INTERNETS

Yet every fifth day, fans treat him as if he just shot up a strip club with an Uzi, set it ablaze then beat out the fire with his dog. Sometimes sports are stupid. And being a load can be a load.

I am positive this is exactly what all Giants fans are thinking!

Labels: Barry Zito, Era's near thoeretical imaginary numbers, IHateU

#1 Barry Bonds (2002) - 268

While 2001 was the year Bonds hit a record 73 homers, it's the following year that was his most impressive all around season. He hit a career high .370 (which lead the league) and set the record for OBP at .582 (he went on to break that record in 2004.) He also set the single season record for walks with 198 (and again he broke that record in 2004.) Bonds also led the Giants to the World Series where he hit .471 with 4 home runs in 17 at bats (and 13 walks, yes the Angels were slightly afraid of Mr. Bonds) All in all, I think 2002 was Bonds' greatest season.

#2 Barry Bonds (2004) - 263

2004 was the year he broke his own records for walks (232) and OBP (.609) and I do believe those two records may be the Bonds records that stand the longest. I think his career home run mark will fall in about 5 years (Alex Rodriguez looks likely to break it) and his single season mark will probably not last all that long either (I could be wrong on that one though) but his single season marks for OBP & walks will probably last for a very long time. There are a lot of amazing things about his 2004 numbers among them are these two breakdowns which show just how ridiculously good Barry Bonds was in 2004: 45 home runs vs. 41 strikeouts & 232 walks vs 41 strikeouts.

#3 Barry Bonds (2001) - 259

In 2001 Bonds set the single season mark for home runs with 73 and for slugging percentage with .863. I personally find the slugging percentage mark far more impressive. I think it's quite possible that some dude (like a Ryan Howard type) may break the 73 mark in the coming years but will they do it while getting walked 177 times and hitting .328? Probably not.

YUP

So yes, Barry Bonds holds the three single season OPS+ of all time. Pretty incredible. I think a lot of people don't realize just how incredibly ridiculously awesome Barry Bonds was from 2001 to 2004. There has never been anyone, ever, who was as dominating as Bonds was during those four years.

#4 through #10 below.

#4 Babe Ruth (1920) - 256
#5 Babe Ruth (1921) - 239
#5 Babe Ruth (1923) - 239
#7 Ted Williams (1941) - 235
#8 Ted Williams (1957) - 233
#9 Barry Bonds (2003) - 231 (Yes, he "slumped" a bit in 2003!)
#10 Babe Ruth (1927) - 226

Bonds, Ruth, & Williams

That top ten list should give a pretty good indication of why when people who know the numbers talk about the greatest hitter of all time there's only three names they seriously consider: Bonds, Ruth, & Williams.

Labels: Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, Ted Williams

Hello folks, or at least the three of you who read this blog. It's been awhile since I've posted and I know I'm a couple weeks late seeing as the season is almost two weeks old.

I know it's a little late, but I have to approach this topic. Keep in mind this isn't a shot at Cubs fans or even just the Cubs. This is a shot at Moises Alou.

I'm not sure if you heard this story or not, but Moises Alou recently said this: "Everywhere I play, even now, people still yell, 'Bartman! Bartman!' I feel really bad," Alou told the Associated Press. "You know what the funny thing is?" he added. "I wouldn't have caught it anyway."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-moises-alou-steve-bartman,1,4013080.story

Okay, so you effectively ruin this guy's life by screaming at him and acting like a Grade A douche bag. Bartman goes into hiding and has had death threats and all of that. You say after the game you would have caught the ball and then 4 1/2 years later, you just nonchalantly say, "Eh, I wouldn't have caught it."

And, "you feel bad?" You feel bad? No, feeling bad is something you do when you have to cancel plans with someone. You should feel awful, terrible, and a general level of douchebaggery. And that doesn't even begin to cover it. You should feel way worse.

You can just say sorry 5 years down the road and move on. This guy's life is forever altered and ruined. You have a $6 million paycheck to rest your head on at night, and this guy has been getting death threats since the incident.

The only thing that will clear his name will be when the Cubs win the World Series. However, it never should have come to this and that's all thanks to you.

Whoops, I'm sorry.

Last week I looked at the top 10 OPS+ of all time, so this week I'm looking at the top 10 ERA+ which is basically ERA normalized to era (ERA/era. HA!)

Of course as you'll see by who is ranked #1, career ERA+ doesn't take into consideration stamina or longevity. It's only a measurement of how good a pitcher is while they are actually pitching!

