formerwiacbaseballer Show full post »
banks93
dawgstyle wrote:
banks93 wrote:
formerwiacbaseballer wrote:
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
Or he was that good. Ruth didn't have access to designer steroids like Jeter did. This discussion just goes in circles. Every era had their advantages and disadvantages.

I am sure he was great in his era but in no way was he even comparable to what a Bonds, A-Rod, Griffey, Pujols, and Trout are in the modern game. A guy that can drink all night and run around all night would quickly be out of the league in today's game for many reasons. The pitching was a joke compared to today's game.

Since you like the career WAR number, who is #1 on that list? [rotfl]


Yes, that made me laugh also. I don't like any computer stats or money ball type stuff. I get it but I still like the eye test or the kid has IT. You can't predict it you see it in the workout or effort.


You sound like old billwalton in the NBA forum. Regardless of what the stats say, my untrained basketball eye knows better. I mean I don't know you, but I have a hard time believing that your eye test surpasses what is likely millions of man hours of statistical data.

But I have been wrong before.


Good for billwalton. I bet he doesn't try to justify hitting women either.
Quote 0 0
safetysqueezepleezzee11
dawgstyle wrote:
banks93 wrote:
formerwiacbaseballer wrote:
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
Or he was that good. Ruth didn't have access to designer steroids like Jeter did. This discussion just goes in circles. Every era had their advantages and disadvantages.

I am sure he was great in his era but in no way was he even comparable to what a Bonds, A-Rod, Griffey, Pujols, and Trout are in the modern game. A guy that can drink all night and run around all night would quickly be out of the league in today's game for many reasons. The pitching was a joke compared to today's game.

Since you like the career WAR number, who is #1 on that list? [rotfl]


Yes, that made me laugh also. I don't like any computer stats or money ball type stuff. I get it but I still like the eye test or the kid has IT. You can't predict it you see it in the workout or effort.


You sound like old billwalton in the NBA forum. Regardless of what the stats say, my untrained basketball eye knows better. I mean I don't know you, but I have a hard time believing that your eye test surpasses what is likely millions of man hours of statistical data.

But I have been wrong before.


WAR is simply a stat. A measurement. When I see Jeff Bagwell ahead of both Pete Rose and Johnny Bench, it tells
me that the WAR stat isn't EVERYTHING.
A very useable stat but anyone with a clue does factor in the 'eye' factor too(plus many other things).
The problem I find with those who live and die with stats is they don't factor other things in.
Baseball hitters fail 7 times out of 10(the really good ones), so how and what happens in those 7 failures plus
what happens when they are on defense, in the club house, etc tells me a lot about a player too.
The hitting numbers are simply NOT equal across time and decades either. A few years in the dead ball era or
in the steroids era can and do affect a WAR a lot - ie Barry Bonds and A-Rod for two.
Quote 0 0
dawgstyle
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
banks93 wrote:
formerwiacbaseballer wrote:
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
Or he was that good. Ruth didn't have access to designer steroids like Jeter did. This discussion just goes in circles. Every era had their advantages and disadvantages.

I am sure he was great in his era but in no way was he even comparable to what a Bonds, A-Rod, Griffey, Pujols, and Trout are in the modern game. A guy that can drink all night and run around all night would quickly be out of the league in today's game for many reasons. The pitching was a joke compared to today's game.

Since you like the career WAR number, who is #1 on that list? [rotfl]


Yes, that made me laugh also. I don't like any computer stats or money ball type stuff. I get it but I still like the eye test or the kid has IT. You can't predict it you see it in the workout or effort.


You sound like old billwalton in the NBA forum. Regardless of what the stats say, my untrained basketball eye knows better. I mean I don't know you, but I have a hard time believing that your eye test surpasses what is likely millions of man hours of statistical data.

But I have been wrong before.


Good for billwalton. I bet he doesn't try to justify hitting women either.


Absolutely not, like you, he's stuck in the mentality that he is superior to them.

Don't look now but women are justifying men hitting women too! Whatever will we do?! Won't someone think of the children?!!?

http://www.thewrap.com/abc-the-view-is-ok-with-a-man-hitting-a-woman-if-she-strikes-first-video/

GTFO
@2GuysFromWI

Harbaugh will have Urban Meyer retired from OSU by 2020.
Quote 0 0
roadkill1
The YANKEE CLIPPER!!!!!!



