Well, I will concede that Stan is twice the harmonica player that Willie ever was.
Maybe so. But then, Musial and Rose may have been ahead of the times. Google: Super utility players becoming prized assets
Sorry, it was late at night. Let me state it another way.
The difference between an outstanding CF like Mays and a good CF, say Duke Snider, does not necessarily translate into that much of a benefit to the team. (Especially in the OF) If you compare the one on one centerfield skill and ability of Mays and Snider, Mays was far superior. But when put in the context of “value to the team” the defensive value of Mays over Snider is at the margins because great defense vs. good defense, at a given position, is not going to have that much of an impact on the overall success of the team. Not like pitching and not like hitting.
That’s why Cincinnati in 1975 could shift a very good LF Pete Rose to 3B replacing him with the bat of George Foster in LF. Pete was not a very good third basemen (as pointed out by RickJay) and Foster was good enough at LF but not as good as Rose. By settling for a lesser LF and a poor 3rd baseman, it not only didn’t hurt the Reds, they went on to win back-to-back WS with that defense alignment.
[MODERATING]
Charlie, on the SDMB, if you wish to take out parts of other people’s statements in quote tags, please usse ellipses (…) or simply quote things separately. I don’t know what PUFFER means, but we’re very picky about the use of quote tags here. Thanks.
[/MODERATING]
Back to the issue, with due respect, I’m not going to do a Google search on command. Having said that, I am fully aware there are utility players around - I have already provided examples of such players. That doesn’t defend the notion that the abuility to play more than one position is as valuable as you’re saying it is.
I would also point out that Pete Rose was never in his life a “utility player.” He switched positions a number of times but he always played at one position at a time (for the most part.) And only once did he actually switch positions for the purpose of helping the team, when he moved from right field to third base. Moving from second to outfield, and moving from third to first (when he signed with the Phillies) was for the sake of keeping his bat in the lineup but finding a less demanding position for him.
As to your point about the marginal difference between Mays and, say, Duke Snider… well, yes. You’re right in that there is not that much difference between a great center fielder and a really, really good center fielder. There is also not that much difference between, say, Jose Bautista, who is the greatest hitter in the major leagues, and Adrian Gonzalez, who is merely the third or fourth best hitter in the major leagues. Does that mean Bautista’s offensive value isn’t particularly important, or do you think maybe I cherry picked the two hitter I was comparing to make Bautista’s marginal contribution seem smaller than it really is?
You can’t have it both ways when it comes to defensive value, is what I think, Charlie. Ultimately, I think you’re trying to couch an argument about his bat in terms of his defense, and it doesn’t really add up.
Either defense is important, such that A. the ability to shuffle among the least important positions has a high value (which you’ve said), so then also B. being the best at the most important positions is even more valuable; OR defense isn’t important, such that A. having the best player at one of the most important defensive positions rather than a good one isn’t going to have much impact (which you’ve said), so then also B. being pretty good at several positions, and shuttling around among them, is going to have even less of an impact on the overall success of the team.
You can’t argue that a player at a premium defensive position, who is the best at that position, is only helping his team a little bit, but then say that another player is adding lots of value on defense because he can play well at three different easier-to-fill positions. It’s a shell game.
If we accept that Mays couldn’t play first base, and that Mays was better in center field than Musial was at any one position, it’s pretty simple to think through the value added to the lineup. Assume the Giants start with Mays and the Cardinals start with Musial, and try out different lineups with the same players added to each team. Assume that no other player is flexible - they can only play their own position, and they’re such great hitters that they absolutely have to be in the lineup. This is precisely the scenario you’re talking about, where Musial can conform to the needs of the lineup to put the best team on the field.
[ul]
[li]If you add a catcher, SS, 2B or 3B to either team, no change.[/li][li]If you add a LF, RF, or 1B to each team, Mays/Musial can play center, and Musial can play whichever two you didn’t add. [/li][li]If you add a left fielder and a first baseman, Mays plays CF, Musial CF/RF.[/li][li]Etc.[/li]
[li]But: Add a CF, and we need to either assume Mays can or cannot play LF or RF. Musial we know can play either, plus 1B. Musial is more valuable if we assume Mays cannot play the corners.[/li][li]Add a LF, CF and RF, and either Mays plays poorly at first or a teammate is definitely out of the lineup; Musial can still play first. Musial is more valuable.[/li][/ul]
In any of the scenarios where both guys are in the lineup, you’ve agreed that Mays is a better defensive player, remember. I’m going to argue that Mays could play just as well in left or right as Musial did, since center to left/right is a pretty easy transition. If you accept that, then even in all hypothetical worlds, Musial only trumps Mays defensively if he’s on a team where that team’s best lineup has three different guys in the outfield, and him at first. In any other configuration, the team is better off with Mays in terms of defensive value, because Mays at CF is better than Musial at any one place in particular.
I’m just going to bang my forehead against the wall for a little while here. It feels good when I stop.
I already told you in post #254 that “the Giants weren’t faced with this kind of problem (need to play Mays at 1B) so the questions (you raised) are moot.”
Puffery!
(My misspell)
(The reason I didn’t provide a direct link to the article is that the url was so lengthy that this site would not allow the full url address to print. I apologize if my directions as how to obtain access to the article came across as a “command”. I just..uh..though as moderator..uh..you might want to..uh..be aware of other opinions about the value of switching players between positions.)
BTW: The article in which you felt commaded to read does in fact support what I’ve been saying all along regarding the value of a player’s ability to play more than one position.
Which I’ve previously pointed out as an example of the value of a player switching positions…even though the defense was weakened.
