PDA

View Full Version : Frank is {not} 5th all-time in OBP


hawkjt
07-06-2005, 12:01 PM
I heard Carmen on AM1000 this morning say that frank is 11th. I called in and said that he was 5th behind Teddy Ballgame,the Babe,Gerhig and Bonds. He replied that he checked some baseball book and he was 11th behind Hornsby,foxx and others. I just went to MLB.com and did the all-time stats and they have him 5th at .428 with Hornsby sixth at .425. Now this pisses me off that either MLB is wrong or Carmen is.

Bottom line is that frank is arguably the greatest right-handed hitter of all time as all the guys ahead of him are leftys. And the object when you go to the plate is to get on base,is it not?

First ballot HOF. No question. Rip up the contract and re-sign him for the duration, Kenny.

JRIG
07-06-2005, 12:10 PM
I heard Carmen on AM1000 this morning say that frank is 11th. I called in and said that he was 5th behind Teddy Ballgame,the Babe,Gerhig and Bonds. He replied that he checked some baseball book and he was 11th behind Hornsby,foxx and others. I just went to MLB.com and did the all-time stats and they have him 5th at .428 with Hornsby sixth at .425. Now this pisses me off that either MLB is wrong or Carmen is.

Bottom line is that frank is arguably the greatest right-handed hitter of all time as all the guys ahead of him are leftys. And the object when you go to the plate is to get on base,is it not?

First ballot HOF. No question. Rip up the contract and re-sign him for the duration, Kenny.

He's 11th.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/OBP_career.shtml

hawkjt
07-06-2005, 12:17 PM
OK- I guess the MLB.com stats are dead wrong as they have Hornsby at .426

Kind of surprising that the official MLB web site would be so wrong on the staple of their sport -stats. I guess they are too busy fielding offers for the Nats to be accurate. Sorry to Carmen for questioning his accuracy.

wildcat
07-06-2005, 12:18 PM
MLB.com doesn't have OBP for seasons before 1894. My guess is that the stat wasn't kept. For any player who played before 1894, their OBP isn't calculated, even if they also played seasons after 1894. So, John McGraw, Billy Hamilton, etc, don't show up on the all-time lists on MLB.com, even though their career OBPs are top-ten. Hope that's not too confusing; it was hard to explain!

hawkjt
07-06-2005, 12:31 PM
Thanks for the info. That explains it totally.

wildcat
07-06-2005, 12:32 PM
OK- I guess the MLB.com stats are dead wrong as they have Hornsby at .426

Kind of surprising that the official MLB web site would be so wrong on the staple of their sport -stats. I guess they are too busy fielding offers for the Nats to be accurate. Sorry to Carmen for questioning his accuracy.

Actually, I think MLB.com might be right or closer. According to the baseball-reference.com breakdown (http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/hornsro01.shtml), Hornsby had (2930 H + 1038 BBs + 48 HPB) / 9475 PA = 0.424 OBP. There's probably some sort of rounding effect or something going on, but the MLB.com OBP for Hornsby seems about right to me.

Deadguy
07-06-2005, 12:33 PM
MLB.com doesn't have OBP for seasons before 1894. My guess is that the stat wasn't kept. For any player who played before 1894, their OBP isn't calculated, even if they also played seasons after 1894. So, John McGraw, Billy Hamilton, etc, don't show up on the all-time lists on MLB.com, even though their career OBPs are top-ten. Hope that's not too confusing; it was hard to explain!

There was a time in the 1800s when pitchers pitched underhanded and walks were calculated in with Batting Averages. Anything pre-1901 should be taken with a grain of salt, as it was very much a different game. 1894 is a bizarre year, in it of itself.

FedEx227
07-06-2005, 01:31 PM
Are you sure about that? I'm almost certain there was no positives for walks until OBP was discovered, but I could be wrong.

Its so hard though to account for the 1880-1920s baseball stats because as someone said it was a totally different game, mounds rose and fell, stadiums hit the extremes of short/long... just an odd time. Hell the Cincinnati Red Stockings of 1869 went undefeated and won by scores of 103-8.

SOXintheBURGH
07-06-2005, 01:40 PM
Are you sure about that? I'm almost certain there was no positives for walks until OBP was discovered, but I could be wrong.

Its so hard though to account for the 1880-1920s baseball stats because as someone said it was a totally different game, mounds rose and fell, stadiums hit the extremes of short/long... just an odd time. Hell the Cincinnati Red Stockings of 1869 went undefeated and won by scores of 103-8.

<Joe Morgan> "If I were playing, we wouldn't have lost those 8 games."</Joe Morgan>

Jerome
07-06-2005, 02:17 PM
Still, we don't need him. His defense sucks, he has no speed, he is a clubhouse cancer, and he's injury prone.

Seriously though, I get sick when I see these criticisms of Frank on these boards or on sports blab radio. Frank has been truly amazing his entire career. Last night 'smallball' got us all of 3 runs against the AAA Devil Rays.But we still won the game, thanks to Frank's three-run (and steroid-free :D:) homer.

It gets me angry how much the chicago media under appriciates this guy, it gets me angry how JR exercised the 'diminshed skills' BS clause, and just in general how he never gets the good pub because he wasn't all lovey with the media like Sammy.

Frank is a no doubt HOF to this baseball fan.

batmanZoSo
07-06-2005, 02:22 PM
Here (http://www.baseballbeat.blogspot.com/2003_07_01_baseballbeat_archive.html) is an article that outlines Frank's utter dominance at the plate and proves that he's without question, on the very short list of baseball's all-time greatest right-handed hitters. It's been posted here more than once in the past, but it's always a good read.

ondafarm
07-06-2005, 02:55 PM
Two factors are affecting this.

1) Whom is eligible? If the threshold is 3000 plate appearances then Frank moves down the list, if it is 6000 then he is closer to fifth. Not all sources have a standard 'career' standard.

2) OBP has been calculated differently in different eras. Hits plus walks have always been in but HBP hasn't always, sacrifices are almost always out but on base by error was in the past but isn't now. (I think it should, does Podsednik get on because of errors more than Konerko?)

If you add in all these factors, and I haven't yet but I believe Frank is at least close to fifth. Hornsby is certainly variable.