the XFL :lol:

 

[TheAsianSensation]

Bagwell had more hits then Thome, even though Thome played 6 more seasons. Bagwell has a higher career on base percentage and batting average, more RBIs per season, struck out 40 less times per season and Bagwell averaged 15 stolen bases per season when Thome only had 19 in his career.

I sort of want to go all sabermetric on you and say batting average and RBIs can't be used as objective measures, but nah.

I'd also argue that Thome playing more seasons is costing him in the averages - if Thome can prove to contribute as a part-time player for a few years, of course his per-season averages are going to come down because he's not full time anymore. So it's natural for Bagwell to eek ahead in OBP and in having more RBIs per season if Thome playing part-time is bringing his averages down.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

The problem, I think, is that every pro or amateur athlete that has ever been proven to have used steroids or PEDs, or suspected to use them, has vehemently denied it when the issue first arose. Some have even gotten into serious trouble or gone to jail by testifying under oath. So just their denials and lack of proof initially are not enough for intelligent and educated fans to believe they are clean. We do not owe them the "innocent until proven guilty" concept.

Does anyone still believe Roger Clemens was clean? We may never get him to admit it, but does anyone still believe he put up some of his best career numbers at the age of 41 & 42 . He struck out 218 batters at age 41, and had a career-best ERA of 1.87 at age 42! And like the other examples I have given, as soon as the steroid testing was instituted, Clemens returned to mortal status, suffered several injuries, finished 7-6 and 6-6 in his final 2 seasons, and finally retired at age 44. I suspect he would still be pitching if steroids were not removed from the game.

I hate using the "guilty until proven innocent stance" whenever possible. I won't necessarily blame anyone for using it, but if there is absolutely zero evidence of PED use other than statistic trends for the player, I just can't slap that player with that label.

Then again, I'm in the school of allowing everyone from the era into the hall of fame as attempting to separate all users from all non-users is simply an insurmountable task.

 

[BuB]

The problem, I think, is that every pro or amateur athlete that has ever been proven to have used steroids or PEDs, or suspected to use them, has vehemently denied it when the issue first arose. Some have even gotten into serious trouble or gone to jail by testifying under oath. So just their denials and lack of proof initially are not enough for intelligent and educated fans to believe they are clean. We do not owe them the "innocent until proven guilty" concept.




I guess this means people should now think everyone is guilty. This attitude no longer applies to just athletes. It is spreading to include many other professions. Many people in society are now being asked to take drug tests at work, or where they want to work, just to prove their innocence. It is in the news all the time. Factory workers, city and state employees, teachers, firemen, cops, air traffic controllers, etc. Not to long ago employers and employees didn't think like this.

The latest to make the news are the teachers out at Illini Bluffs who now are on strike. They do not think they should be required to take a test. Who is right or wrong? In my opinion, nobody likes to pee in a cup just to prove they are not breaking the law.

 

[BuB]

if Major League baseball split into two leagues --
One being "drug-free" and the other being anything allowed including steroids...
I have my strong suspicions that the steroid league would get all the best athletes and draw the most fans by far... kinda ironic -- but it's what the fans love and want to see.......
remember the steroid-fueled battle between Sammy Sosa & Mark McGwire then Bonds' push for 70 HR?
Even at the time most of us knew they were on steroids but we didn't care and we wanted to watch & follow intensely.

I don't know if they would get the best athletes to start taking them. I do believe they would get more average athletes to take them though. Its just a matter of time before these marginal players morph and become better athletes.

Based on how the public and the press now judge these players who have been caught, pleaded guilty, or made a list...... I am not sure these same players would be a hero to a little league kid and his parents who knew they were taking a short cut by doing drugs.

 

[Beninator]

McGriff, Grace, Thomas, Bagwell, Helton, Pujols, McGwire (though he clearly juiced), Howard (though I don't think he should be), Fielder, would all be considered better than Thome at 1B during his Era in a given season. Thome was never one of the greatest players in any one season during his time, but once you consider his longevity and success over that time he has to be a HOF'er and I'd argue he should at least get strong consideration for first ballot.

IMO, I would remove Grace and Helton from your list. Speaking of expansion teams like the Rockies, I have always thought that the recent numbers put up by some players have been inflated by a dilution of the talent pool at the MLB level as a result of adding two MLB teams in 1993.

 

[JMM28]

I sort of want to go all sabermetric on you and say batting average and RBIs can't be used as objective measures, but nah.

I'd also argue that Thome playing more seasons is costing him in the averages - if Thome can prove to contribute as a part-time player for a few years, of course his per-season averages are going to come down because he's not full time anymore. So it's natural for Bagwell to eek ahead in OBP and in having more RBIs per season if Thome playing part-time is bringing his averages down.

RBI and batting average are so 1995.

