Discussion about this post

User's avatar
YojimboZatoichi's avatar

"The greatest Mexican-American player was slugger Ted Williams, whose mother was slightly mestizo-looking. "

Williams was about 75-80% European. It's a bit mech, since Ted never seriously identified as being Mexican during his lifetime. Perhaps because in his autobiography he seems to harbor some deep seated resentment vs his mother (half Mexican) whose life centered around her participation in the Salvation Army at the expense of taking care of her family (and by extension, not devoting enough time to his upbringing).

In his autobiography, Cuban born Jose Canseco devotes nearly half a chapter to players from various nations. One prominent example he uses is the DR Miguel Tejada, who started out slow with below average stats but within a few years, was putting up stats that were simply amazing. Without directly saying it, Canseco attributes Tejada's sudden rise to PEDS, and in his mind the answer is fairly simple. In the DR and other Caribbean nations, there is abject poverty for most locals, and the one way out of that hard life is thru baseball. He makes the point that if you had one chance in a million to get out of that poor nation, play in MLB where you could potentially make tons of money and thus take care of your family for life, wouldn't you take that chance, even if it meant using PEDS? In Canseco's mind, in order to guarantee a consistently amazing on field performance (and thus score big money contracts) is thru PEDS. As Carribbean nations laws and regulations at the time weren't as strict as the US regarding PEDS, it was fairly easy for local players to obtain them and thus have a better opportunity at reaching the MLB. In Canseco's view, failure wasn't an option for impoverished Caribbean locals playing ball. and thus PEDS in his view was the one guarantor of success (playing in MLB).

"What is WAR? A typical regular is worth about two additional wins per season for his team over a generic replacement player that can be picked up from Triple A minors or off the waiver wire, while a superstar is worth six or eight incremental wins per season, with a Judge or Ohtani approaching ten WAR)."

This is the one Sabermetric based stat that Steve has finally convinced me to endorse (with perhaps some cautious corrolaries, namely, don't completely ignore and neglect starting pitchers who traditionally pitched 30% or more complete games during their careers).

IF Ohtani and Judge are worth 10 WAR, then Babe Ruth would certainly have to be ca. 12-15, and we have a definitive link to demonstrate it.

In Ruth's first five years with NY, the Yankees won the AL Pennant 3 times and finished no lower than 3rd place.

In 1925 due to a still mysterious illness, Ruth was out for most of the season, and the Yankees finished in 7th place, at 69-85. A record they wouldn't finish that low again until 1965, two generations later. By pretty much every metric, Ruth had the worst statistics of his career as an everyday player. During the offseason Ruth worked out, lost weight, dieted and was ready for the following season to return to his usual superstar form.

In 1926 with Babe Ruth back in the lineup healthy, the Yankees went 91-63 and won the AL Pennant. That's a 22 W noticable difference over the previous season. The lineup was basically the same (except for a healthy Ruth. It was also Lazzeri's rookie season and Gehrigs first full season so that certainly helped, so that must be noted as well).

But the main factor remains that Ruth was healthy again and his stats were up to where they had been pre-1925 levels.

If anything, this should demonstrate that of the 22 W's NY gained with Ruth back in the lineup*, that he was directly responsible for at least 15, if not say 16-18 of those additional wins. Going from next to last place to winning the pennant mainly because one of the greatest players to have played in MLB made all the difference to NY's standings.

*(In '26, Ruth played in 152 out of NY's 154 games that season)

PE Bird's avatar

WAR for pitchers is kind of a funky calculation, looking at runs allowed and innings pitched. With the more recent trend of openers and finishers (as well as saving multi-million dollar contracts from throwing out their arms), WAR will need adjustment.

Given that the "average" pitcher has a win-loss record of .500 (by definition) you might think that WAR would be the pitchers wins over breakeven. Record of 20-10 = WAR of 10. But then you don't get the first and second decimal place that sabermetric gurus covet. Also need a separate calculation for relievers (which should probably be primarily saves).

47 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?