CAWS Career Gauge – Part 2

HHS contributor Michael Hoban has written a comprehensive paper on assessing career value for players of the past century (since 1920), commonly known as the live ball era. In Part 1. Michael introduced his CAWS metric, which stands for Career Assessment Win Shares, based on the Win Shares system developed by Bill James. In Part 2, Michael examines the relationship between CAWS and Hall of Fame-worthy careers.

In Part 1 of this series, I introduced the CAWS metric which takes the form of: CAWS  = CV  +  .25(CWS – CV) where

CAWS  =  Career Assessment Win Shares
CV  =  Core Value  =  sum of win shares for a player’s ten best seasons
CWS  =  total career win shares 
.25(CWS – CV)  =  longevity factor  =  credit earned for a longer career

Thus, to balance the quantity (length of career) and quality (core value performance) of a player’s career, CAWS credits players with 100% of the Win Shares for their best ten seasons, and 25% of their remaining Win Shares.

Hall of Fame Thresholds

In evaluating CAWS scores for prominent players of the past century, I’ve determined that the following thresholds provide the best correlation to career standards that are likely to be recognized by Hall of Fame enshrinement.

  • CAWS score of 280 for right fielders, left fielders, first basemen and designated hitters
  • 270 for center fielders and third basemen
  • 260 for second basemen
  • 250 for shortstops and catchers
  • 220 for pitchers

The different benchmarks for each position recognize their positional scarcity which, for non-pitchers, derive from the different types and levels of defensive skills demanded of players at each position.

Based on these benchmarks, there have been 152 players (104 position players and 48 pitchers) since 1920 who have posted Hall of Fame numbers during their playing career. Ninety-nine (99) of these players have a CAWS score of 280 or better while fifty-three (53) others meet the adjusted HOF benchmark for their position, or one of the special HOF benchmarks for players with unusual or shorter careers (these will be explained below). The 152 players are distributed as follows:

  • Pitcher – 48* (43 are in HOF)
  • First base – 16** (10)
  • Second base – 14*** (9)
  • Third base – 10**** (7)
  • Shortstop – 13***** (11)
  • Left Field – 14 (10)
  • Center Field – 11 (9)
  • Right Field – 12 (12)
  • Catcher – 12**** (10)
  • Designated Hitter – 2 (2)
* incl. 1 active player
** incl. 2 active players
*** incl. 1 active player and 1 retired player not yet HOF eligible
**** incl. 1 retired player not yet HOF eligible
***** incl. 2 retired players not yet HOF eligible

A player is assigned (with very few exceptions) to the position where he played the most games during his career. So, for example, Paul Molitor and Frank Thomas are considered to be designated hitters because they played more games as a DH than at any one position.

One of the few exceptions to this rule, for example, is Ernie Banks. He played more games at first base (1259) than at shortstop (1125). But in everything I have read (and in the Hall of Fame), Banks is always referred to as a shortstop. So, I regard him as such.

The CAWS Career Gauge suggests that any player who has achieved the CAWS benchmark score for his position has Hall of Fame numbers. The question then arises: What about players who have not achieved these benchmarks, but who appear to have had a great, shorter career? I will address these exceptional cases next.

The 250/1800 Benchmark – Jackie Robinson

Jackie Robinson is a player whose contributions to the game went far beyond his considerable achievements on the field. As most fans know, Robinson had a rather short career of only ten seasons, chiefly attributable to the baseball color barrier that had existed prior to his career. While it is certainly true to say that a player who has such a short career usually will not be able to post Hall of Fame numbers, it may come as a surprise to some when I state that Jackie actually did post HOF numbers during his brief career.

Conversely, it will come as no surprise to most fans to learn that there are some players who are in the Hall of Fame but do not have Hall of Fame numbers, with examples like Chick Hafey and Rick Ferrell that come readily to mind. And there is another category of players, such as Dick Allen and Darrell Evans, who do have HOF numbers, but who have not been elected to the Hall for one reason or another.