Which means Mays and Snider could be switched between the Giants and Dodgers and there would be no appreciable difference between the teams defensive capabilities. However, offensively the Dodgers would benefit at the expense of the Giants by having Mays’ bat in place of Snider’s bat. Or put another way, if Mays were to have had the exact defense capabilities as Snider but retain his hitting abilities, there would have been little difference in the overall success of the Giants.
Unlike defensive values, offense values are more representative of the players worth to the team. Therefore, I could care less if you cherry picked one or both of the named players or, whether you were trying to make Jose’s contribution seem smaller than it really is. I would trade even up, Adrian for Jose and switch the Sox RF to 1B.
Not at all. My arguement is that Musial’s versatility on defense, i.e. switching positions, allowed the bat of a teammate to be inserted into the line-up thereby giving a better match-up for the Cards against opposing pitchers. Musial’s bat and glove were what they were. If Musial could move from 1B to RF (replacing a right hand bat) and allowing a lefty inserted at 1B to face the oppositions RH pitcher, then the team had a better chance to win. It’s done all the time in the majors but if often results in one player replacing another. In Musial’s case his big bat could stay in the line-up and give management the option of using what player they saw fit.
The post kept going after that sentence, you know.
False. Of course at this point no one really believes much of anything you say.
link
The actual article you’re referring to:
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090516&content_id=4768298&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb
And Mays’ ability to play CF allowed the bat of a teammate to be inserted into the line-up, thereby giving a better match-up for the Giants against opposing pitchers.
(In response to your post #269)
I considered the premise of your opening sentence to be wrong because I’m not trying to prove Musial’s “bat in terms of his defense”, but rather, that Musial’s defensive versatility made his teammate’s bats more relevant. That’s why I didn’t respond to the remainder of your post. But see below.
- I agree that one on one Mays was a better defensive player than Musial in CF.
- For the sake of this discussion I’ll concede that Mays could play just as well in left or right as Musial did.
- I agree if Musial is playing 1B there would be three different guys in the outfield (but I don’t get what that has to do with anything).
- With Musial presumably stuck at just one position, under your scenario, and Mays moving around to CF, LF or RF, you are absolutely correct than Mays would have been more valuable than Musial.
- Likewise, if Mays plays just CF and Musial plays only, say 1B, you are once again correct that Mays would be more valuable than Musial.
- I’ll concede that under your hypothetical “trapping” of Musial at just one position with Mays becoming a multi-position player (if he had so chosen) that Mays would have been more valuable.
But it just didn’t work out that way. Mays stayed at CF and Musial moved around.
Musial’s very good fielding abilities at multi-positions, plus his willingness to do so, made him more valuable as a defensive player (to the team) than Mays because that value converted directly into offensive opportunities the Cardinal’s otherwise would not have had. Musial’s defensive skills afforded the Cards the ability to expand their team’s line-up options from the equivalent of 25 players to that of 28…and to do so using one of the all-time best sluggers as their* rook*.
To put his versatility into prespective, consider that Musial is the only 3 time+ MVP winner to receive the award while playing a different fielding postion each time:
1943 - RF: 122 Games Started at RF
1946 - 1B: 114 GS at 1B
1948 - CF: 63 GS at CF / RF: 51 GS at RF / LF: 41 GS at LF
(It wouldn’t be unreasonable to conclude that in 1948 Musial became the only “utility player” to have ever won an MVP award.)
SIDE-BAR
In 1948 Musial had what is arguably the greatest all-round offensive season in the history of baseball when he lead the league in 11 of MLB’s 13 hitting categories (and 8 MLB categories). The season was highlighted by a .376 BA and the highest Total Bases (429) in a season over the past 80 years…while striking out only 34 times. Musial started every game of the 1948 season, almost equally divided at three positions, and committed only 7 errors.
Why would you say something like that Munch?
Do you believe I would purposely not provide the link for RickJay to read an article I want him to see, but instead ask Rick to Google the subject matter in order to read the material? What would be the point in that? Uhhh, maybe I would hope that Rick would refuses to Google an article I wanted him to read? (Sigh)
My daddy told me that once they start hurling insults or name=calling it means they lost the battle!
(But at least Rick no longer has the “Google excuse” for not being able to link to the article.)
Why would you say something like that Munch?
Do you believe I would purposely not provide the link for RickJay to read an article I want him to see, but instead ask Rick to Google the subject matter in order to read the material? What would be the point in that? Uhhh, maybe I would hope that Rick would refuses to Google an article I wanted him to read? (Sigh)
My daddy told me that once they start hurling insults or name-calling it means they lost the battle!
(But at least Rick no longer has the “Google excuse” for not being able to link to the article.)
D
Duplicate post…ignor
Unless SS Pegan went on the DL (and assuming Mays was as capable at SS as Robin Yount, SS, CF) then Mays could go to SS, Alou to CF, Cepeda to RF and McCovey permanently to 1B. Matter-of-fact, that might (if only) have been a stronger line-up day to day for the Giants and once Pegan got healthy he or Mays could move over to 2B which would keep Cepeda and McCovey in the line-up and maybe the Giants could have traded Hiller to the Cards, kept Cepeda and went to 3 or 4 WS in the 1960’s…instead of the Cardinals. It might have been comparible to Rose moving to 3B and Foster to LF for the Reds that took place a decade later. (Something was out of whack with the Giants and all that talent they had in the 1960’s)
I honestly have no idea why you would say “this site would not allow the full url address to print” when it’s clear you made no attempt at all to try. And yes - honestly, that does undermine your points in this thread, as it shows an unwillingness to put forth a modicum of effort. Why should we believe you’re making an effort to understand our points when you refuse to hit Ctrl+V to post a simple link (and make up contrived excuses for not doing so)? If you’d instead said “I don’t know how to make a link”, I’d give you the benefit of the doubt - because at least that would have been honest.
Why would they have done all that?