RK
"So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold
Quote 0 0
safetysqueezepleezzee11
dawgstyle wrote:
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
banks93 wrote:
formerwiacbaseballer wrote:
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
Or he was that good. Ruth didn't have access to designer steroids like Jeter did. This discussion just goes in circles. Every era had their advantages and disadvantages.

I am sure he was great in his era but in no way was he even comparable to what a Bonds, A-Rod, Griffey, Pujols, and Trout are in the modern game. A guy that can drink all night and run around all night would quickly be out of the league in today's game for many reasons. The pitching was a joke compared to today's game.

Since you like the career WAR number, who is #1 on that list? [rotfl]


Yes, that made me laugh also. I don't like any computer stats or money ball type stuff. I get it but I still like the eye test or the kid has IT. You can't predict it you see it in the workout or effort.


You sound like old billwalton in the NBA forum. Regardless of what the stats say, my untrained basketball eye knows better. I mean I don't know you, but I have a hard time believing that your eye test surpasses what is likely millions of man hours of statistical data.

But I have been wrong before.


Good for billwalton. I bet he doesn't try to justify hitting women either.


Absolutely not, like you, he's stuck in the mentality that he is superior to them.

Don't look now but women are justifying men hitting women too! Whatever will we do?! Won't someone think of the children?!!?

http://www.thewrap.com/abc-the-view-is-ok-with-a-man-hitting-a-woman-if-she-strikes-first-video/

GTFO


Why don't you quit while you are behind. The only one who ALWAYS tries to come across as superior is you - nancy boy. I put your hitting women statements right up with your pronouncement that Bo Ryan was not the guy to get the
Wisc Badger basketball program to the next level. You simply aren't as brilliant as you think ONCE you get out of
your small Walter Mitty world of your small mind.
Quote 0 0
blade12
DiMaggio > Jeter and it's not close.



Quote 0 0
dawgstyle
safetysqueezepleezzee11 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
banks93 wrote:
formerwiacbaseballer wrote:
banks93 wrote:
dawgstyle wrote:
Or he was that good. Ruth didn't have access to designer steroids like Jeter did. This discussion just goes in circles. Every era had their advantages and disadvantages.

I am sure he was great in his era but in no way was he even comparable to what a Bonds, A-Rod, Griffey, Pujols, and Trout are in the modern game. A guy that can drink all night and run around all night would quickly be out of the league in today's game for many reasons. The pitching was a joke compared to today's game.

Since you like the career WAR number, who is #1 on that list? [rotfl]


Yes, that made me laugh also. I don't like any computer stats or money ball type stuff. I get it but I still like the eye test or the kid has IT. You can't predict it you see it in the workout or effort.


You sound like old billwalton in the NBA forum. Regardless of what the stats say, my untrained basketball eye knows better. I mean I don't know you, but I have a hard time believing that your eye test surpasses what is likely millions of man hours of statistical data.

But I have been wrong before.


Good for billwalton. I bet he doesn't try to justify hitting women either.


Absolutely not, like you, he's stuck in the mentality that he is superior to them.

Don't look now but women are justifying men hitting women too! Whatever will we do?! Won't someone think of the children?!!?

http://www.thewrap.com/abc-the-view-is-ok-with-a-man-hitting-a-woman-if-she-strikes-first-video/

GTFO


Why don't you quit while you are behind. The only one who ALWAYS tries to come across as superior is you - nancy boy. I put your hitting women statements right up with your pronouncement that Bo Ryan was not the guy to get the
Wisc Badger basketball program to the next level. You simply aren't as brilliant as you think ONCE you get out of
your small Walter Mitty world of your small mind.

I'd feel insulted if you were capable of properly formatting a forum post.

Have a nice day!
@2GuysFromWI

Harbaugh will have Urban Meyer retired from OSU by 2020.
Quote 0 0
wissportsnet

Boys Basketball Alumni Round-up: February 21st, from @ColtonWilson23 #wisbb -- https://t.co/0K6CZzZWpf https://t.co/715tfpBGVS

wissportsnet

WSN15: Boys Basketball Top Teams #12 -- Two NCAA Division I players at one WIAA Division 4 school = state champions… https://t.co/1MThqzce9L

wissportsnet

Predicting winners of every state wrestling title plus a look By The Numbers, from @Nate_Woelfel -… https://t.co/HgU1bLP7d6

wissportsnet

Join the free Boys Basketball Playoff Pick 'Em Contest; Staff picks coming Tuesday #wisbb -- https://t.co/Y6yTA3OgP8 https://t.co/hA6Uyw9uje