Since 1920, I have found only ten position players who attained a CAWS score of 250 while playing in fewer than 1800 games. Every one of these ten has been elected to the Hall of Fame despite playing in relatively fewer games than their contemporaries.

Of course, Joe DiMaggio stands out among the players in this group as the one who achieved the most in a relatively short career. But note that Jackie Robinson played the fewest games among this elite group – and yet he was still able to achieve the CAWS benchmark.

Bear in mind that, while the above players met the 250/1800 benchmark for their careers, some elite players do so well before their careers end. Albert Pujols is a prime example: he is still active this year in his 19th season, but achieved the 250/1800 benchmark almost a decade ago, in 2010.

As an interesting aside, note how close the numbers place Jackie Robinson and Larry Doby – the two players credited with integrating the National League and the American League, respectively. Each of these players had a core value (CV) of 257 meaning that each averaged almost 26 win shares over his ten best seasons – an outstanding accomplishment. So, aside from being the integration pioneers, both Jackie Robinson and Larry Doby were terrific ballplayers.

Keep in mind that there have been other outstanding players who have played in fewer than 1800 games in their careers – but who did NOT achieve the 250 CAWS benchmark. Here are two, one (Kiner) who is in the Hall of Fame, and one who is not (Mattingly).

High Peak or High Career Value – Pedro and Eck

The HOF benchmark for pitchers is a CAWS career score of 220 that has been achieved by only 35 pitchers since 1920. The question then arises: What about a pitcher who has not achieved this benchmark, but who appears to have still had a great career?

A few pitchers who fall short of the 220 CAWS threshold nonetheless compiled stellar careers. A career with a high peak value is evidenced by a 200 Core Value (sum of ten best Win Shares seasons) that a couple of the 220 CAWS qualifiers did not achieve. And, one pitcher (with a notably unique career shape) recorded a high career value of more than 300 career Win Shares without reaching 220 CAWS or 200 CV.

The 180/2400 Benchmark – Sandy and Dizzy

To fairly recognize exceptional performance by starting pitchers with shorter careers, or relief pitchers with very long careers, I’ve identified 180 CAWS in a career of less than 2400 IP as a suitable benchmark.

All five of these pitchers are in the Hall of Fame and deservedly so since this is quite an accomplishment. In fact, these are the ONLY PITCHERS since 1920 that I have found who have achieved a CAWS score of 180 with fewer than 2400 innings pitched.

But what if a pitcher had achieved this benchmark at some earlier point in his career? Logic would dictate that the pitcher in question had accumulated Hall of Fame numbers at that point in his career irrespective of what happened subsequently.

If you examine Pedro’s career through 2004 (his thirteenth season), he had already reached a CAWS score of 180 in fewer than 2400 IP, putting him in company with Koufax and Dean, whose careers were less than 13 seasons. Only two other pitchers since 1920 have reached the 180/2400 benchmark by their thirteenth season.

Therefore, in the live ball era, only eight pitchers achieved a CAWS score of 180 in fewer than 2400 innings – and the seven who are eligible are now in the Hall of Fame. So, for a pitcher, 180/2400 becomes a Hall of Fame benchmark.

The 160/1500 Benchmark – Mariano Rivera

As we just saw, Mariano Rivera has HOF numbers because he is one of just eight pitchers who have earned a CAWS score of at least 180 in fewer than 2400 innings pitched. But Mariano is the extraordinary exception, a relief pitcher who meets the HOF standards for a starting pitcher. But, what should the HOF standard be for every other reliever who is not Mariano?

In wrestling with this question, I looked at the careers of all the great relief pitchers to try to establish a benchmark that would recognize the best – but would not be “too easy”. What I found was that only three pitchers since 1920 have achieved a CAWS score of 160 while pitching fewer than 1500 innings. Here are those pitchers, all of whom are in the Hall of Fame.

And, here are the CAWS scores for several other great relievers who did not reach 160 CAWS.

Only two of the relievers falling short of 160 CAWS are in the Hall of Fame, one (Fingers) who is recognized as being one of the pioneers of modern relief pitching, and the other (Hoffman) who is second only to Rivera in career saves, and more than 100 saves clear of Lee Smith in 3rd place.

