How is pitcher endurance factored in by Strat-o-Matic, seeing as they all need to throw complete games? Because...I'd be worried about some of the more modern guys. Kershaw's only thrown 25 complete games in his career. Pettite only threw 26 cgs. Mussina had 57, which isn't a ton compared to other guys. If endurance is a factor, I might have gone with Smokey Joe Williams over Kershaw, Eddie Plank over Mussina, and Chuck Finley over Pettite.
The Oldtimers, or any Pitchers who pitched before Hoyt Wilhelm demonstrated the advantages of having a star pitcher as a reliver have the usual disadvantage of being able to bring in overpowering relievers who possess the ability to shut down the most powerful of lineups. These teams wouldn't need too many subs, so a team could carry ten Relief Pitchers if the team has them available in their state. Any team not having three stud Starters could even things up if they a bevy of relievers available. That might be an advantage.
On December 15, 1900, Christy Mathewson was acquired by the New York Giants for Amos Rusie in one of the most lopsided trades in the history of the game. Mathewson was originally a Giant who had a rough start to his illustrious career New York in 1900, when he went 0-3 with a 5.08 . ERA and a 1.693 WHIP. He was assigned to the Giants' minor league team in Norfolk. From there, Mathewson was selected by the Cincinnati Reds in the Rule V Draft, whose owner, John T. Brush, coveted the young pitcher. While Brush owned the Reds, he was also working behind the scenes to purchase the Giants. The owner, Andrew Freedman, was hated by his players, and was considered fairly unscrupulous in his dealings. In fact, Amos Rusie was his star pitcher whom he purposely sat out for two years, rather than accept a salary cut. Brush was determined to have Mathewson on his team, and began to lay the groundwork to bring him back to New York.
Yes. It's perhaps the worst trade in baseball history. With some extenuating circumstances, in that the Reds owner John T Brush (who'd signed Rusie years earlier) traded a very young Mathewson to the Giants for a broken-down Rusie in Dec. 1900 -- while aware that the league wanted to force Giants owner Andrew Freedman out.
Brush bought the Giants in 1902. So, he kind of traded Mathewson to himself.
I still don't understand why Elmer Flick didn't get the call over Jim Wynn. I know Wynn's a good player, but at DH Flick seems like the better call to me.
Boy you really have it in for Wynn, even when his single scored the 3rd run for Ohio, which ended up allowing them to take the game to extra innings, in which he hit the game winning RBI. I know RBI’s don’t mean what they once did but he WAS the player of the game for Ohio. I think rather than complaining about him you’d say “ Way to go Jimmy!”
I'm not Anti-Wynn, I'm Pro-Flick. Here are some numbers:
Jimmy Wynn:
.250/.366/.436 (OPS+ 129) in 8,011 Plate Appearances
Wynn led the league in walks twice (no other offensive category leads), stole 225 bases (only 69% success rate).
Elmer Flick:
.313/.389/.445 (OPS+ 148) in 6,434 Plate Appearances
Flick led the league in triples three times, hitting/slugging/OPS once & stolen bases twice (no success rate data since this is Deadball).
Even if you cut Wynn's career down to around the 6,500 PAs Flick got he's still 15 points lower on OPS+ and here's the regular stat line:
.257/.364/.450 (OPS+ 133)
I see the argument for Wynn. He played more recently (Flick isn't exactly a top star from Deadball). But I think in the DH spot Flick is just the better choice. Most of Wynn's WAR advantage comes from being a centerfielder (at times a good one too!), but at DH that doesn't matter.
Maybe I'm missing something but I think Elmer Flick is clearly the better choice. Doesn't hurt that Flick also was born and played for my hometown team.
Man, Ohio vs. California and Texas vs. New York games are so, so evenly matched. I'm a little surprised at the fan vote in the Ohio/California skewing so far towards California, California has a slightly deeper lineup, but not all that much deeper. And I'd take a rotation of Clemens, Cy Young, and Yermin Mercedes against most teams, let alone one with an actual third pitcher in it such as Niekro.
Agreed. I think California wins, but if I was actually betting I think I’d take Ohio at those odds. They have enough pop in their lineup that with their front 2 pitchers could pull a fast one on CA.
One complaint: in real life, the three-game series would be only a couple days after the one-game round, so the starting pitchers of the latter should be bumped back to game 3 of the former. That way depth of the staff comes into play more.
Also I'm picking California because that's where Rose put his money.
In reviewing these teams again, even with the knowledge that inferior baseball teams can- and do- win series against superior teams more often than any other sport, I’m wondering how CA can be beat- unless it’s by PA (or maybe Al). What a lineup. I don’t agree with the Hernandez for Murray substitution, but I don’t think it makes any difference.
The only matchup I didn’t have a strong opinion as to the winner- went with betting favorites- was Texas and NY. Heck I voted for one of them about 5 minutes ago and can’t even remember who I picked. What a matchup that will be. Can’t wait to read the game reports.
