The True Big Hurt

[Wolf Hopper]

See: http://www.netshrine.com/20040201.html

Discussion welcome and appreciated.

[gyb13]

nice read....the 'big fat lazy cat'? isn't it an insult to thomas to compare him to galarraga?

[TimmyB]

HOFer and "What coulda been" all in the same package. Guess which one he'll be remembered for most...

[nyy26wc]

Until this happens, former players such as Rogers Hornsby and Jimmie Foxx will remain in the debate of “Best Ever” (for right handed batters) and Frank Thomas will be excluded from the argument.

Let's compare Thomas to the two players you explicitly named here.

Hornsby had a 10 year stretch, from 1920-29, in which he had 902 of his 1084 career RCAA. That's 83%.

Foxx's best 10 year stretch, from 1930-39, produced 799 of his 985 RCAA. That's 81%.

From 1991-2000, Thomas had 679 of his 770 career RCAA. That's 88%, which makes him more peak bulk than the others, but only at the moment. All he needs is a mere 48 RCAA for the rest of his career and he's down to Hornsby's 83% and just 68 to get down to Foxx's 81%.

It will be a big surprise if he doesn't do both of them. So, it's likely that we're left with a player who was able to put a higher percentage of his career figure into non peak years than the other two.

Meanwhile, here are the others in the top 10 for career RCAA by a righthanded hitter, plus a couple (DiMaggio & McGwire) would make the top 10 if it was since 1900 and a Thomas comtemporary who has a shot at the top 10 (Bagwell, but his chances are fading). The players are listed with their percentage of their career RCAA during their best 10 year stretch, followed by the amount and the time of that stretch--

Willie Mays, 64%, 647, 1954-63
Hank Aaron, 57%, 592, 1957-66
Honus Wagner, 71%, 725, 1900-09
Frank Robinson, 60%, 542, 1959-68
Ed Delahanty, 97%, 813, 1893-1902
Nap Lajoie, 71%, 559, 1898-1907
Rickey Henderson, 65%, 495, 1984-93
Joe DiMaggio, 86%, 526, 1938-49 (for DiMaggio, the 10 year stretches are 10 year played stretches)
Mark McGwire, 80%, 532, 1991-2000
Jeff Bagwell, 88%, 583, 1993-2002

Thomas's 10 year % percentage will come down as his career progresses (unless he has a negative RCAA from this point on, which would drive up that %, but I don't think anyone is expecting that). While he's a good bet to have his percentage fall under Hornsby and Foxx's, he'll still probably have a figure higher than others on this list. But, is it really unfair to penalize Thomas for higher a higher percentage, when you consider that it was a result of him having a higher 10 year figure than anyone but Hornsby and Foxx?

Meanwhile, just out of curiosity, here are the 10 year percentages for those in the top 10 in career RCAA who were non-right handed hitters--

Babe Ruth, 66%, 1174, 1920-29
Ted Williams, 67%, 985, 1939-51 (like DiMaggio, counting 10 year played stretches)
Ty Cobb, 61%, 831, 1908-17
Barry Bonds, 70%, 945, 1994-2003
Lou Gehrig, 83%, 1031, 1927-36
Stan Musial, 69%, 833, 1943-53 (see Williams/DiMaggio)
Mickey Mantle, 75%, 824, 1953-62
Tris Speaker, 57%, 604, 1912-21

[nyy26wc]

I have another idea.

I'm going to rerun the numbers, this time using 7 year stretches and see what happens.

[nyy26wc]

Here are the 7 year figures, using the same righthanded hitters.

This time I'll order them based on the highest percentage for 7 year stretches, and once again, counting 7 year played stretches--

Ed Delahanty, 75%, 624, 1893-98
Jeff Bagwell, 71%, 469, 1994-2000
Mark McGwire, 69%, 460, 1994-2000
Frank Thomas, 65%, 497, 1990-96
Joe DiMaggio, 63%, 443, 1939-48
Jimmie Foxx, 61%, 597, 1929-35
Rogers Hornsby, 60%, 652, 1919-25
Honus Wagner, 56%, 562, 1902-08
Nap Lajoie, 55%, 430, 1898-1904
Frank Robinson, 49%, 417, 1961-67
Rickey Henderson, 47%, 360, 1984-90
Willie Mays, 46%, 462, 1954-60
Hank Aaron, 44%, 455, 1957-63

Give Thomas another 58 RCAA for the rest of his career, which is certainly reasonable, and he plummets down to 60% and starts heading to the bottom half of the list.

Meanwhile, just of curiosity, here are the 7 year figures for the players in the top 10 who weren't right-handed hitters--

Lou Gehrig, 58%, 730, 1930-36
Mickey Mantle, 58%, 638, 1955-61
Barry Bonds, 54%, 727, 1997-2003
Ted Williams, 54%, 794, 1940-49
Stan Musial, 50%, 606, 1948-54
Babe Ruth, 47%, 837, 1920-26
Tris Speaker, 45%, 470, 1910-16
Ty Cobb, 44%. 596, 1907-13

NOTE--In this lists, when there were ties, I didn't go to extra decimal places to settle them.

