New Trout Pr0n

[Tank]

10 minutes ago, hangin n wangin said:

I agree he could hit in this era well. How well I’m not going to argue about because no one knows. 

My post was more in reference to Bob’s post being a little funny because it came off as Williams’ 20/10 vision being the only reason we could hit in any era.

well, if you can't trust bob, who can you trust?

[Angels#1Fan]

1 hour ago, Dick B Back said:

One of the reasons the piching mounds were lowered along with Gibson’s 1.12 ERA, to supposedly take the unfair advantage away from the pitchers.

Agree.

[Angels#1Fan]

I don't mean to be repetitive but my point has more to do with the over use of WAR as some kind of super stat that ends all arguments rather than a point about what generation had the best talent.

It's not my intention to dismiss WAR as a stat, it's my opinion that WAR is just one of many ways to judge talent, but it isn't the end all of be all that some seem to think. Like in, "well so and so had a WAR of"..end of argument. That is essentially what the article said and I for one ain't buying it. ymmv

[AngelsLakersFan]

Williams is the greatest hitter of all time, and he played in a hitters park. He also was a worthless defender who would've been a DH in today's game.

[Angels#1Fan]

7 hours ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

If you were going to pick one stat to compare two players and try to say who was better, WAR is the best stat for the job like it or not. That's objectively indisputable.

And that would be a mistake.

Picking just one stat is foolish when there are so many others that give valid insight into how good a player is. Why not use all the tools available?

[Angels#1Fan]

1 minute ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Williams is the greatest hitter of all time, and he played in a hitters park. He also was a worthless defender who would've been a DH in today's game.

While I agree that Williams wasn't a great defender he was far from worthless. lol

The statement that Williams played in a hitters park is only half true as he played half his games on the road!

[Blarg]

Williams away splits are Hall of Fame first ballot. He had 25 more home runs away than at home.

.328/.467/.615/1.082

 

Edited March 22, 2018 by Blarg

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

1 hour ago, Angels#1Fan said:

While I agree that Williams wasn't a great defender he was far from worthless. lol

The statement that Williams played in a hitters park is only half true as he played half his games on the road!

Yankee Stadium, Camden Yard, Griffith Stadium, Connie Mack Stadium, Comiskey Park...

[nate]

7 hours ago, Dochalo said:

WAR isn't perfect, but it's the only thing that comes close to stacking up players from different generations.  

There was WAY WAY less talent in the game 70 years ago.  To think otherwise is a complete non-starter.  The game has become totally different.  

When Williams played, there were 8 teams in the AL and  they only played against each other.  In 1942, Williams faced 75 pitchers all year.  Last season, Trout faced 175.  

In that same season, Williams had 108 plate appearances vs. a starting pitcher that he'd already seen 3 times.  Do you know how many times Trout saw a pitcher for the 4th time in one game last year?  8.  Trout face a reliever 164 times last year.  Williams 94 times.  And in 1942, reliever era was half a point worse than that of starters.  Why?  because they typically sucked.  

This is just the tip of the iceberg.  There's a whole slew of other reasons why the game used to be much easier.  

Do you know how good Mike Trout is to do the things he does in today's game?  that's WAR.  

Think of WAR this way.  Instead of calling it WAR, let's call it 'stat that shows how much better or worse you are relative to everyone else in the league for that year'.  

in other words, Trout is on par with the all time greats in terms of how he stacks up vs. his current peer group.  

Excellent post, doc. 

[Ray McKigney]

9 hours ago, Angels#1Fan said:

@Chuckster70 sorry Chuck but I don't by the notion that players of Williams era faced inferior talent, in fact, there are twice as many players in MLB today than there were in Williams time and imho the talent is diluted down some. Think about it Chuck..half of the players today would be in the minors if they played when there were only 8 teams in each league!

As far as the opinion of pitchers throwing harder now than in Williams time goes, that argument will never be put to rest because there were no radar guns then. Besides I think it's hard to believe that the human species has evolved that much in the last 60 to 80 years or so. In fact didn't Nolan Ryan throw over 100 mph when he came up as a Met in 1968..50 years ago??? 

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that players like Koufax or Gibson and many others didn't throw over 95 consistently.  

Again, to make my point very clear, it is not about todays players versus yesterdays. My point is about basing an entire argument of a players greatness on WAR alone..it's bs imo. The fact that so many people do it (including the authors in the article above) makes their argument a very weak one imo.

 

9 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

I would just like to see a study made on this topic because it's fascinating to me.

I do believe though that if Trout was facing the type of arms that were on the mound during Ted Williams' era he'd have even a higher WAR, better stat lines across the board. 

