Musial and Mays

The Game Room
41

To explain a bit further, assuming those questions weren’t intended to be rhetorical ones, OPS+ isn’t a corrective anything. It’s a normalizing factor. It compares to league averages. There is a park adjustment involved, but all you’re really doing to calculate OPS+ is dividing a player’s SLG and OBP by the league average SLG and OBP, adding them together, subtracting one, and multiplying by 100. As you can see, an average player would have a 100 OPS+. The further from 100, the better you are compared to the league you play in.

So I’d almost agree with your last sentence, except it wasn’t the park conditions that changed, as Jeff points out, it was the league conditions. Mays was more valuable as a hitter in 1968 than 1970, even though his numbers were worse, but you wouldn’t know that unless you looked at the context. That was my point.

Anyway, even operating under your assumption, that the only issue was the parks, this

doesn’t get us very far. “Giants hitters” didn’t do those things, Mays and McCovey did. Pointing out how good Willie Mays was isn’t really an argument against the point I was trying to make, which was first that the park made his numbers look worse, but ultimately that Willie Mays was really good. And maybe you underrate Willie McCovey, too.

42

Off topic, but it really really irritates me that whoever formulated OPS+ did it by subtracting one instead of dividing by 2.

43

Nope! I never said a thing about Musial being a better hitter because he had a better park to play in. Stan was quite generous in spreading the hits around. He recorded a career .663 SLG at Ebbits Field, had a lifetime average at the Polo Grounds 11 points above his career average, hit 5 HR during a double-hitter at Sportsman Park, and when it was all said and done, he had exactly 1815 career hits at home and 1815 hits on the road.

The 1960 decade (1961-70) was not exactly a dead-ball era. Even with the dilution of talent accompanying expansion, and a 1967-68 dip in hitter production, the average HR per ML team was 133 compared to 131 for the same period during the 1950 decade. Sluggers had a great 10 years: Maris and Mantle had a slug-fest trying to pass Ruth’s single season record; Mays and McCovey were banging out HR at a record pace; and Mays and Aaron recorded half of their career HR totals during this period. It might not have been a great decade for all the minor leaguers now showing up in the majors, but it was a very good time for the quality big bats.

Mays was the better base-stealer and fielder…conceded. Mays was also the greatest CF and probably would have been the greatest LF or RF had he played either one of those positions…conceded. But that is no reason to dismiss or question Musial’s stature or accomplishments.

Like Mays, Musial was in a category all his own: the only power-hitter in baseball history that was used as a* utility* player. (How many egos could handle that?) No slugger has ever done this before or since. He played at 4 positions all the while recording one of the highest fielding percentage (.989) of all time and becoming one of the most productive players since Babe Ruth.

You may question whether all this is a compliment to Musial, but it was certainly one hell of a compliment to his manager(s), the histroy of baseball and to baseball’s record book.

44

Then it might not be kosher for Jimmy to take a one-year low point in league production (1968) and thru the miracle of sabermetrics try to make a case that Mays was not getting a fair shake in the evaluation of players between eras? Especially when Mays was at an age where norml players being to lose their playing skills.

45

Well, you’re the one inventing his own definitions of “utility player,” “power hitter” and “slugger,” so you could claim that–BY YOUR OWN DEFINITIONS. but in part Musial was “able” to do this by dint of being an average fielder. (If he were a superior outfielder, he would have played much more centerfield than he did.) His three main positions (LF, RF, and 1B) are played by the three worst fielders of your 8 position players.

But you could make the case Ernie Banks was far more versitle (I never can spell that word) playing roughly half his career at ss and half at 1B–but you’re not counting that as a utility player, are you? Or you could make the argument that Yaz also played first base, and LF and RF (and a little CF and DH)–but he doesn’t fit your definition of a slugger, does he? Or you could point to the Babe-- but playing LF and RF and P isn’t a utility player, is it?

46

And what was Orlando Cepeda? Milk toast. Okay, correction: “Giant sluggers like Cepeda, Mays, McCovey, etc. were league leaders in…”
Jeeze!

47

True - Cepeda led the league in home runs once. My apologies. He’s also in the Hall of Fame. Mays, McCovey, and once, Cepeda. No etc. Does that mean that Candlestick Park was not unfavorable to hitters? Because that, again, is my point.

No one is dismissing Musial. What they are dismissing are the claims that he is the greatest hitter and also the best defensive player of all time, and the claim that he was a better player than Willie Mays, which are a stretch, completely ridiculous, and a big stretch, respectively.

And now I’m dismissing your carefully cherry-picked claims about how great hitters had it in the 60s. Home runs per team doesn’t matter much to this conversation, I don’t think, considering that Mays hit more home runs in the 50s than Musial did. Why not look at some of the things that Musial actually did better than Mays, on the face of it?

