A Game Of Inches And Pounds

[Wolf Hopper]

http://www.netshrine.com/sizebyera.html

I found these results interesting.

Any thoughts or comments?

[Ytown Tribe fan]

Do you have raw data for the population as a whole for those periods? I would bet that the height and weight of the average adult increased by an amount similar to that of the ballplayers.

[Wolf Hopper]

Originally posted by Ytown Tribe fan
Do you have raw data for the population as a whole for those periods? I would bet that the height and weight of the average adult increased by an amount similar to that of the ballplayers.

Can't find it. 'Tho, I would think that the pattern would be the same, at the least.

[pathogan]

Originally posted by Ytown Tribe fan
Do you have raw data for the population as a whole for those periods? I would bet that the height and weight of the average adult increased by an amount similar to that of the ballplayers.


....on the whole,I would think...

[gyb13]

what about outliers (players that are much taller or fatter than average)? max, did you do a pass at the number of players a number x of standard deviations away from the mean?

[Wolf Hopper]

Originally posted by gyb13
max, did you do a pass at the number of players a number x of standard deviations away from the mean?

Nope - but, if you're willing - the data is all there on the xls.

[RedSeat]

The results are only as good as the data. Taking a quick look at some of the current players:

Mo Vaughn, 225 lbs
Raul Mondesi, 150 lbs
Sammy Sosa, 165 lbs

I don't feel good making any conclusions based on this kind of information.

[Wolf Hopper]

This is why I stressed in the feature that it's reported weights and heights.

Since the beginning of baseball, players have been adding 1 or 3 inches to their height and not listing their correct weight.

The only hope, with a study such as this, is that the fudging is consistent and it offsets itself.

For example - if I had a scale that was dead solid perfect - and it weighed Willie Keeler at 160 pounds and Mo Vaughn at 300 pounds - - and then I had another scale, somewhat broken, that weighed Keller at 125 and Vaughn at 265, even with the broken scale, I would be able to tell that Vaughn in the present weighed more than Keller in the past.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Originally posted by RedSeat
The results are only as good as the data. Taking a quick look at some of the current players:

Mo Vaughn, 225 lbs
Raul Mondesi, 150 lbs
Sammy Sosa, 165 lbs

I don't feel good making any conclusions based on this kind of information.

RedSeat, Where do these figures for Sosa and Mondesi come from. At this time, both are over 220 pounds.

[poorme]

this would be a fascinating project if the data were reliable.

[Wolf Hopper]

Anyone have any suggestions on where I could get better data? I mean, outside of manually inputting everyone off of ESPN.com or something..............

[poorme]

i don't think the data exists, really. from bill james i got the impression that it was inaccurate.

what the hell, i guess its interesting nevertheless.

bottom-line your conclusion for me, steve.

[RedSeat]

Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3
RedSeat, Where do these figures for Sosa and Mondesi come from. At this time, both are over 220 pounds.

Those are the reported figures for those 3 players. All of the data is available through the original link.

Wolf, I agree that heights and weights have been exagerrated throughout the years. But those three examples were so extreme that I'm not comfortable with any of the results.

Also, the criteria to select the data is very limiting. From 1994-2002, only 96 hitters made the cut. Not sure how to get more accurate data, but I think looking at each season individually, instead of by era might be a more accurate analysis. The current model eliminates an awful lot of players (ie someone who played 950 games from 1986 to 1993 and 950 games from 1994 to 2001.) The GAMES criterion for pitchers also skews the data set towards relief pitchers. Don't know how or if that affects the outcome, but it limits the usefulness of the data.

[Wolf Hopper]

Originally posted by RedSeat
Not sure how to get more accurate data, but I think looking at each season individually, instead of by era might be a more accurate analysis.

A project for another day! :D

[hmrsf]

Every once and awhile I wonder what it would be like in Steve's head...........:eek:


Now I know. Great stuff, as always!


BBA is better thou.;)

[Wolf Hopper]

Originally posted by poorme
bottom-line your conclusion for me, steve.

That, on average, players today are slightly larger than players of the past - but, they are not extremely larger, again, on average.

[sweaver]

I think that's also true of the population in general.

[pwdennis]

At one time I thought the average height of the American male would be about 6' ; however, given the trends in immigration (more Asians and Latinos, less Northern Europeans) I doubt that this would be ever become true. The influx of Latin American players (on average shorter than their non-Latin counterparts) has probably kept the average size of baseball players down

[Wolf Hopper]

Originally posted by Wolf Hopper
This is why I stressed in the feature that it's reported weights and heights.

Since the beginning of baseball, players have been adding 1 or 3 inches to their height and not listing their correct weight.

The only hope, with a study such as this, is that the fudging is consistent and it offsets itself.

Just looked back at this - -
to RedSeat's point of:

Mo Vaughn, 225 lbs
Raul Mondesi, 150 lbs
Sammy Sosa, 165 lbs

well, there's Ruth at 215 and Foxx at 195 - - and Wilbur Wood at 180 and - get this! - Mickey Lolich at 170.

Best I can say is that the weights reported are weights when players first made the bigs - not weights at the end of their career. Therefore, the offset theory should work to a degree.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Players are 3 inches and 22 pounds bigger now than during the "dead ball" era. That's more than a "tad" of difference, don't you think?

[Wolf Hopper]

Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear
Players are 3 inches and 22 pounds bigger now than during the "dead ball" era. That's more than a "tad" of difference, don't you think?

I'm looking at the chart and cannot see where you are getting 22 lbs?

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear
Players are 3 inches and 22 pounds bigger now than during the "dead ball" era. That's more than a "tad" of difference, don't you think?

I'm not going to doubt your word, but maybe the accuracy of your source, 22 pounds seems like quite a difference. Then I wonder how far back we are going into the dead ball era, the 1870s.