#1 Pedro Martinez (160)

Martinez has had more than his share of injury problems over the years but when he's been healthy he has been better than anyone. Ever. Along with holding the record for the greatest ERA+ of all time, he also holds the record for greatest single season ERA+. His mark of 290 in 2000 is astounding. It basically means his ERA was nearly THREE TIMES lower than an average pitcher that year. To get a better idea of how overpowering he was in 2000, look at these numbers: 284 strikeouts, 32 walks. 2000 wasn't his only great year of course. He has actually had an amazing 6 seasons with an ERA+ of over 200. In other words, he's had 6 seasons where he was more than twice as good as an average pitcher.

#2 Lefty Grove (148)

Grove was never as overwhelmingly awesome as Martinez has been as he only made it over an ERA+ of 200 once (219 in 1931) but he was a more consistent pitcher. He made it to the career mark of 300 wins (with 141 losses) which Martinez looks increasingly unlikely to reach as he continues to have injury problems.

#3 Walter Johnson (147)

His career ERA of 2.17 is quite ridiculous but of course you must consider (and ERA+ does) that he played a large portion of his career in the "dead ball" era when sub 3.00 ERAs were the norm. To give you an idea of just how dead the dead ball era was, in 1908 the league average (American League) ERA was 2.29! But even taking that into consideration, Johnson was an overpowering pitcher. He had 4 seasons with an ERA+ over 200.

#4 Ed Walsh (146)

Walsh's career ERA is an even more ridiculous 1.82 (he is the all time leader in career ERA) but he pitched his entire career in the dead ball era (he retired in 1917.) To give an idea of how insane things were back then, in 1910 Walsh had a 1.27 ERA and an 18-20 record! Walsh only had 7 full seasons (more than 25 starts) in his career.

#4 Joe Wood (146)

Wood spent his entire career (except for 2 innings pitched in 1920) in the dead ball era as well. He actually only had 2 seasons with more than 30 starts. One of those was 1912 which was easily his greatest season. He had a 34-5 record with a 1.91 ERA that year and won the World Series MVP award. Wood retired at the age of 30 in 1920 due to injury problems which never allowed him to fully make good on the promise he had shown in 1911 and 1912. Walter Johnson and Satchel Paige both claimed that Wood threw faster than any other pitcher of their time.

#6 Brandon Webb (144)

Webb has only pitched 5 seasons thus far and his career high ERA+ (thus far) actually came in his rookie year in 2003 when his 2.84 ERA was good for an ERA+ of 165. He won the Cy Young award in 2006 with a 16-8 record and a 3.10 ERA.

#7 Roger Clemens (143)

Clemens has had one of the most impressive careers of any pitcher in baseball's history. He won 7 Cy Young awards during his career while piling up 354 wins and 4672 strikeouts. He had 3 seasons with an ERA+ over 200 ('90, '97, '05) which were incredibly spread out over 15 years.

#8 Addie Joss (142)

Joss's career was only 9 seasons long. He retired in 1910 at the age of 30 due to illness and that took his life the following year. His best year was 1908 when he went 24-11 with a ridiculous 1.16 ERA (for an ERA+ of 205, the league average was 2.39!)

#8 Johan Santana (142)

He's only had 4 complete seasons as a starter but his career is already shaping up as one of the all time greats. His peak year thus far was 2004 when he went 20-6 with a 2.61 ERA (182 ERA+) Mets fans are hoping he surpasses those numbers this year.

#10 Roy Oswalt (141)

Oswalt has been very consistent so far in his career. His ERA+ has never been below 125. His peak ERA+ was actually his rookie year in 2000 when he had a 2.73 ERA for a 169 ERA+.

Conclusion

Four of the top 10 are active with one just retiring (Clemens) which shows that the stat is clearly somewhat biased towards players pitching in certain eras (ie it seems to be telling us it's easier to get an impressive ERA+ if the league ERA is high.) But consider that 4 of the 10 pitched either entirely (Walsh, Wood, Joss) or largely (Johnson) during the dead ball era which actually appears to be telling us the opposite. Perhaps it's hardest for a pitcher to have a dominating ERA+ in "in between" eras?

Taking a look at the top single season ERA+: 2000, 1914, 1994, 1995, 1913, 1968, 1906, 1999, 1912, 1905 supports that theory. All of those seasons were either highly explosive offensive years or during the dead ball era (or 1968 which was as close to the "dead ball" era as MLB has got since 1919.)