In Part 3, I will present CAWS scores for all of the players meeting the Hall of Fame thresholds for their positions. If you don’t want to wait, you can look up the Win Shares for any player and, after cutting and pasting that result to a spreadsheet, you are a few clicks away from computing their CAWS score.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

55 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago

There is so much to discuss here that it is difficult to know where to begin. Mike’s system invites almost endless (why “almost”?) opportunities to question whether the rankings and cut-offs align with what we think should be the threshold for Hall membership. In that sense, it is most interesting at the borders, the type of cases that nsb’s series has focused on. There are two very distinct ways I see of approaching Mike’s list — and I hope he will forgive the fact that, naturally, it’s more interesting to begin by questioning the outcomes on the list than by… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

Screwed up: “IP160” was IP less than 1500 and CAWS greater than 160 — I guess I used math symbols that were read as hypertext, and some stuff got swallowed up. (I see other types, but that’s par for my course.)

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 years ago

I’d like to make a small clarification concerning Jackie Robinson. Robinson’s short career is not “chiefly attributable to the baseball color barrier.” This is a common misperception. Robinson was a multifaceted sports star in college, but he was much better at and perceivably more interested in football, basketball, and track. He played pro football after graduation—not in the NFL—and then spent his time through 1944 being a pain in the neck to his superiors as a lieutenant in the segregated army, a tale told many times. His pro baseball career began in 1945 for the K. C. Monarchs when he… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago

And when Musial retired, Robinson had already been a corporate VP for nearly seven years. Your points about Robinson are well taken, nsb. The War may not only have led Robinson to baseball, but prepared him for what he would face in integrating the Majors. I’ve quoted this before here; it’s Pete Reiser speaking about his time in the military: One day a Negro lieutenant came out for the ball team. An officer told him he couldn’t play. “You have to play with the colored team,” the officer said. That was a joke. There was no colored team. The lieutenant… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago

Well, it’s been quiet here, so I’ll raise another issue — actually two, both related to the discussion of the 2400 IP short-career benchmark. Consider these two pitchers: CAWS…….IP………CWS…….CV……..WS/162IP…..CAWS/162IP 230…….2623……..233…….229………..14.4……………….14.2………Wes Ferrell 191…….2324……..194…….190………..13.5……………….13.3………Sandy Koufax Note that Ferrell has 13% more career IP, but exceeds Koufax in total WS by 20%, has a much higher Core Value, where both pitchers are on a level playing field (ten best seasons), and compiled both more WS and more CAWS per IP. But Ferrell does not have HoF numbers while Koufax does. The reason is not what the two pitchers did on the field, it… Read more »

Doug
Doug
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

Points well taken, Bob. I suppose you’ll always have issues at the margins, however you do it. I was surprised that Ferrell’s WS were so much higher than Koufax’s, but I suppose that’s because you’re looking at 2500 IP for Ferrell’s 10 best vs. only about 2200 IP for Koufax. Yes, Koufax out-ERA’ed Ferrell by 133 to 117, but he also had only 5 seasons of his 10 with 200 IP vs. 8 for Ferrell, so that’s 3 more seasons that Ferrell had where he was in a better position for a larger share of his team’s wins. The other… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 years ago

I’m confused about Pedro Martinez being included in the 180/2400 group. he pitched over 2800 innings and in Mike H’s long work he is credited with 256 WS, 206 CV, and 219 CAWS. Another question: Is there a different source for CAWS figures than this work (A Century of Modern Baseball: 1920 to 2019)? Or are there two? I’m going by the figures in the one that Bob Eno posted a link to awhile back, and the numbers Doug has posted for WS and CAWS in the COG career stats section vary from that source, sometimes considerably. Whitey Ford’s CAWS… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Generally, I use the Baseball Gauge to track WS; it’s actually more complete than James’s site (and I find James’s site much harder to use). But the Gauge page is down this morning, so I can’t confirm what it has for Ford. The CAWS figure of 217 is what appears in Mike’s book. By my calculation, James’s site’s figures and Mike’s figures match: CWS 261; CV 202: 202 + (.25*59) = 216.75.