[Wolf Hopper]

Lee - how I came up with Foxx and Hornsby - - -
take all RH batters since 1900, min 8000 PA, and look at the top ten RCAA guys.

Then, look at the ratio of RCAA to Outs.

Hornsby and Foxx are the only ones with a ratio > .17

Thomas is close - at .158

[Wolf Hopper]

Here's the complete list:

MODERN (1900-)
RIGHT HANDED HITTERS
PLATE APPEARANCES >= 8000
RCAA >= 0

	        RCAA	OUTS	PA	RCAA/Outs
Rogers Hornsby	1084	5526	9475	0.19616359
Jimmie Foxx	985	5700	9670	0.172807018
Frank Thomas	770	4874	8167	0.157981124
Honus Wagner	938	6292	10219	0.149078195
Edgar Martinez	651	4897	8123	0.132938534
Willie Mays	1008	8056	12492	0.125124131
Jeff Bagwell	663	5367	8629	0.1235327
Harry Heilmann	663	5468	8960	0.121250914
Nap Lajoie	649	5503	8727	0.117935671
Frank Robinson	852	7528	11743	0.113177471
Hank Aaron	1032	9136	13940	0.11295972
Gary Sheffield	565	5067	8035	0.111505822
Mike Schmidt	623	6490	10062	0.095993837
R.Henderson	763	8510	13346	0.089659224
Al Simmons	504	6032	9517	0.083554377
Bob Johnson	413	5063	8047	0.08157219
H. Killebrew	516	6399	9831	0.0806376
Sherry Magee	425	5544	8547	0.076659452
Jack Clark	385	5348	8225	0.071989529
Al Kaline	546	7594	11597	0.071898868
Joe Medwick	368	5413	8142	0.067984482
Kiki Cuyler	325	5118	8098	0.063501368
Sammy Sosa	348	5801	8479	0.059989657
Paul Molitor	479	8040	12160	0.059577114
R. Clemente	409	6877	10212	0.059473608
Orlando Cepeda	349	5952	8695	0.058635753
Jimmy Wynn	307	5312	8010	0.057793675
Bobby Bonds	315	5513	8090	0.057137675
Jose Canseco	306	5528	8129	0.055354559
Dwight Evans	378	6965	10569	0.054271357
Craig Biggio	338	6496	9990	0.05203202
Ellis Burks	282	5443	8139	0.051809664
Dave Winfield	434	8422	12358	0.051531703
Bob Elliott	265	5335	8190	0.049671978
Joe Torre	289	5908	8801	0.048916723
Barry Larkin	271	5711	8671	0.047452285
Bobby Grich	255	5454	8220	0.046754675
Brian Downing	277	6125	9309	0.04522449
Cesar Cedeno	251	5672	8133	0.044252468
Joe Cronin	243	5588	8838	0.043486042
Jim Rice	270	6221	9058	0.043401382
Johnny Bench	245	5955	8669	0.041141898
Hal McRae	226	5504	8058	0.041061047
Ron Santo	253	6293	9396	0.040203401
Ed Konetchy	230	5768	8664	0.039875173
Gil Hodges	210	5414	8104	0.038788327
Sal Bando	212	5587	8288	0.03794523
Luke Appling	239	6419	10243	0.037233214
Ron Cey	        207	5616	8344	0.036858974
Tony Perez	263	7462	10861	0.035245243
Toby Harrah	199	5845	8766	0.034046193
Robin Yount	284	8415	12249	0.033749257
Don Baylor	218	6510	9401	0.033486943
Amos Otis	187	5687	8246	0.032882012
Gary Matthews	177	5470	8189	0.032358318
Dale Murphy	198	6192	9040	0.031976744
Dusty Baker	172	5479	8021	0.03139259
Carlton Fisk	212	6767	9853	0.031328506
Ryne Sandberg	197	6347	9282	0.031038286
A. Galarraga	186	6074	8905	0.030622325
George Burns	164	5450	8251	0.030091743
Ken Boyer	163	5654	8268	0.028829148
Ernie Banks	207	7261	10395	0.02850847
Andre Dawson	216	7621	10769	0.028342737
Eddie Yost	162	5798	9175	0.027940669
Willie Horton	154	5614	8052	0.027431421
Billy Herman	150	5730	8641	0.02617801
Alan Trammell	161	6388	9375	0.025203507
Steve Garvey	163	6672	9466	0.024430456
Gary Carter	149	6233	9019	0.023905022
Julio Franco	134	5982	8820	0.022400535
Willie Randolph	131	6283	9462	0.020849912
Tommy Leach	111	5762	8587	0.019264144
Cal Ripken	161	8893	12883	0.018104127
Bobby Doerr	96	5412	8028	0.017738359
Lee May	        86	5906	8219	0.014561463
Pie Traynor	75	5467	8293	0.013718676
Buddy Bell	76	6955	10009	0.01092739
George Scott	46	5859	8269	0.007851169
Brooks Robinson	51	8340	11782	0.006115108
Stuffy McInnis	30	5858	8623	0.005121202
Joe Carter	28	6551	9154	0.004274157
Todd Zeile	12	5649	8253	0.00212427
Pee Wee Reese	13	6302	9470	0.002062837

[KCBOOMER]

I am trying to discern a real point here. Some players' careers are defined by peak value and some by career value. Skewing one way or the other doesn't preclude a player from being in the discussion of "best ever" anything.