MIA?

Who is missing from this list that you thought would be here? Here's some of the close calls:

Randy Johnson (138)
Cy Young (138)
Christy Matthewson (135)
Greg Maddux (134)
Whitey Ford (133)

Billy Beane (A's GM, Failed 5 TOOOOOOL Prospect)

AND

Barry Bonds (A delicate flower)

Middle name "Lamar"

Labels: Barry Bonds, Billy Beane, IHateU, SILLY, Where da Bonds at?

OPS+ is a pretty good shorthand for comparing the careers of hitters from different eras. I wouldn't say it's perfect and I actually think it punishes hitters who played in explosive offensive eras a tad too much and ranks older era hitters too highly (easier to dominate when there's less skilled players around) but it's a pretty good measurement as far as these things go.

#1 Babe Ruth (207)

The house that Ruth built is being destroyed at the end of this season and many of his greatest single season records have been destroyed by Barry Bonds. But he still holds some of the most impressive career hitting records such as the career OPS, career slugging percentage, and as obvious by his #1 ranking here, career OPS+.

#2 Ted Williams (191)

Williams is the career leader in on base percentage and is still seen by many as the greatest pure hitter of all time.

#3 Barry Bonds (182)

Barry Bonds' stretch from 2001 to 2004 is probably the most dominating any hitter has ever been in any 4 year period in major league history. The argument that he had an unfair advantage over his competitors due to possible use of steroids/HGH is now quite thin as it's obvious that use of performing enhancing drugs has been the norm (and not the exception) in baseball for a long time. Bonds' 762 home runs may be his most famous record but I think it's far from his most impressive. I'd take his .609 OBP in 2004 or his .863 SLG in 2001 over that and I think both of those records will last longer than his career home run record.

#4 Lou Gehrig (179)

Gehrig is somewhat overshadowed by his teammate Babe Ruth and the disease that ended his career & his life and was later named after him. But he was an incredible hitter in his own right who probably doesn't get the accolades he deserves as one of the greatest hitters in MLB history.

#5 Rogers Hornsby (175)

Hornsby Vs. Cobb is a good argument that I think can reasonably go either way. By OPS+ Hornsby comes out on top.

#6 Mickey Mantle (172)

Imagine if he had laid off the sauce and stayed healthy?

#7 Joe Jackson (170)

Imagine if the scandal in 1919 had never gone down. He looked to be well on his way to one of the most impressive careers in baseball history. Even though his career ended way too early at age 30 in 1920 due to the scandal of the previous year's World Series he still did enough during his career to be considered one of the all time great hitters.

#8 Ty Cobb (167)

You could make the argument that Cobb has got more than his fair share of the attention when compared to Rogers Hornsby, Lou Gehrig, and Jimmie Fox. But Cobb was a special player who will always stand out in baseball history.

#8 Albert Pujols (167)

With the Bonds era now over (apparently?) Pujols is now the best hitter in baseball. He's only 28 years old and will likely go down as one of baseball's all time greats. And yes he's far better than Alex Rodriguez who as you'll notice, is not on this list (it would have to be a top 40 list for him to be included, by the way.)

#10 Jimmie Foxx (163)

Foxx is often overlooked when looking at the greatest hitters in early baseball history. That may be because his career started to fade at age 32. If he had kept his earlier pace for a few more years he would be a much more towering figure in baseball's career leaders. Foxx had some of the best seasons of his era. In 1932 he hit .364 with 58 home runs (nearly tying Ruth's then record of 60 which was only 5 years old at the time.)

MIA?

Who did you expect to see in this list but isn't here?

Willie Mays? His 156 mark wasn't enough for the top 10. Some of Mays most impressive skills (baserunning & defense) are of course not included in the OPS+ calculations which is purely a measurement of hitting skill.

Hank Aaron? Aaron's greatest asset was his consistency over the course of a long career. He was never as dominating as any of the hitters on the top 10 list. His career OPS+ was 155.

Alex Rodriguez? His 147 mark wasn't close to being in the top 10. Rodriguez's skills as a hitter have been somewhat exagerated due to him starting his career as a Shortstop. But of course OPS+ looks at hitting stats purely without looking at it through the lens of expected performance by position.

***I left Dan Brouthers (170) off the list as I don't think it makes sense to compare pre-1900s players to those in the "modern era."