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

The Baseball Gauge is back online and I see its figures are not identical with James’s. CWS 252.3; CV 195.3: 195.3 + (.25*57) = 209.55 (210). I have no idea why the Gauge’s figures don’t match James’s. It’s not just because the Gauge’s seasonal figures are not rounded; although the differences in any given year are never large, the Gauge’s figures are consistently slightly lower.

Mike H
Mike H
3 years ago

1. Bob wrote: “Note that Ferrell has 13% more career IP, but exceeds Koufax in total WS by 20%, has a much higher Core Value, where both pitchers are on a level playing field (ten best seasons), and compiled both more WS and more CAWS per IP. But Ferrell does not have HoF numbers while Koufax does.” But CAWS indicates Ferrell DOES have HOF numbers. 2. Pedro, Roy Halladay and Clayton Kershaw each is in the 180/2400 group because each achieved this benchmark at some point in his career. If someone achieves HOF numbers at some point in his career,… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike H

Mike, You’re right. I’ve made an error by reading poorly. In your book, which is what I rely on, you set the starting pitcher benchmark at 235. I see now that in your update article and this post, you have lowered it to 220. Since I’ve only consulted the article for updated player rankings and skipped the defensive adjustment figures at the start of the post because I assumed I already knew them, I botched my comment. (Now I’ll have to poke around to see whether Ferrell can be replaced in the argument I was making . . . but… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

Hah! The tornado skipped our town in favor of some cornfields to the west — no accounting for taste. So in the interim I did find a substitute for Ferrell, Urban Shocker, and I wrote a long post showing why he generally had the advantage over Koufax according to WS and CV, despite being short of a 220 CAWS score and being long of 2400 IP. But all that work had to go out the window when I checked your article and discovered a loophole that let him in, one that’s in neither your book nor your post: a CV… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

On p. 40. Mike has Pedro qualifying on the basis of CV > 200. I think it’s easier to argue for that benchmark than for the reduced IP benchmark for pitchers who go on to pitch more innings, and whose full careers wouldn’t qualify them. Dizzy Trout would be an example. He does not have Hall numbers, according to Mike’s article (CWS 228; CV 199; CAWS 206 in 2726 IP). However, if you look at his record as of the end of the 1950 season, he has 205 CWS and a CV of 177, for a CAWS number of 184,… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

Some other pitchers who also made the 180/2400 benchmark (at least, as I calculate their records, late at night), but who seem unlikely members of the Hall: Through 2400 IP >……………………………Full Career IP……….CWS…….CV………CAWS……………IP………….CWS………..CV…………CAWS 2278…..186…….186……….186……………..2661……..212………..195…………199………Sam Leever 2395…..187…….185……….185……………..2937……..223………..196…………203………Bob Shawkey 2253…..183…….183……….183……………..2783……..220………..200…………205………Lon Warneke Warneke also qualifies under the CV >/= 200 rule. I don’t see any of these three on Mike’s lists (Leever’s career was in the Deadball Era, so he wouldn’t be in the article, but I’m not spotting him in the book’s lists either). I think the Hall cases for all three are not strong. Leever received only one vote for the… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
3 years ago

Just want to point out Christian Yelich’s home/road splits, because they are extraordinary
(which, wouldn’t it make more sense if the word ‘extraordinary’ meant ‘really, really ordinary’?)

Anyway, he is now on pace for 66 HR and 41 SB.
But!

His splits:

.438 / .533 / 1.073 / 1.606
.274 / .377 / .511 / .888

He has a home run for every 6 plate appearances in Wisconsin.

