1932 - Babe Ruth v. Jimmie Foxx

Skipper Steve · 12-02-2001, 11:26 PM

Who had a better season and why?

Pirate21 · 12-03-2001, 10:30 PM

This was interesting because the Babe was 37 and Foxx was 24. At first glance the difference in RC's is pretty big - 211 for Foxx & 160 for Ruth. Foxx had sizable advantages in SLG. batting avg., hits, TB., but RC/G is about 3/4 run per game difference in Foxx's favor which seems close considering the other numbers.

But then you see the Babe played 20 games less than Foxx and cost his team 76 fewer outs! That context is what makes the comparison closer than just the raw data. To me RC's and RC/G(and it's relationship to the rest of the league) is what is most important when weighing offensive contributions either for a season or over a career. I really don't care how a player got there, his job is to produce runs for his team because that's what wins games if you are just looking at offense.

But, in the end, I would say Foxx had the better year because he played in more games, thus contributing to his team more often to give them a chance to win.

Skipper Steve · 12-03-2001, 10:36 PM

Interesting, I went with Ruth.

Pretty much on OWP alone:
1 Babe Ruth .860
2 Jimmie Foxx .816

Babe had the edge in RCAP too:
1 Babe Ruth 95
2 Jimmie Foxx 92

Pirate21 · 12-03-2001, 11:16 PM

I figured Foxx's lead in RCAA (+17) pretty much cancelled out the RCAP. OWP is a good stat, but it's an estimate of what a team made up of that player would do. Runs created are runs that directly contribute to the team winning and a 211 to 160 advantage is pretty large. Plus, Foxx played every game, contributing at the level he did.

I wouldn't kick either one of them off my team.

Skipper Steve · 12-03-2001, 11:18 PM

Yeah, they make a nice righty-lefty combo.

timconnelly · 12-06-2001, 11:04 AM

OWP is more than an estimation of what a team made up of that player might do: It is an estimation of that player's offensive value from game to game and spread out over the season.

For example, when we say that Ozzie Smith has a OWP of .600 during one of his better seasons, we are saying that he is an offensive player who is helping his team to win approximately 60 % of it's games based solely on his offensive performance.

It is a legitimate measurement and not a gimmick.

SmedIndy · 12-06-2001, 11:13 AM

Not a gimmick, but my only problem with that is that sometimes you are comparing it cross-positionally.

A shortstop with a OWP under .500 still may be one of the best in the game at that time, whilst a first baseman at about .550 will still be one of the worst in the game at the time.

SmedIndy · 12-06-2001, 11:14 AM

That all being said, I'm glad I can finally discuss the merits of runs created, OWP, etc. etc. and not be hooted from the room or hung like an infidel.

sweaver · 12-06-2001, 11:16 PM

Speaking of which, the mail in Baseball Weekly about the Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract was pretty interesting. Especially the people who complained about statistics, then tried to use statistics to support their arguments.

12-02-2001, 11:26 PM	#1
Skipper Steve NetShrine Creator & Curator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NetShrine WHQ Posts: 1,281	1932 - Babe Ruth v. Jimmie Foxx Who had a better season and why? __________________ Steve, Forum Administrator Please Read the NetShrine Discussion Forum Community Standards

12-03-2001, 10:36 PM	#3
Skipper Steve NetShrine Creator & Curator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NetShrine WHQ Posts: 1,281	Interesting, I went with Ruth. Pretty much on OWP alone: 1 Babe Ruth .860 2 Jimmie Foxx .816 Babe had the edge in RCAP too: 1 Babe Ruth 95 2 Jimmie Foxx 92 __________________ Steve, Forum Administrator Please Read the NetShrine Discussion Forum Community Standards

12-03-2001, 11:18 PM	#5
Skipper Steve NetShrine Creator & Curator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NetShrine WHQ Posts: 1,281	Yeah, they make a nice righty-lefty combo. __________________ Steve, Forum Administrator Please Read the NetShrine Discussion Forum Community Standards

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Offseason stat package--BPA	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	12-15-2002 09:51 AM
Offseason stat package--RCAA	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	4	12-04-2002 12:07 PM
ATM report--Regular season ends; Lots of Bonds charts; Managers start to get fired	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	3	09-30-2002 12:04 PM
Offseason stat package--BPA	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	6	12-05-2001 02:23 PM
1998: McGwire or Sosa?	Throwback	2001 Baseball History Archives	14	11-03-2001 03:08 AM

12-03-2001, 10:30 PM	#2
Pirate21 NetShrine Hot Prospect Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 15	This was interesting because the Babe was 37 and Foxx was 24. At first glance the difference in RC's is pretty big - 211 for Foxx & 160 for Ruth. Foxx had sizable advantages in SLG. batting avg., hits, TB., but RC/G is about 3/4 run per game difference in Foxx's favor which seems close considering the other numbers. But then you see the Babe played 20 games less than Foxx and cost his team 76 fewer outs! That context is what makes the comparison closer than just the raw data. To me RC's and RC/G(and it's relationship to the rest of the league) is what is most important when weighing offensive contributions either for a season or over a career. I really don't care how a player got there, his job is to produce runs for his team because that's what wins games if you are just looking at offense. But, in the end, I would say Foxx had the better year because he played in more games, thus contributing to his team more often to give them a chance to win.

12-03-2001, 11:16 PM	#4
Pirate21 NetShrine Hot Prospect Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 15	I figured Foxx's lead in RCAA (+17) pretty much cancelled out the RCAP. OWP is a good stat, but it's an estimate of what a team made up of that player would do. Runs created are runs that directly contribute to the team winning and a 211 to 160 advantage is pretty large. Plus, Foxx played every game, contributing at the level he did. I wouldn't kick either one of them off my team.

12-06-2001, 11:04 AM	#6
timconnelly Renounced Membership 1/6/02 Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: NC Posts: 266	OWP is more than an estimation of what a team made up of that player might do: It is an estimation of that player's offensive value from game to game and spread out over the season. For example, when we say that Ozzie Smith has a OWP of .600 during one of his better seasons, we are saying that he is an offensive player who is helping his team to win approximately 60 % of it's games based solely on his offensive performance. It is a legitimate measurement and not a gimmick.

12-06-2001, 11:13 AM	#7
SmedIndy NetShrine's Historian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Zionsville, IN Posts: 10,569	Not a gimmick, but my only problem with that is that sometimes you are comparing it cross-positionally. A shortstop with a OWP under .500 still may be one of the best in the game at that time, whilst a first baseman at about .550 will still be one of the worst in the game at the time.

12-06-2001, 11:14 AM	#8
SmedIndy NetShrine's Historian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Zionsville, IN Posts: 10,569	That all being said, I'm glad I can finally discuss the merits of runs created, OWP, etc. etc. and not be hooted from the room or hung like an infidel.

12-06-2001, 11:16 PM	#9
sweaver Netshrine Cleanup Hitter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Mountain State Posts: 8,883	Speaking of which, the mail in Baseball Weekly about the Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract was pretty interesting. Especially the people who complained about statistics, then tried to use statistics to support their arguments.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)