There is a great documentary about the topic of pitch speed back in the day called, "Fastball." In the doc, they conduct experiments and try different methods to determine how hard some of the players from back then actually threw. It's pretty interesting and convincing stuff. The doc is available on Netflix. I highly recommend checking it out. It will shed some light for you on the question of how fast some of the guys were throwing before radar guns.

[Angels#1Fan]

28 minutes ago, Ray McKigney said:

 

There is a great documentary about the topic of pitch speed back in the day called, "Fastball." In the doc, they conduct experiments and try different methods to determine how hard some of the players from back then actually threw. It's pretty interesting and convincing stuff. The doc is available on Netflix. I highly recommend checking it out. It will shed some light for you on the question of how fast some of the guys were throwing before radar guns.

If this is the doc that claims Walter Johnson (or pitchers of his era) only threw 82 then I'm sorry I just don't believe it.

There is no way the human species has evolved to that point especially if you consider Nolan Ryan threw over 100 50 years ago or that Bob Feller threw between 95 and 100 82 years ago! One would have to believe that humans of Feller's era evolved from being able to throw only 82 to 100 in the space of just 30 years from Walter Johnson's time. Sorry I don't believe it. The real truth is that no one knows exactly how hard those guys threw the ball because there weren't any radar guns at that time. There was an interesting experiment done with Feller in which he threw a baseball against a motorcycle that was traveling at 86 mph and had about a ten foot head start. It has been estimated that because Fellers ball beat the motorcycle that it had to be traveling between 95 to 100 mph.

Frankly I think the notion that pitchers of Johnson's era ( or Dizzy Dean's and Fellers) were only able to throw 82 mph is preposterous..that's my opinion. 

[fan_since79]

10 hours ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

If you were going to pick one stat to compare two players and try to say who was better, WAR is the best stat for the job like it or not. That's objectively indisputable.

 

And the article went beyond WAR, they think Trout is going to be the all time leader in runs scored.

Pardon me for not reading the article, but I find this prediction a bit ridiculous. He would have to average 115 runs a year for 14 more seasons to pass Ricky Henderson.

One of the advantages Henderson had is he stole an awful lot of bases, so was in scoring position more frequently. Trout's game has already slowed down in that area.

Edited March 22, 2018 by fan_since79

[Ray McKigney]

42 minutes ago, Angels#1Fan said:

If this is the doc that claims Walter Johnson (or pitchers of his era) only threw 82 then I'm sorry I just don't believe it.

There is no way the human species has evolved to that point especially if you consider Nolan Ryan threw over 100 50 years ago or that Bob Feller threw between 95 and 100 82 years ago! One would have to believe that humans of Feller's era evolved from being able to throw only 82 to 100 in the space of just 30 years from Walter Johnson's time. Sorry I don't believe it. The real truth is that no one knows exactly how hard those guys threw the ball because there weren't any radar guns at that time. There was an interesting experiment done with Feller in which he threw a baseball against a motorcycle that was traveling at 86 mph and had about a ten foot head start. It has been estimated that because Fellers ball beat the motorcycle that it had to be traveling between 95 to 100 mph.

Frankly I think the notion that pitchers of Johnson's era ( or Dizzy Dean's and Fellers) were only able to throw 82 mph is preposterous..that's my opinion. 

I'm not sure if the doc concludes that Walter Johnson only threw 82. From what I recall, they do a similar experiment with the motorcycle, but with a modern pitcher, can't remember exactly who--might be Verlander--to test the validity of the Feller experiment from back in the day. They also do some actual scientific experiments in order to determine the velocity of some of the older pitchers. It's an interesting watch and it's very entertaining, regardless of whether or not you buy into the science and conclusions. 

[Docwaukee]

2 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Williams is the greatest hitter of all time, and he played in a hitters park. He also was a worthless defender who would've been a DH in today's game.

can you imagine Trout vs. pitchers who throw in the mid to high 80's that he's seen 3 times in one day?  and they're pitching to contact?  with no defensive shifts?  Imagine if felix hernandez was the best pitcher Trout ever faced.   

Williams had the highest number of PA vs. Bob Feller.  Considered one of the greatest pitchers of all time.  Feller had a career 6.1 k/9 and 4.1 bb/9.  yet somehow amassed 266 wins and a 3.25 era.  Someone with those peripherals in today's game would be laughed at.  

There is no doubt that Williams was a gifted hitter.   Maybe the best hitter ever.  I would argue that Votto or Cabrera would be equivalent given the situation.   I would argue that Altuve could hit .400 in 1920.  Or that Trout would be Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Lou Gehrig, or Tris Speaker.  

[Docwaukee]

the avg fastball velocity in 2017 was 93.6 mph.  A guy throwing 95 about 70 years ago was an absolute anomaly.  There are teams who's pitchers averaged that for an entire season just last year.  The avg fastball velocity in 2007 was 92 mph.  That's 1.7% in in 10 years.  

backtracking that would be 90.4 in 1997.  88.90 in 1987.  87mph in 1977 etc.  I am sure it hasn't followed a liner route.  But is it unreasonable to think it was 85mph 70 years ago?  

