October 2, 2010

St. Louis Regional

Los Angeles Regional

81-79, Chipper

            Chipper Jones used five small advantages over Scott Rolen to overcome a 17-point deficit in the field and advance into the Final Four:

            Among all the players in the tournament, the biggest surprise to me was Scott Rolen.   I believe that about two months ago, I did get a question in the “Hey, Bill” section asking about Scott Rolen and the Hall of Fame.   I just kind of blew it off.   I didn’t believe that Rolen’s career was anywhere near that stature.

            When I first figured Rolen’s career Win Shares and Loss Shares and came up with a record that would put him in the Hall of Fame, I assumed that I had made some sort of data entry error.    I figure the Win Shares in a spreadsheet.  Sometimes I get data in the wrong column, and when that happens we may wind up with a player showing at 212-58 when he should be 119-141 because I have entered his RBI in the home run column.   I saw Rolen’s won-lost record, I simply assumed I had a data entry error.

            And I did find a data entry error.   I found a data entry error that changed Rolen’s “Fielding” Won-Lost record from 63-10—which would have been the best defensive percentage in the tournament—to 60-13, the second-best.    But while doing that, I kept poking around at the data, and. . .Rolen seemed to calculate pretty well.   There were all those seasons with .900+ OPS—1998, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004.   Even now. . .he’s old and the stats have gone back to normal. . .he still has an OPS near .900.  Ron Cey was a heck of a player; he never had a .900 OPS.

I was still trying to figure out where I might have messed up.   At some point I came up with the idea of the “recessive rating system”—rating the players by an entirely separate and sometimes inconsistent method.    When I rated the 66 third basemen by how they ranked in eight different categories, Rolen came in second among the 66 players.   A close second—four points behind Chipper Jones, thirty points ahead of Ken Boyer, who was third.   That’s when I realized. . .oh, it’s a not a data screw-up.   I just didn’t realize what a good career he has had.

            Is Rolen really the second-best (percentage) defensive player in the tournament, behind Jimmy Collins?   Well. . .I don’t know.   Let’s say he isn’t.   Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that that’s some sort of data illusion, and that his defense shouldn’t be scored at 60-13.   What should it be?

            He’s a pretty good third baseman, right?   He’s won eight Gold Gloves.   The aggregate defensive winning percentage of the third basemen in this tournament is .609.   Let’s say Rolen was just average for this group.   That would make him 44-29 on defense, which would make him 244-115 overall.  That’s still well above a Hall of Fame standard.

            I am asked often about the Hall of Fame standing of Jorge Posada or Chase Utley or Manny Ramirez or Jim Thome or Ivan Rodriguez, and I mostly just dodge the question.   It’s better to get perspective on the player, let things settle down in the mind.    There’s really nothing to be gained, in my view, from starting a Hall of Fame argument about somebody who hasn’t even retired yet.

            Rolen, in some way, has failed to build a legend that parallels his accomplishments.   There is a legend associated with Ivan Rodriguez; there is a legend of Jim Rice and a legend of Albert Pujols and a legend of Manny Ramirez.   There is a point in a Hall of Famer’s career at which we start talking about him as if he were his own universe, spinning within the universe of the game.  Maybe Rolen’s legend was lost because his best years were in St. Louis, and that ended badly.   I don’t know.   Maybe he’s not as good as his numbers.   Maybe the reason we shouldn’t rate him where he seems to rate will become obvious to us in six or eight years.

            But Ken Boyer, who I think could be in the Hall of Fame, was a premier player for nine years, from 1956 to 1964.    Rolen has been playing at a comparable level for 14 years now.    It’s a nice career.

Scott Rolen—Career Won and Lost Contributions

Penquin Anquish

Buddy Bell 76, Ron Cey 74 (OT)

            In a close and controversial decision, Buddy Bell used advantages in defense, career length and hitting for average to survive a rugged challenge from Ron Cey, and move into the Final Four of the Brooks Robinson Invitational Tournament. 

            “It’s an outrage, a (bleeping) outrage,” said Dodger fan Hilda Chester in an interview in The Pearly Times.   “Anybody that thinks that Buddy Bell was a better player than Ron Cey probably thinks that Dabney Coleman is a better actor than Jimmy Stewart.   The referees in this thing were just Penguin Haters, that’s all.” 

            Ron Cey was a fine player, and my respect for him is well known.  Bell was a regular before Cey was, and Bell was still a regular after Cey was gone.   Ron Cey was a reliable third baseman with a good arm who was quite good in the field despite his odd build.   Buddy Bell was a Gold Glove third baseman.

            Although Bell’s career batting average was .279 and Cey’s was .261, Ron Cey was a better hitter than Buddy Bell.   Bell’s marginal winning percentage, above Ron Cey, was just .327, and it is not absolutely clear that Bell was better than Cey.   But that’s what the system that I’ve set up shows, and I’m going to go with it. 

Ron Cey—Career Won and Lost Contributions