Paul E
Paul E
3 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

So, correct me if I’m wrong. Jeter traded the 2nd best player in baseball (Yelich), the former NL MVP (Stanton), a part-time CF and full-time outfielder who hit 35+ homers (Ozuna), and the most athletic catcher in baseball (Realmutto). All for the promise of a lower payroll, minor leaguers who might perform at the ML level, and a possible bonus based on the profitability of the Marlins. Geeze, sign me up for that job

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 years ago

To change topics a little, currently there isn’t a single position player among the top 10 on the WAR lists for either league who has seen his twenty-ninth birthday, and in fact there seems to me to be a dearth of better players, other than pitchers, who are both older and not not just hanging around. Historically this is an anomaly, since established players tend not to fall off drastically until after their age 31-33 seasons.

Voomo Zanzibar
3 years ago

Top Ten in WAR, position players ages: 2019: 23, 27, 27, 25, 25, 26, 28, 26, 25, 25 2009: 29, 28, 30, 26, 31, 25, 24, 23, 27, 26 1999: 25, 31, 31, 27, 22, 36, 27, 31, 28, 25 1989: 33, 30, 25, 31, 24, 34, 27, 28, 28, 25 1979: 27, 26, 27, 29, 27, 25, 27, 28, 26, 23 1969: 26, 23, 25, 31, 35, 33, 34, 27, 25, 26 1959: 28, 25, 27, 28, 28, 27, 20, 31, 24, 23 1949: 30, 28, 30, 26, 30, 33, 28, 25, 33, 24 1939: 24, 26, 31, 20,… Read more »

Doug
Doug
3 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Good way to do a snapshot compare.

it was everybody under 30 in 1979, and only one 30+ in 1959. Maybe a similar result today could be a harbinger of a return of the speed game, on offense and defense.

Paul E
Paul E
3 years ago

n s b,
Maybe it’s the ‘improved’ fielding metrics and the greater weight on fielding that WAR appears to utilize? Certainly this would favor younger players with more range than the geezers in their 30’s

Paul E
Paul E
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

I believe James had Wynn as the 10th best CF of all-time back in 1999? Something about the Astrodome and the dead-ball era…he had Wally Berger up there too

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul E

I think Wynn deserves to be in the Hall. Berger’s a borderline no for me. But David Wright?

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Mike himself writes that Clark and Singleton don’t have Hall numbers on p. 46 of his article. Here are some CAWS figures for these guys (excluding active players); I’ve added in a career rate stat. Berkman and Wynn are asterisked because they qualify under CAWS (a 280 benchmark for Berkman and a 270 for Wynn).

CWS………..CV………..CAWS………..CWS/500PA
321………..252………..269………………….19.4………Clark
311………..276………..285………………….19.9………Berkman*
283………..258………..264………………….18.3………Minoso
318………..266………..279………………….17.8………Giambi
305………..269………..278………………….19.0………Wynn*
302………..260………..271………………….17.6………Singleton
317………..258………..273………………….16.8………Helton
302………..264………..274………………….18.7………Bonds
272………..252………..257………………….19.8………Wright
311………..248………..264………………….17.2………Williams

Adding Berger (per Paul E’s post):

241………240…………240………………….21.3……….Berger

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

A further note on Berger. Mike adds to his discussion of his 1800 G / 250 CAWS benchmark a glimpse at Don Mattingly and Ralph Kiner, who fell short of 250 but also had fewer games yet. Mattingly’s shortfall in games is not really significant (1785), but Kiner’s is (1472). Compare Kiner and Berger, adding PA, which seems to me a better measure than Games: …G……….PA………CWS……….CV……..CAWS……CWS/500PA 1472….6256………242………..242……..242………….19.3……………Kiner 1350….5665………241………..240……..240………….21.3……………Berger I think Kiner has a good case for the Hall (which he is in). Berger (who never reached 1% of the Hall vote) doesn’t have the same league-leadership history as Kiner, whose… Read more »

Mike H
Mike H
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

1. I find Doug’s list (and Bob’s list) of 250/1600 players to be intriguing for the following reason – anyone who is in favor of a “larger Hall of Fame” should definitely look closely at these players (most would be considered at present to be “marginal HOFers”). Of course, players like Dick Allen and Lou Whittaker should not be forgotten. 2. By the same token, anyone who thinks Jack Morris, Mike Mussina or Curt Schilling belong in the Hall has to also logically admit Luis Tiant, Dolf Luque, Urban Shocker and Dizzy Trout (since 1920). Of course, this would require… Read more »