Can you imagine if Mike Trout face an avg fastball of 85mph?  

[arch stanton]

If we're going back 70 years he's never seen a video of his own swing or gotten 1/10 of the coaching. He's not hitting the gym, especially in-season. He has to rely on word of mouth for pitchers he's never faced. If a pitch decides he's plate diving he likely wears one in his unhelmeted ear. He's far more likely to face a doctored ball or hit one that's been in play for 3 or 4 innings. His manager isn't going to take kindly to striking out 100 times. He won't always have a batter's eye background in center field.

On the other side of the coin, he'll hit screaming grounders that take unpredictable hops on bad infields and at poor fielders who can't hide at DH. Hit gappers into cavernous outfields. Superior talent finds a way to shine

[Angels#1Fan]

38 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

A guy throwing 95 about 70 years ago was an absolute anomaly. 

Is that a statement of fact or speculation on your part?

The truth is that no one knows how fast pitchers threw 70 years ago.

We have a slight idea of what Feller may have done (some have suggested that he threw over 100) but no one else. You're assertion that Feller was an anomaly isn't based on any fact nor does it have any supporting evidence. In the doc "Fastball" they conclude he threw well over 100 mph! 

If Feller threw over 100 as was suggested in the doc "Fastball" would it be unreasonable to think others threw over 90?

41 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

backtracking that would be 90.4 in 1997.  88.90 in 1987.  87mph in 1977 etc.  I am sure it hasn't followed a liner route. But is it unreasonable to think it was 85mph 70 years ago?  

Yes..speculation?

[Angels#1Fan]

2 hours ago, Ray McKigney said:

I'm not sure if the doc concludes that Walter Johnson only threw 82. From what I recall, they do a similar experiment with the motorcycle, but with a modern pitcher, can't remember exactly who--might be Verlander--to test the validity of the Feller experiment from back in the day. They also do some actual scientific experiments in order to determine the velocity of some of the older pitchers. It's an interesting watch and it's very entertaining, regardless of whether or not you buy into the science and conclusions. 

I just finished watching "Fastball" at your suggestion. It's pretty entertaining and they draw several conclusions.

Walter Johnson was clocked at 83 point something back in the day using something that can only be described as very crude that actually timed the pitch 7 feet behind the plate and they (the doc experts) corrected it to 93 point something because todays radar gun clocks the pitch at close to the point of release or about 50 feet from home plate.

I don't want to say any more because I wouldn't want to ruin it for those that might want to watch it..it's definitely worth a watch.

[Ray McKigney]

53 minutes ago, Angels#1Fan said:

I just finished watching "Fastball" at your suggestion. It's pretty entertaining and they draw several conclusions.

Walter Johnson was clocked at 83 point something back in the day using something that can only be described as very crude that actually timed the pitch 7 feet behind the plate and they (the doc experts) corrected it to 93 point something because todays radar gun clocks the pitch at close to the point of release or about 50 feet from home plate.

I don't want to say any more because I wouldn't want to ruin it for those that might want to watch it..it's definitely worth a watch.

Awesome. Glad you liked it. 

[tomsred]

5 minutes ago, Ray McKigney said:

Awesome. Glad you liked it. 

I saw that movie some time ago too Ray.  It's really good, I highly recommend it as well.

[ten ocho recon scout]

21 hours ago, Dick B Back said:

All I know is that I’d like to see Ted Williams hit with a lowered mound, the 2017 juiced ball, and against dandy pitchers like Nolasco.

While these things are true, youd have to also ask how Ted would have faired once the color ban was lifted. When players were being scouted sincee they turned 12...in foreign countries. With pitchers that threw multiple pitches, etc etc.

Im a huge ted williams fan. Hes my favorite legend player. But the game has evolved. The guys today have the advantage of better scouts, nutrition, etc etc. The guys back then were blessed by having only a very small talent pool, no bullpen, etc etc.

[Inside Pitch]

On 3/21/2018 at 4:39 PM, Dick B Back said:

I understand where you are coming from, but as an old guy let me say this, Trout would be hitting against pitchers:

1. Throwing from an elevated mound.

2. Throwing stuff we don’t see now like screwballs and spitters.

3. When facing primo pitchers of the day, facing them 4 times in a game, i.e. the Koufax, Gibson, Feller types, not some BP scrubs.

Also, travel by train/bus, lack of decent medical staff and weightroom facilities, no high tech meals.

its all apples and oranges.

Those old timers never saw a slider or a cutter...  They also benefited from bad playing field and weaker defenses.   They didn't go cross country, how many night games did they play?

Williams was the best hitter ever imo.