Thome will be a first ballot unanimous selection for 600 home runs and the fact he was a nice guy. Ozzie Smith was a first ballot HOF based on some flips and flash.

Thome was consistently in the top 10 in offensive wins above replacement. You can flip a coin on whether or not he, Bagwell, or Thomas were higher in those years. The Big Skirt also spent a larger chunk of his career at DH. Basically, an argument can be made that any 3 of them were better than the other 2.

Todd Helton is the Will Clark of his generation. Neither are HOF caliber.

 

[Beninator]

Then again, I'm in the school of allowing everyone from the era into the hall of fame as attempting to separate all users from all non-users is simply an insurmountable task.

I disagree. I think that the answer for some of the players who benefited from the steroid era is to make them wait for a possible induction by the Veterans Committee. In certain aspects, this benefits a player like Thome, whom as of now, has not been implicated with PED's.

 

[Beninator]

RBI and batting average are so 1995.

Thome will be a first ballot unanimous selection for 600 home runs and the fact he was a nice guy. Ozzie Smith was a first ballot HOF based on some flips and flash.

There is no doubt that Thome is a certain Hall of Famer. I still have doubts as to Thome being a first ballot Hall of Famer. Thome played in an era in which the talent pool was diluted due to expansion, and played the majority of his career away from the major media markets. It would also be pretty tough to put a slugger in on the first ballot who never won an MVP award.

 

[sousaman2089]

I sort of want to go all sabermetric on you and say batting average and RBIs can't be used as objective measures, but nah.

I'd also argue that Thome playing more seasons is costing him in the averages - if Thome can prove to contribute as a part-time player for a few years, of course his per-season averages are going to come down because he's not full time anymore. So it's natural for Bagwell to eek ahead in OBP and in having more RBIs per season if Thome playing part-time is bringing his averages down.

You can use sabermetrics on me, I've read Moneyball and a lot of Bill James. It's no problem.

The two most important things you learn from sabermetrics and a book like Moneyball is

1. OBP is the most effective way to measure how good a player is offensively
2. Nothing is worse then a strikeout

(and that OBP is 3x's more important then OPS)

So, in my mind, Bagwell is just a bit better then Thome for a higher OBP and striking out less. Compare most years Thome had to most years Bagwell had and you'll see Bagwells either better or just under Thome's.

And it's hard for me to shake batting average since it's the stat most everybody grew up on. Shoot, ask my dad Joe Torre's batting average in 1971 and my dad recalls .363 like if it were the ultimate moment in his childhood.

 

[Da Coach]

...The latest to make the news are the teachers out at Illini Bluffs who now are on strike. They do not think they should be required to take a test. Who is right or wrong? In my opinion, nobody likes to pee in a cup just to prove they are not breaking the law.

You're right, nobody likes to be forced to be tested. But it is becoming a much more common thing in all areas of employment.
But I think whenever other people lives or well being is at stake, it is justified. Commercial drivers, bus drivers, airline pilots, and many other occupations have required it for many years.

 

[Chico]

There is no doubt that Thome is a certain Hall of Famer. I still have doubts as to Thome being a first ballot Hall of Famer. Thome played in an era in which the talent pool was diluted due to expansion, and played the majority of his career away from the major media markets. It would also be pretty tough to put a slugger in on the first ballot who never won an MVP award.

What player in the last many many years hasn't played in an era which was diluted due to expansion? Who was the last expansion team? Anyway, I'm not going to compare Jim to any other player. I' m just happy for him and his family and can't wait for him to be a HOF, whenever that might be.

 

[sousaman2089]

What player in the last many many years hasn't played in an era which was diluted due to expansion? Who was the last expansion team? Anyway, I'm not going to compare Jim to any other player. I' m just happy for him and his family and can't wait for him to be a HOF, whenever that might be.

Agreed.

Diamondbacks were the last expansion team, and all expansion did was make sure the Yankees didn't get basically every great player like they did in the from the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.

Jim is definitely a HOFer and is a top 50 or top 60 player in MLB history.

 

[thefish7]

You can use sabermetrics on me, I've read Moneyball and a lot of Bill James. It's no problem.

The two most important things you learn from sabermetrics and a book like Moneyball is

1. OBP is the most effective way to measure how good a player is offensively
2. Nothing is worse then a strikeout

(and that OBP is 3x's more important then OPS)

So, in my mind, Bagwell is just a bit better then Thome for a higher OBP and striking out less. Compare most years Thome had to most years Bagwell had and you'll see Bagwells either better or just under Thome's.

And it's hard for me to shake batting average since it's the stat most everybody grew up on. Shoot, ask my dad Joe Torre's batting average in 1971 and my dad recalls .363 like if it were the ultimate moment in his childhood.

I don't think Bill James or Moneyball care about strikeouts... You could have said, nothing is worse than a caught stealing?