Mike H
Mike H
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike H

I should have added that if someone is interested in “expanding the Hall,” one should look at

1. Any position player with a CV of 260 – like Wynn, Giambi, Bonds, Singleton and Frank Howard.
2, Any starting pitcher with a CV of 195 – like Tiant, Luque, Shocker, Trout and Jack Quinn.
3. Any “pure reliever” with a CV of 150 – like Wagner and Quisenberry.

In my mind, this is the value of the concept of core value = 10 best seasons.

I suspect that if someone did a similar study using WAR, similar results would emerge.

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike H

Mike, This is certainly true. It’s a function of where you place the benchmarks. But for small-Hall people like me the problem is just the opposite: that your benchmark levels are sweeping up players who fit the profile of a Hall of Very Good (e.g., Singleton, Howard, Quinn, Quisenberry), especially when you supplement the CAWS figures with alternative benchmarks, like pitcher CV>200, position player CWS>300, 180/2400 short-career pitcher mark, and 250/1800 position player mark. All these alternatives seem to be ways to align the CAWS system with an intuitively just result, based on one set of quantitative criteria. Moreover, players… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike H

Mike, I guess I want to add one other response, this to your comment, “. . . anyone who thinks Jack Morris, Mike Mussina or Curt Schilling belong in the Hall has to also logically admit Luis Tiant, Dolf Luque, Urban Shocker and Dizzy Trout . . .” I think there are two problems with this, One is that it takes as an axiom that Hallworthiness concerns only the application of a consistent metric; the other is that WS provides the sole metric. For example, as I mentioned earlier, we know that over a third of Trout’s WS were the… Read more »

Doug
Doug
3 years ago

Shohei Ohtani’s cycle last week came in his 135th game, the 27th player to cycle that early in a career, but just the 2nd DH to do so (Travis Hafner is the other).

Ohtani’s 113 DH games are second only to Josh Phelps (121) in the first 135 games of a career (Hafner had 73 DH games). Phelps is one of 4 Blue Jays among the top 25 on that list, with the other three all notables (Fred McGriff, John Olerud, Cecil Fielder). Two HOFers also make the top 25 – Eddie Murray and Jim Rice.

Mike L
Mike L
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug, you reminded me of Ron Bloomberg, who, to my surprise, had a career OPS+ of 140 in 461 games. I thought there would be more DH, but his DH/Position player split was 180/222. Of course, 154 of those position player games came before the dh> Bloomberg had 1BWAR per 159PA. Hafner 1/193, Fielder 1/345, Phelps 1/485, Rice 1/190, Olerud 1/156, McGriff 1/193
Can we get some consideration?

Voomo Zanzibar
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

I hate to kvetch, but only an amoretz fertummelt would confuse a Blomberg for a Bloomberg.

Mike L
Mike L
3 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Ouch, admittedly disgraceful. I still mourn for Mike, if that’s any excuse.

Voomo Zanzibar
3 years ago

Terrance Gore is a pinch-runner.
Perhaps he will get a chance to play in every aspect of the game.
Thus far, however, he is a pinch runner.

Career, plate appearances less than 2x stolen bases:

195/103 . Matt Alexander
31/44 … Allan Lewis
68/37 … Terrance Gore
0/31 …. Herb Washington
8/21 …. Don Hopkins
15/9 …. Rodney McCray
16/9 …. Darren Ford
2/5 ….. Rico Noel
8/4 ….. Sandy Piez
3/4 ….. Mel Stocker
3/4 ….. Yefri Perez

Paul E
Paul E
3 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

you would think a guy who is exclusively a pinch runner to be a luxury nowadays with 13 man pitching staffs – particularly one who didn’t even hit in the minor leagues.

