hsmith19 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 On list of overrated Cardinals, Ozzie is at the top. Top 10 shortstop all time. He has a good argument to be in the 6-8 range based on JAWS and the level of competition he faced. Would be very hard to overrate a guy like that, particularly when he was a better all around player than Derek Jeter, who some insist on ridiculously calling the best ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Harry Rogers definitely should have been on the team. There are some other debatable spots, but it is absolutely unacceptable that Harry Rogers was snubbed. I think Grawer should be another coach named for the important role he played in our history, though I understand the argument that he should not be named, it is not as big of a snub as Rogers. (Who on Earth would say Brock was overrated and cite his fielding (a left fielder in baseball rarely is a top notch defensive asset) hell he played left field very well, had a solid fielding percentage, charged the ball and got a lot of assists that way despite a poor arm? He set the all time record for stolen bases, had > 3000 hits, high BA, hit plenty of home runs for a leadoff man, high on base %, had a high OPS). A mediocre to poor defensive left fielder costs his team roughly as much as an equally inept fielder in right field. Outfield defense counts, at all three spots on the field. And fielding percentgage? Really?? El Oh Effing El. There is perhaps no more meaningless statistic in the history of meaningless statistics. But since you bring it up, Brock's fielding percentage was 17 points BELOW the league average over his career. He actually made more errors than all but a few contemporary outfielders (not that that means anything as far as defensive value goes, of course). You understand baseball stats about as well as you understand criminal procedure. Crack a book sometime... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 A mediocre to poor defensive left fielder costs his team roughly as much as an equally inept fielder in right field. Outfield defense counts, at all three spots on the field. And fielding percentgage? Really?? El Oh Effing El. There is perhaps no more meaningless statistic in the history of meaningless statistics. But since you bring it up, Brock's fielding percentage was 17 points BELOW the league average over his career. He actually made more errors than all but a few contemporary outfielders (not that that means anything as far as defensive value goes, of course). You understand baseball stats about as well as you understand criminal procedure. Crack a book sometime... After you got cut from your freshman high school team you probably lost track of how baseball teams are ultimately structured. The left fielder is often the most productive offensive player on the team in MLB, but then also the least talented fielder. Do not put him in with CF's and RF's, it is not a valid comparison. Think PG vs. # 2, or # 3, big difference. In Lou's case with his world class speed he got to a lot of balls that NO ONE else could, and a few went off his glove and that affected his fielding percentage in a negative way. His arm was poor but he charged the ball and threw a lot of people out, surprised them. His offense was superior across the board, (H, W, R, SB, OBP, BA, HR's, OPS), a true top of the elite HOF'er, I think voted in the first time he was eligible. Try to hit the books and get a list of HOF left fielders and how this all works, see if you can figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 After you got cut from your freshman high school team you probably lost track of how baseball teams are ultimately structured. The left fielder is often the most productive offensive player on the team in MLB, but then also the least talented fielder. Do not put him in with CF's and RF's, it is not a valid comparison. Think PG vs. # 2, or # 3, big difference. In Lou's case with his world class speed he got to a lot of balls that NO ONE else could, and a few went off his glove and that affected his fielding percentage in a negative way. His arm was poor but he charged the ball and threw a lot of people out, surprised them. His offense was superior across the board, (H, W, R, SB, OBP, BA, HR's, OPS), a true top of the elite HOF'er, I think voted in the first time he was eligible. Try to hit the books and get a list of HOF left fielders and how this all works, see if you can figure it out. The funny thing here is Brock was almost never the best hitter on his own team, even the Cardinals teams he played on that were really bad. And I never "put him in with" center fielders. But there is no meaningful distinction between corner outfielders. Defense counts roughly the same at each spot, and corner outfielders can and often are used essentially interchangeably, except in the case of a guy like Brock whose arm is too poor to hide in right field. Outfield defense matters SIGNIFICANTLY at all three spots. You cannot ignore defense for ANY outfielder. And it is simply not true that Brock was above average at "getting to" balls. From the available defensive metrics, it is clear he was never better than average (at best) in range. And Brock, compared against his contemporary corner outfielders, was merely good and not great offensively. He is a borderline Hall of Famer at best, and was inducted simply because of the novelty of 3,000 hits and the stolen base record. He was not nearly as good a player as Tim Raines, who has still not made the Hall. Your counting stats from the back of old Topps cards are meaningless, and even by some of those measures Brock was highly ordinary. He walked less than 50 times per 162 games and managed an OBP of only 13 points above the league average. For a leadoff man, that is hardly outstanding. There are good reasons why nearly every credible baseball statistician considers him among the most overrated players of all time. Now here's a list based on numbers that actually matter, pegging him the 35th best left fielder of all time, which is about right, and which makes him one of the very worst at his position in the Hall of Fame: http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_LF.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizziken Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Just curious, would you put Brock in the Top 10 Cardinals of all-time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Ouch. So you admit getting cut from the freshman baseball team. Did you make it outside to swing a bat or did you get cut just from doing pick ups and playing catch in the gym? Thus, your psychological profile, taking cheap shots at Cardinal great Lou Brock and saying Willie McGee had "dashing ET looks". Assignment: the number one stat, the # 1 first and foremost measurable in baseball, is "hits", so please list players # 24 - 10,000 who finished behind Lou Brock, # 23 all time MLB baseball in hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 The most immediate goal is to get on base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Top 10 shortstop all time. He has a good argument to be in the 6-8 range based on JAWS and the level of competition he faced. Would be very hard to overrate a guy like that, particularly when he was a better all around player than Derek Jeter, who some insist on ridiculously calling the best ever. Lifetime bating averages: Lou Brock: .293 and Ozzie Smith: .262 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doowop Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Once again, counting stats. Brock is pretty much the definition of an empty compiler. He was consistently better than league average offensively, but never truly outstanding. He was a good but not great player, who gets remembered because he stole tons of bases for a very long time