As you probably found in researching your last post, when you look at basically every other indicator of overall offensive performance, which is to say, the ones that you could at least argue Musial was better at - BA, runs, OBP, SLG, doubles, triples - the 50s were a more favorable environment, and more specifically, the years Mays played in were less favorable than the ones Musial did:


Year 	R 	H 	2B 	3B 	HR 	RBI 	BA 	OBP 	SLG 																		
1950	4.85	9.11	1.5	0.32	0.84	4.55	0.266	0.346	0.402																		
1951	4.55	8.96	1.45	0.29	0.75	4.25	0.261	0.336	0.386																		
1952	4.18	8.58	1.37	0.27	0.69	3.9	0.253	0.327	0.37																		
1953	4.61	9.06	1.45	0.3	0.84	4.32	0.264	0.336	0.397																		
1954	4.38	8.86	1.4	0.32	0.78	4.11	0.261	0.333	0.39																		
1955	4.48	8.76	1.32	0.28	0.9	4.21	0.259	0.332	0.394																		
1956	4.45	8.74	1.35	0.29	0.93	4.17	0.258	0.331	0.397																		
1957	4.31	8.85	1.37	0.27	0.89	4.06	0.258	0.324	0.391																		
1958	4.28	8.75	1.37	0.27	0.91	4.03	0.258	0.325	0.394																		
1959	4.38	8.74	1.4	0.24	0.91	4.11	0.257	0.324	0.392																		
1960	4.31	8.67	1.39	0.27	0.86	4.03	0.255	0.324	0.388																		
1961	4.53	8.76	1.39	0.26	0.95	4.22	0.258	0.328	0.399																		
1962	4.46	8.8	1.33	0.26	0.93	4.18	0.258	0.326	0.393																		
1963	3.95	8.35	1.27	0.24	0.84	3.68	0.246	0.309	0.372																		
1964	4.04	8.51	1.31	0.23	0.85	3.76	0.25	0.313	0.378																		
1965	3.99	8.3	1.29	0.24	0.83	3.7	0.246	0.311	0.372																		
1966	3.99	8.42	1.28	0.25	0.85	3.71	0.249	0.31	0.376																		
1967	3.77	8.17	1.26	0.24	0.71	3.48	0.242	0.306	0.357																		
1968	3.42	7.91	1.19	0.21	0.61	3.17	0.237	0.299	0.34																		
1969	4.07	8.37	1.24	0.22	0.8	3.77	0.248	0.32	0.369																		
1970	4.34	8.63	1.35	0.24	0.88	4.05	0.254	0.326	0.385

And that is the point that you haven’t addressed. Do you dispute that Stan Musial’s career took place in a more favorable era, and a more favorable home ballpark, than Willie Mays’, for the purpose of his career statistics? If not, I don’t know why you’re arguing about things like Cepeda and McCovey.

48

Honus Wagner was a power hitter by the standards of his time and played at least 200 games at four different positions. Certainly other great players have played multiple positions; Pete Rose was a regular player for an extended period of time at second, right field, third, and first.

That said, leaving everything else aside, you seem to be implying that playing both first and several outfield positions is somehow a great thing. I don’t quite understand why you would think that. Willie Mays only played center field because he was a great fielder. Getting shifted from position to position is something that usually happens to guys who are BAD fielders but good enough with the stick that you want to keep finding a way to keep them in the lineup, or who have a lot of defensive skill but aren’t good enough hitters to have regular playing time. Musial was an unusual case, but it’s not evidence of great fielding ability.

The truly great fielders of all time are put at hard positions and kept there. Ozzie Smith didn’t get moved around. Brooks Robinson didn’t get moved around. Nor did Willie Mays. You don’t move a glove wizard around.

For what anyone cares, all time leaders in WAR:

  1. Babe Ruth, 178
  2. Barry Bonds, 168
  3. Ty Cobb, 164
    4. Willie Mays, 163
  4. Heny Aaron, 151
  5. Honus Wagner, 150
  6. Tris Speaker, 143
  7. Ted Williams, 140
    9. Stan Musial, 139
  8. Rogers Hornsby, 135
49

Honus Wagner was a power hitter by the standards of his time and played at least 200 games at four different positions. Certainly other great players have played multiple positions; Pete Rose was a regular player for an extended period of time at second, right field, third, and first.

That said, leaving everything else aside, you seem to be implying that playing both first and several outfield positions is somehow a great thing. I don’t quite understand why you would think that. Willie Mays only played center field because he was a great fielder. Getting shifted from position to position is something that usually happens to guys who are BAD fielders but good enough with the stick that you want to keep finding a way to keep them in the lineup, or who have a lot of defensive skill but aren’t good enough hitters to have regular playing time. Musial was an unusual case, but it’s not evidence of great fielding ability.