Hernandez was a contact hitter and arguably the greatest defensive First Baseman in baseball history (10 Gold Gloves). Certainly the best by far I've ever seen defending against the bunt. Defensively, Hernandez was a far superior fielder than Eddie Murray, was undoubtedly the much better power hitter. Hernandez won an MVP, something Murray never did. I think Hernandez substituting for Murray is a reasonable strategy. They're both great players in their own right.
I'm just sad we won't get to see Amos Rusie ptich against Christy Mathewson, just to give the Hoosier Thunderbolt the chance to redeem the worst trade in baseball history.
For the battle of the South I chose 'Bama simply because I think Guidry has a really tough day pitching to both Mays and Aaron. NY v Texas could go either way. Went with Texas as I wasn't sure if Koufax would miss a start due to a religious observance.
Surprised you left Smokey Joe Williams off the Texas roster! But I think they have to feel pretty good about the pitching staff as selected. And that doesn't even consider two more great Hall of Fame pitchers Texas could have picked, Bill Foster and Hilton Smith.
Murray won 3 Gold Gloves at 1B; he was no slouch in the field. Plus he switch hits, out slugs, and has a better career WAR than Hernandez (68.7 vs. 60.3).
At the very least this a curious line-up change from someone Joe rates just outside the top 100 to a non-hall of famer (though I would say Hernandez should be in the Hall).
Murray played longer, which could account for the higher WAR. He also played at a time when very good offensive players often won GG they didn't deserve. While not in the Ten Who Missed, Joe did put Hernandez in his 200-101 series.
How is pitcher endurance factored in by Strat-o-Matic, seeing as they all need to throw complete games? Because...I'd be worried about some of the more modern guys. Kershaw's only thrown 25 complete games in his career. Pettite only threw 26 cgs. Mussina had 57, which isn't a ton compared to other guys. If endurance is a factor, I might have gone with Smokey Joe Williams over Kershaw, Eddie Plank over Mussina, and Chuck Finley over Pettite.
The Oldtimers, or any Pitchers who pitched before Hoyt Wilhelm demonstrated the advantages of having a star pitcher as a reliver have the usual disadvantage of being able to bring in overpowering relievers who possess the ability to shut down the most powerful of lineups. These teams wouldn't need too many subs, so a team could carry ten Relief Pitchers if the team has them available in their state. Any team not having three stud Starters could even things up if they a bevy of relievers available. That might be an advantage.
Oh, absolutely. I don't think any of us would get as much enjoyment from a stream of relievers entering into these games.
They would play to win.
Weren't Christy Mathewson and Amos Rusie traded for each other?
On December 15, 1900, Christy Mathewson was acquired by the New York Giants for Amos Rusie in one of the most lopsided trades in the history of the game. Mathewson was originally a Giant who had a rough start to his illustrious career New York in 1900, when he went 0-3 with a 5.08 . ERA and a 1.693 WHIP. He was assigned to the Giants' minor league team in Norfolk. From there, Mathewson was selected by the Cincinnati Reds in the Rule V Draft, whose owner, John T. Brush, coveted the young pitcher. While Brush owned the Reds, he was also working behind the scenes to purchase the Giants. The owner, Andrew Freedman, was hated by his players, and was considered fairly unscrupulous in his dealings. In fact, Amos Rusie was his star pitcher whom he purposely sat out for two years, rather than accept a salary cut. Brush was determined to have Mathewson on his team, and began to lay the groundwork to bring him back to New York.
Yes. It's perhaps the worst trade in baseball history. With some extenuating circumstances, in that the Reds owner John T Brush (who'd signed Rusie years earlier) traded a very young Mathewson to the Giants for a broken-down Rusie in Dec. 1900 -- while aware that the league wanted to force Giants owner Andrew Freedman out.
Brush bought the Giants in 1902. So, he kind of traded Mathewson to himself.
Leo Durocher later commented to Ott that, with Belle, Louisiana could "finish first."
I still don't understand why Elmer Flick didn't get the call over Jim Wynn. I know Wynn's a good player, but at DH Flick seems like the better call to me.
Boy you really have it in for Wynn, even when his single scored the 3rd run for Ohio, which ended up allowing them to take the game to extra innings, in which he hit the game winning RBI. I know RBI’s don’t mean what they once did but he WAS the player of the game for Ohio. I think rather than complaining about him you’d say “ Way to go Jimmy!”
I'm not Anti-Wynn, I'm Pro-Flick. Here are some numbers:
Jimmy Wynn:
.250/.366/.436 (OPS+ 129) in 8,011 Plate Appearances
Wynn led the league in walks twice (no other offensive category leads), stole 225 bases (only 69% success rate).
Elmer Flick:
.313/.389/.445 (OPS+ 148) in 6,434 Plate Appearances
Flick led the league in triples three times, hitting/slugging/OPS once & stolen bases twice (no success rate data since this is Deadball).