And why are we dividing by outs? Aren't outs already in the RCAA formula??

[nyy26wc]

Originally Posted by KCBOOMER

I am trying to discern a real point here. Some players' careers are defined by peak value and some by career value. Skewing one way or the other doesn't preclude a player from being in the discussion of "best ever" anything.

The point of the article seemed to be to discount Thomas because too much of value is peak. But, not only does he have both great peak and career value, when his final figures are in the books, his peak is very likely to represent no more of the whole than the rest of the players in the discussion.

[Wolf Hopper]

Boomer - why I used outs...........

to "qualify" the RCAA in a way..........

Say Player A has 400 RCAA and Player B has 400 RCAA. One might assume that they are "equal" in worth. But, if Player A got his 400 RCAA and cost his team 600 outs in the process, and Player B got his 400 RCAA and cost his team 985 outs in the process, is not Player A "better" or "more productive" (or in other words, his RCAA production was less costly)?

[Wolf Hopper]

Originally Posted by nyy26wc

The point of the article seemed to be to discount Thomas because too much of value is peak. But, not only does he have both great peak and career value, when his final figures are in the books, his peak is very likely to represent no more of the whole than the rest of the players in the discussion.

Maybe I should try and clarify..........

My point = Thomas' career, the peak part, is perhaps the best ever for a hitter, and certainly the best ever for a RH batter. But, the peak came at the start of his career, and then his production, from that point on, while very, very good, was not at the same level as before. What caused the peak to end and the "new level" of production? Well, read the feature.........

Further, because of the placement of his peak period, in his personal timeline, and the subsequent play, and the suggested factors at work behind the drop, then, the feature suggests, that some - and, as I stated it "albeit it fair or not" - see this as a disappointment.

Perception is reality. And, the feature states that the hope is that Thomas can regain that previous production level and change people's perception.

This more clear?

[Wolf Hopper]

Just some further evidence that Thomas needs to "pick up the pace" to be part of the argument for "best RH hitter ever":

CAREER
MODERN (1900-)
RIGHT HANDED HITTERS

OPS                             DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE   
1    Rogers Hornsby             .275    1.010     .735   
2    Jimmie Foxx                .263    1.038     .775   
3    Frank Thomas               .233     .996     .763   

RUNS CREATED/GAME               DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE   
1    Rogers Hornsby             5.05     9.92     4.87   
2    Jimmie Foxx                4.66    10.25     5.59   
3    Frank Thomas               4.18     9.22     5.03   

TOTAL AVERAGE                   DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE   
1    Rogers Hornsby             .421    1.105     .684   
2    Jimmie Foxx                .410    1.143     .733   
3    Frank Thomas               .380    1.093     .713

At the end of 1997, Thomas OPS was 1.053 and his RC/G was 10.40 - - his drop off from 1997 has dragged down his career, no?

[Wolf Hopper]

Here is how Thomas ranked, at the end of 1997 - -

OPS                             DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE   
1    Frank Thomas               .299    1.053     .753   
2    Rogers Hornsby             .275    1.010     .735   
3    Jimmie Foxx                .263    1.038     .775   

RUNS CREATED/GAME               DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE   
1    Frank Thomas               5.49    10.40     4.91   
2    Rogers Hornsby             5.05     9.92     4.87   
3    Jimmie Foxx                4.66    10.25     5.59   

TOTAL AVERAGE                   DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE   
1    Frank Thomas               .485    1.187     .702   
2    Rogers Hornsby             .421    1.105     .684   
3    Jimmie Foxx                .410    1.143     .733 

[nyy26wc]

Originally Posted by Wolf Hopper

Boomer - why I used outs...........

to "qualify" the RCAA in a way..........

Say Player A has 400 RCAA and Player B has 400 RCAA. One might assume that they are "equal" in worth. But, if Player A got his 400 RCAA and cost his team 600 outs in the process, and Player B got his 400 RCAA and cost his team 985 outs in the process, is not Player A "better" or "more productive" (or in other words, his RCAA production was less costly)?

I'll agree that with, players with similar RCAA figures, the one that uses the fewer outs would be the more productive one.

But, I don't know if we can extend that to the whole. I'm not convinced that Jack Clark's 385 RCAA is similar to Al Kaline's 546 RCAA, even though your RCAA/OUTS list shows their figures as essentially indistinguishable.