The truly great fielders of all time are put at hard positions and kept there. Ozzie Smith didn’t get moved around. Brooks Robinson didn’t get moved around. Nor did Willie Mays. You don’t move a glove wizard around.

For what anyone cares, all time leaders in WAR:

  1. Babe Ruth, 178
  2. Barry Bonds, 168
  3. Ty Cobb, 164
    4. Willie Mays, 163
  4. Heny Aaron, 151
  5. Honus Wagner, 150
  6. Tris Speaker, 143
  7. Ted Williams, 140
    9. Stan Musial, 139
  8. Rogers Hornsby, 135
50

I meant your perception of Musial being a better hitter is because you are ignoring the context of his career–playing in a favorable hitter’s park, in an era which had more scoring than the 1960’s.

51

I’m sorry, could you repeat that?

52

Apropos of nothing, IMHO:

  1. Babe Ruth, likeable asshole
  2. Barry Bonds, despicable asshole
  3. Ty Cobb, racist thug
  4. Willie Mays, good guy, a little embittered
  5. Heny Aaron, good guy, a little arrogant
  6. Honus Wagner, good guy
  7. Tris Speaker, good guy, accused of gambling, never proven
  8. Ted Williams, arrogant jerk
  9. Stan Musial, humble, modest, well-liked
  10. Rogers Hornsby, self-centered, nasty jerk

against just my opinion. It’s odd what strong feelings I have about these guys, and about 300 other ballplayers

53

Did it ever occur to you (and the others) that:
[ul]
[li]Musial’s willingness to play 4 positions was partly due to the fact that he was willing to help the team by fullfilling whatever role would best suit the needs of the club[/li][li]That the 60’s were a less productive era of baseball due to the influx of mediocre talent because of expansion [/li][li]Mays didn’t play any other position later in his career because it would have diminished the team[/li][/ul]
I saw Mays play in the late 60’s and early 70’s and he was, to a large extent, in the twilight of his career at that stage so it’s hard to make judgments about his skills. I grew up in St. Louis and Stan Musial was, as someone else described, a modest, humble man who was as revered for his off the field character as he was for his baseball skills. I don’t know enough about Mays to say the same one way or another.

FWIW, I saw Aaron play many times during the 50’s and 60’s and he was, without doubt, the most atheletic and natural ballplayer I ever saw! I would rate Aaron above Mays.

54

So what? That has absolutely nothing to do with how productive they were as players. Musial played 4 positions because he was able to do so and yet unable to excel at any. It’s good that he was able to get away from 1B unlike a lot of poor fielders, but he’s still not close to the fielder Mays was.

Now I’ve heard everything. Expansion was used as an argument for greater offense in the 1990’s… but I have never heard it used as a rationale for why pitching dominated. How, exactly, would adding pitchers to MLB have anything but a positive effect on hitters?

So you saw Mays play in his late 30s and early 40s, and you saw Hank Aaron play during his 20s and 30s, and you think the latter was the superior player? Imagine my surprise.

Nobody is saying Stan Musial was not a great ballplayer. He’s an inner-circle Hall of Famer, one of the top 20 or so hitters of all time. It’s not an insult to say that he was not as good as Willie Mays.

55

AAron never hit 50 in a season. He was like Rose, he got the record with overwhelming ABs. Ruth hit 715 with 8400 ABs. Aaron took 12,400 ABs to set the record.
AAron does not enter the discussion about greatest hitters.

56

How could the all-time #5 WAR amongst position players not enter into the discussion… not saying he would win, but in the discussion? Absolutely.

Hell, him and Mays have almost identical slash lines: 305/374/555 for Aaron, 302/384/557 for Mays, with identical 155 OPS+ for their careers.

57

And neither did Ted Williams. In fact, Williams only hit more than 40 home runs once.

Other hitters who never hit 50: Frank Robinson, Reggie Jackson, Mike Schmidt, Willie McCovey, Frank Thomas, Ernie Banks, Eddie Mathews, Mel Ott, and Lou Fucking Gehrig.

In short, using “seasons with 50 home runs” as an entry requirement to the “greatest hitters of all time” discussion is horrible.

58

But you know who’s the only guy to hit 60 3 times? Sammy Sosa… of course he didn’t lead the league in any of those seasons (which never ceases to amaze me), so I guess he’s out of the running too.

59

The difference is Arron was a home run hitter. Williams had a life time average of 344. Ruth was 342. A home run hitter is rated on home run production. Williams was much more, including a triple crown winner.
AAron was not in Williams hitting class. Musial and Mays were.

60

How, specifically, is Willie Mays in the discussion, and not Aaron? It’s already been pointed out to you how ridiculously similar the two’s careers were. It’s now up to you to point out specific points where they diverge.