Voomo Zanzibar
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul E

I’m not understanding the 13 man staffs.
Most teams are already clogging up a roster spot with a backup catcher who offers nothing on offense.
That leaves one backup outfielder and one infielder.
Keep enough pitchers with Options on your 40 and use the AAA shuttle. 12 pitchers is more than plenty.

Voomo Zanzibar
3 years ago

Looking at the MLB splits for 2019 (through June 20th). According to these numbers, right handed hitters are deriving a huge advantage from pulling the ball. And for lefties there is an advantage, but not nearly as pronounced. .405 / .403 / .773 / 1.176 … RH Pull . .318 / .314 / .519 / .833 ….. RH Middle .290 / .286 / .464 / .750 ….. RH Opposite .326 / .324 / .642 / .967 ….. LH Pull .346 / .341 / .565 / .906 ….. LH Middle .335 / .329 / .504 / .833 ….. LH Opposite We… Read more »

Doug
Doug
3 years ago

Was watching the Mets/Cubs game on Friday. Yu Darvish was on the hill, allowing 4 runs over 6 innings for an ND. In the middle of the second season of his 6-year deal with the Cubs, Darvish has yet to win a game at Wrigley. Today’s ND was the tenth consecutive for Darvish which, excepting the Rays’ “openers” last year, ties the record for the longest streak by a starter, previously set by John D’Acquisto (1977), Randy Lerch (1977) and Dick Stigman (1965-66). Mets’ first baseman Pete Alonso (no relation to Yonder) cranked his 25th homer on Thursday in the… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 years ago

Voomo’s remarks aside, one thing that’s not happening much here lately is discussion of the current season. Why? I think it could be because the way the game has transformed so completely to Ks vs HRs—so much so that the mainstream media has caught on—it’s exceedingly boring to watch and difficult to get excited about. Nevertheless here’s a report on some players and teams I find interesting for one reason or another. The Dodgers. Running away with the NL West, they’re being led, it seems to me, not by Bellinger despite his remarkable season thus far, but by Hyun-Jin Ryu,… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago

It has been abut three days since we’ve had a comment on Mike’s CAWS system. I’m not sure whether there are ore installments to come in this series, but in case this is the end of our conversation about CAWS I’d like to add a few comments about how I think it could be made a little more useful. Using my own psychology as a measure, I don’t suppose these suggestions will be very appealing to Mike — he’s invested a lot of time in his book and article, and I can’t imagine ideas for “improvements” to be very welcome.… Read more »

Mike H
Mike H
3 years ago
Reply to  Bob Eno (epm)

Bob, You wrote: “I don’t suppose these suggestions will be very appealing to Mike — he’s invested a lot of time in his book and article, and I can’t imagine ideas for “improvements” to be very welcome. But I hope these will at least be seen as a way of engaging positively with the system.” Actually, I am very pleased with these suggestions (and others that have been made) – and I would love to see someone take the CAWS concept and improve it (as I have mentioned to Bob in a private email). I have always considered CAWS to… Read more »

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike H

This is such a great response from Mike — I’m a former academic, like Mike, and my experience is that it’s rare for anyone (including me) to be so open to suggestions for change (although people like me pretend).

At the moment, I’m without power because of another storm, and I’m the wrong generation to type on this phone, so I’ll wait till I have my regular online access back to add some further thoughts about CAWS and Hall metrics in general.

Mike L
Mike L
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike H

If I could upvote this 100 times, I would. As to being 83, I suggest you bring out new tweaks in a circadian rhythm. It would be a refreshing take on the phrase “Centennial Edition.”

Voomo Zanzibar
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

Michael Hoban,

I see that the CAWS book is currently unavailable on amazon.
Why is that?

Mike L
Mike L
3 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Voomo, you got Mike L, not Michael Hoban

Bob Eno (epm)
Bob Eno (epm)
3 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar
trackback

[…] The rest of this post identifies those players who achieved, or came close to achieving, Hall of Fame-worthy careers as measured by the CAWS Career Gauge. For an introduction to CAWS, please see Part 1. For an explanation of Hall of Fame standards as measured by CAWS, please see Part 2. […]