 

[thefish7]

Then again, I'm in the school of allowing everyone from the era into the hall of fame as attempting to separate all users from all non-users is simply an insurmountable task.

This is me too. My feeling is that the vast majority of players were doing something PED-related, roids or otherwise. The fault lies with the league and the union. They created the environment and tacitly encouraged the use of these drugs. The media likes to use it get on guys who weren't nice to them, like Barry Bonds, while many other cases come and go without a lot of fanfare. Also no one's digging at guys who are liked, but who I think are good candidates... e.g. Randy Johnson, who could've used them to extend his career a significant amount, like a certain (jerkier) Roger Clemens did. Anyway, mark the era for what it was, and move on. I firmly believe roids may have inflated all kinds of stats but they didn't turn an average joe into a HOFer.

 

[Beninator]

What player in the last many many years hasn't played in an era which was diluted due to expansion? Who was the last expansion team? Anyway, I'm not going to compare Jim to any other player. I' m just happy for him and his family and can't wait for him to be a HOF, whenever that might be.

Certainly since 1960, there have been players whom have benefited from expansion. Granted 6 teams were added in the 1960's, however, there had been only 16 teams from 1901 through 1960. Given population growth and demographics, I can understand this expansion. However, in the 1990's MLB added 4 teams. Given current demographics and the development of other sports that kids are interested in today, I believe that the last expansion as well as PED's has contributed to very inflated statistics. Look no further than the players whom have hit 600 plus home runs. Prior to 2002, Hank Aaron was the last player to reach this milestone and Aaron was the third player to do so in 1971. Since 2002, five players have reached 600 home runs. The same can be said for MLB players with 500 plus home runs.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

I disagree. I think that the answer for some of the players who benefited from the steroid era is to make them wait for a possible induction by the Veterans Committee. In certain aspects, this benefits a player like Thome, whom as of now, has not been implicated with PED's.

Well the thing is, in the end, the veterans' committee is going to let these guys in, so why not just do it at the beginning and not go through all these politics on the way?

 

[TheAsianSensation]

The two most important things you learn from sabermetrics and a book like Moneyball is

1. OBP is the most effective way to measure how good a player is offensively
2. Nothing is worse then a strikeout

(and that OBP is 3x's more important then OPS)

Now I feel like I'm getting way divergent :lol: but I feel it's worth pointing out: to me, the important thing/concept behind Moneyball is not about the specific use of OBP or even any other singe stat. The underlying concept is that the market (other baseball teams) overvalue some stats and undervalue other stats that are relevant in determining how good a player is. Beane found that OBP was a stat/characteristic that was way undervalued by the market. It's not that OBP was the best indicator of offensive ability, it was that OBP was the greatest value on the market if you wanted to build a cheap offense.

So yes, OBP is quite important as for determining a player's value, but Moneyball is incorrectly interpreted in that OBP is not the end-all when it comes to player evaluation. OBP was simply by far and away the greatest value on the market, and therefore, the cheapest way for Beane to contend.

So a 5 point lead in OBP for Bagwell over Thome is notable, but not anywhere near an end-all in my book.

 

[BuB]

Well the thing is, in the end, the veterans' committee is going to let these guys in, so why not just do it at the beginning and not go through all these politics on the way?

Many of the veterans both on and off the committee have taken a hard stance against these cheaters. I don't think users they will get in from a vote from their peers. They should not get voted in by anyone but if they do it will come from the media in their last years of eligibility. I say keep them out forever.

 

[sousaman2089]

Now I feel like I'm getting way divergent :lol: but I feel it's worth pointing out: to me, the important thing/concept behind Moneyball is not about the specific use of OBP or even any other singe stat. The underlying concept is that the market (other baseball teams) overvalue some stats and undervalue other stats that are relevant in determining how good a player is. Beane found that OBP was a stat/characteristic that was way undervalued by the market. It's not that OBP was the best indicator of offensive ability, it was that OBP was the greatest value on the market if you wanted to build a cheap offense.

So yes, OBP is quite important as for determining a player's value, but Moneyball is incorrectly interpreted in that OBP is not the end-all when it comes to player evaluation. OBP was simply by far and away the greatest value on the market, and therefore, the cheapest way for Beane to contend.

So a 5 point lead in OBP for Bagwell over Thome is notable, but not anywhere near an end-all in my book.

I love how we're actually having a conversation about Moneyball, though. Having a real, statistical debate on two players Haven't found many people who actually know something about sabermetrics.

And this goes out to thefish7. If you think that Moneyball or James doen't speak badly about strikeouts, you haven't even paid attention to what they said. There's paragraph upon paragraph in Moneyball detailing how a strikeout is by far the worst thing a player can do to kill the chances of scoring. The whole book is about being efficient with who you sign and how they play.

There's a reason Adam Dunn was signed by the White Sox, they have no sabermetricans working under them