at a success rate that ranged from decent to mediocre. Yes, the talent pool Hornsby and Musial played against was weaker, but they were truly dominant, transcendant players compared to the competition they faced. Brock was never in the same stratosphere as them. Musial played against some of the best from 1950 through 1963, unlike Hornsby and Bottomly. He was GREAT. The only one of the Cardinals to hit well in the 1963 playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Pelican Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Musial played against some of the best from 1950 through 1963, unlike Hornsby and Bottomly. He was GREAT. The only one of the Cardinals to hit well in the 1963 playoffs. Say WHAT? What 1963 playoffs? I haven't looked it up but i recall the Cards made a run but finished several games behind the Dodgers in 1963. There were no playoffs back then unless two teams tied and they only had a one game "playoff" to go to the World Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Man Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 once again I apologize for leading this thread into a Cardinals tangent... Let's stay on topic here people...growing up Billiken in the 80s at the old Kiel "Pee Wee" Lenard is the first player I remember - mainly because from my perspective he looked like a kid playing out there...walking up the ramps, Rock N Roll part 2 during pre-game warmups, the Suzuki halftime shootout, Monroe Douglass, Roland Gray, Anthony Bonner, Charles Newberry... You just had to fuoking be there. Crews knows what we're talking about. He never could win at the Kiel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeniceMenace Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Perhaps if SLU were to name it's all-time stiffs team, 16 would be a good number because we're had so many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Say WHAT? What 1963 playoffs? I haven't looked it up but i recall the Cards made a run but finished several games behind the Dodgers in 1963. There were no playoffs back then unless two teams tied and they only had a one game "playoff" to go to the World Series. The 60 Card's championship teams were in some measure one of the greatest ever. There were 7 seasons where the % of teams making it to the post season was at it's lowest, '62-'68, when there were 10 teams in each league and no divisions, thus a 10% chance. We were in 3 of the 7 possible slots as were Dodgers and Yankees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basketbill Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I don't think they should run them off ... However, if they privately let them know they won't be getting much love as Billiken All Century team member and will help them find another All Century team they may be more suited for, I don't have a problem with it They could just wait and let the drug testing take care of things. The less deserving with undoubtedly fail due to performance enhancing drugs etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Finally! A place for Cardinals fans to talk baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doowop Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Say WHAT? What 1963 playoffs? I haven't looked it up but i recall the Cards made a run but finished several games behind the Dodgers in 1963. There were no playoffs back then unless two teams tied and they only had a one game "playoff" to go to the World Series.They played the Dodgers at the end of the season and if they had swept that three game series they would have had a chance to go to the World Series. They finished several games behind because they lost that series. They lost because Musial was the only one to hit well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Man Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Perhaps if SLU were to name it's all-time stiffs team, 16 would be a good number because we're had so many. Big Mel is the Anthony Bonner of the all-stiffs team. Tadysak and Bickel for sure. Does Bryce Husak's senior season disqualify him from consideration? Who else? I seem to have blocked most of them from memory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bauman Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Big Mel is the Anthony Bonner of the all-stiffs team. Tadysak and Bickel for sure. Does Bryce Husak's senior season disqualify him from consideration? Who else? I seem to have blocked most of them from memory. One of the worst stiffs of all time---Sekue Barentine (sp?). He never met a pass he could catch or a shot he could make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bauman Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 On list of overrated Cardinals, Ozzie is at the top. Oz would certainly disagree with you. He is a legend in HIS OWN MIND! Also, one of the worst excuses for a team player in modern Cardinal history. No, now that I think about it he is the worst excuse for a team player in recent Cardinal history-I can't think of anybody more selfish or self-centered. I will grant him, he was the best all-time Card at doing backflips and yes he was a great fielder, who's sole accomplishment at the plate was being fortunate enough to have Jack Buck make a memorable call of a 310 foot fly ball that barely cleared the wall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Man Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 One of the worst stiffs of all time---Sekue Barentine (sp?). He never met a pass he could catch or a shot he could make. Sekeue could run the floor and draw lane violations* on missed FTs, but that was about the extent of his value. *Did Evans ever pass him as the all time leader? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmbilliken Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Sekeue could run the floor and draw lane violations* on missed FTs, but that was about the extent of his value. *Did Evans ever pass him as the all time leader? Sekeue was the epitamy of Spoonhauer's disdain for recruiting. He didn't even start on his JUCO team. We had all that talent coming back from a tournament team that lost Pederson as our starting center. What an easy sales pitch. We've got a team full of guards and small forwards that are going to take us back to the tournament, all we need is you(big man) to come in and play center. All that and Charlie brings in a back up JUCO center who averaged about 5 points a game and a few rebounds a game(in JUCO ball where everyones figures are inflated) to come in and sit on the bench. I realize he had another guy he thought he was going to get that backed off late, but you've got to have a back up plan better than a back up JUCO center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Harry Rogers should be on this team, period. His omission really sticks out. He may well be one of the Top 5 players to ever play for the Billikens, most definitely in the Top 10. Lewis McKinney, David Burns, and Marque Perry should also be on this team. The solution is very simple. The SLU Athletic Dept. needs to rectify this and make this a 20 member team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 They played the Dodgers at the end of the season and if they had swept that three game series they would have had a chance to go to the World Series. They finished several games behind because they lost that series. They lost because Musial was the only one to hit well.I believe you have just validated everyone else's fact that there were no playoffs in 1963. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Man Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Sekeue was the epitamy of Spoonhauer's disdain for recruiting. You misspell epitome and Spoonhour but correctly spell Sekeue, disdain, and recruiting? That's odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.