Even if you cut Wynn's career down to around the 6,500 PAs Flick got he's still 15 points lower on OPS+ and here's the regular stat line:
.257/.364/.450 (OPS+ 133)
I see the argument for Wynn. He played more recently (Flick isn't exactly a top star from Deadball). But I think in the DH spot Flick is just the better choice. Most of Wynn's WAR advantage comes from being a centerfielder (at times a good one too!), but at DH that doesn't matter.
Maybe I'm missing something but I think Elmer Flick is clearly the better choice. Doesn't hurt that Flick also was born and played for my hometown team.
Man, Ohio vs. California and Texas vs. New York games are so, so evenly matched. I'm a little surprised at the fan vote in the Ohio/California skewing so far towards California, California has a slightly deeper lineup, but not all that much deeper. And I'd take a rotation of Clemens, Cy Young, and Yermin Mercedes against most teams, let alone one with an actual third pitcher in it such as Niekro.
Agreed. I think California wins, but if I was actually betting I think I’d take Ohio at those odds. They have enough pop in their lineup that with their front 2 pitchers could pull a fast one on CA.
Yeah exactly. If the odds are based on the fan vote, I'll bet on Ohio.
I see California with a big edge in the OF & DH Ohio with slight edge at the corners of the IF and about a push in the middle IF & C.
One complaint: in real life, the three-game series would be only a couple days after the one-game round, so the starting pitchers of the latter should be bumped back to game 3 of the former. That way depth of the staff comes into play more.
Also I'm picking California because that's where Rose put his money.
The Alabama team looks real good. The scores of these games appear unrealistically high
Williams, Mays, Aaron, McCovey - holy moly, imagine going through them 4 times in a game.
I kind of wish Koufax and Ryan were going. Eleven no-hitters, 8000 strikeouts - and using their 7-year peaks! They’d be there until Christmas.
In reviewing these teams again, even with the knowledge that inferior baseball teams can- and do- win series against superior teams more often than any other sport, I’m wondering how CA can be beat- unless it’s by PA (or maybe Al). What a lineup. I don’t agree with the Hernandez for Murray substitution, but I don’t think it makes any difference.
The only matchup I didn’t have a strong opinion as to the winner- went with betting favorites- was Texas and NY. Heck I voted for one of them about 5 minutes ago and can’t even remember who I picked. What a matchup that will be. Can’t wait to read the game reports.
And so glad these are best of 3 now.
Hernandez was a contact hitter and arguably the greatest defensive First Baseman in baseball history (10 Gold Gloves). Certainly the best by far I've ever seen defending against the bunt. Defensively, Hernandez was a far superior fielder than Eddie Murray, was undoubtedly the much better power hitter. Hernandez won an MVP, something Murray never did. I think Hernandez substituting for Murray is a reasonable strategy. They're both great players in their own right.
They are both good. I just like Murray a little better.
Overall, I have to agree with you, based on Murray's awesome power and clutch hitting.
Keith Hernandez...I despise him.
I'm just sad we won't get to see Amos Rusie ptich against Christy Mathewson, just to give the Hoosier Thunderbolt the chance to redeem the worst trade in baseball history.
For the battle of the South I chose 'Bama simply because I think Guidry has a really tough day pitching to both Mays and Aaron. NY v Texas could go either way. Went with Texas as I wasn't sure if Koufax would miss a start due to a religious observance.
Good point re Koufax!
Surprised you left Smokey Joe Williams off the Texas roster! But I think they have to feel pretty good about the pitching staff as selected. And that doesn't even consider two more great Hall of Fame pitchers Texas could have picked, Bill Foster and Hilton Smith.
I would pay good money to see the prime Clemens vs prime Seaver game.
It’s just so weird to remember that they were briefly teammates in ‘86.
Texas looks hard to beat with Maddux, Ryan, and Kershaw pitching. There should be plenty of K’s.
I love the meeting between Clemens and Young ...”I have seven of you.”
Koufax, Palmer and Ford are pretty good, themselves.
Can the teams change lineups between games?
California will pay for sitting Eddie Murray for Keith Hernandez...
How so? Hernandez is the best defensive 1B ever, was a .300 hitter til late in his career, and is clutch. The only thing he lacks is Murray's power.
Murray won 3 Gold Gloves at 1B; he was no slouch in the field. Plus he switch hits, out slugs, and has a better career WAR than Hernandez (68.7 vs. 60.3).
At the very least this a curious line-up change from someone Joe rates just outside the top 100 to a non-hall of famer (though I would say Hernandez should be in the Hall).
Murray played longer, which could account for the higher WAR. He also played at a time when very good offensive players often won GG they didn't deserve. While not in the Ten Who Missed, Joe did put Hernandez in his 200-101 series.
Who do you think you are?
I'm Keith Hernandez.
Who does this guy think he is?
Keith Hernandez, and sometimes Napoleon.
Great pull!
Yeah, that's a surprise.