Brett Butler

[Cowtipper]

Butler had a .290 career average and 558 stolen bases. He led the league in triples four times and singles four times as well. Even with all this, he was an All-Star only once.

What do you think, should Butler be in the Hall of Fame?

[PVNICK]

Brett Butler was a very good player, but for Henderson the best leadoff hitter in the game in the mid to late 80s (Raines was batting 3rd by this point). A long career of very good all around play with a short run of being excellent is going to put him shy of admission even though there are examples of similar players already in the Hall.

[KCGHOST]

Amongst career OFers in the modern era who got at least 1000 AB's and achieved a .375+ OBP Butler has the 5th lowest SLG. Respectable defender, though. His 68.5% success on SB is not exactly a ringing endorsement of his basestealing skills.

Type of guy I think of as an occasional all-star, but not an HoFer.

[jalbright]

No. He's close in black ink (139th), and 20th in career win shares among CF in the latest BJHA. But that's about it for the positives. He was only an All-Star once, he's 525th in MVP shares, 169th in Gray Ink, 179th in HOF standards, 44th in top three seasons in win shares, and 32nd in best 5 consecutive seasons in win shares, and only 3 of his 10 most similar are in the HOF, and two of them are weak picks (Harry Hooper and Lloyd Waner). There's no way he overcomes the negatives to make a HOF case IMO.

[Colorado Express]

I don't see him as even close to a HOFer.

[yankillaz]

I've always wondered why he didn't have a greater consideration. But when you lack power, you have to be very good running the bases, and Butler (like Steve Sax) wasn't.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Butler is a player who's actual career is borderline, at best, but he was a HOFer in terms of how good a player he was.

Butler was 24 before he was called up to the major leagues, and 26 before he was given a regular job. Butler was a legitimately great player with the Indians, but this was barely recognized because the Indians were a struggling franchise at that time, and Butler was perceived as part of the mediocrity (a perception that gets attached to the stars of poor teams). His run of star caliber season continued through 1995, but he had some tough luck. He made it to the World Series in 1989, but he was overshadowed by Kevin Mitchell, who had a career year. (Butler and Will Clark were, in fact, the best players on Butler's Giant teams.) The 1991 Dodgers lost the NL West title on the last day, by one game; had they won, Butler would have been in the postseason after perhaps his best regular season.

Butler's fade in 1996, at age 39, was due to throat cancer. He recovered, but missed most of the season. At age 40, he hit .283, with a .363 OBP in 105 games, which represents significant retention of ability, but he chose to retire after the season ended.

Butler's a college guy who's missing two seasons on the front end of his career. Had he come up at age 23, and been given a full time job at that point, things might have been different for him, but he was a 3rd round draft pick from a small school in 1979, and the Braves clung to the fiction that Jeff Burroughs or Gary Matthews would suddenly have a stud season, rather than take a chance on Butler. (Matthews, at the time, had a fat contract with guaranteed money; the Braves seriouisly overpaid for him, as I recall.) It is clear, in retrospect, that Butler was ready for a full time job earlier than he got one, and would have been a more effective player if he had been given a job that was his, but you can hear Brave management crying "He needs more seasoning!". The Braves also had a hangup about Butler playing LF, given that he wasn't a power hitter and CF was taken by Matthews, then Dale Murphy. I believe that this silliness kept the Braves from making the kind of commitment to Butler that his talent warranted.

Butler's not really a peak value HOFer; not in the sense that one would say Al Rosen or Ron Santo are. He's a guy who WOULD have been a HOFer, IMO, if he had been given a job when he was ready for it. His case would be stronger if he had been a better percentage base stealer and/or if he were a better defensive outfielder. (Butler had lots of range in CF and didn't make mistakes, but he never had a strong throwing arm.) I rooted for Butler to make the HOF, but I can't honestly say that his one-and-done in the BBWAA voting is an injustice. His candidacy for the HOF is not ridiculous, however. Butler was a very good player; a great one in his best years. But there are better than he that are outside the HOF as well. Santo, Torre, Oliva, and Trammell all have better cases, as do Will Clark and Don Mattingly.

[Yankwood]

Not even close-Tim Raines was better and he won't make it either.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Not even close-Tim Raines was better and he won't make it either.

I hope you're wrong about Raines. He gets a lot of love here; I wonder if this will be the perceptions of the BBWAA.

[Yankwood]

I'm a huge Raines fan but I know one of the Voters/sportswriters and they tip their hands. I'll be surprised if he gets half the votes.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I'm a huge Raines fan but I know one of the Voters/sportswriters and they tip their hands. I'll be surprised if he gets half the votes.

If by "half the votes", you mean 50 percent, that's a good sign.

If Raines gets 50% of the vote the first time out, he stands a good chance of building toward 75%. A stronger-than-expenced first time showing is a momentum builder. If Raines gets 50% the first time out, he will be considered a "serious" candidate for enshrinement.

Butler has the edge on Raines in defense; Butler was a career CENTER fielder. Raines had a longer career because he came up earlier, but Butler retained his ability just as long. Raines was the better player, but Butler is not a totally silly HOF candidate by any means. It's just that there are better guys than him that are not yet in.

[SABR Matt]

Not a sexy candidate, but a deserving one...through and through.

The defensive tools (sabermetrically) are somewhat divided on him...but the popular view was that he was a fantastic defensive CFer so I am more inclined to believe PCA's interpretation that he was among the 12 greatest defensive CFers of all time than FRAA's take (that he was barely average)...Win Shares agrees with me BTW...Butler has an A grade in James' book. Combine great defense with sterling OBP and good speed and you have one of the best lead-off hitters and most valuable CFers of his time.

[philkid3]

Butler's the kind of candidate where I think the argument comes down to arguing where the Hall of Fame baseline should be -- which is not a simple argument to determine -- rather than a simple case of saying he's in or out.

For my baseline, he's probably out, but I'm still putting him down as a "maybe."

[Cougar]

I absolutely love Butler as a leadoff man with consistently wonderful OBP, lots of SB, and superior CF defense over a fairly long career (that should have been longer...truncated by the stunted development in Atlanta and the flukish cancer in his late thirties).

Two tangential questions:

Did he chew tobacco? (Irrelevant to HOF argument; just curious if it contributed to Butler's throat cancer.)

Did anyone notice that Butler's managers in Atlanta were future HOFers Bobby Cox and Joe Torre? Granted, this wasn't when they were doing their HOF work....

Major cons include his abject lack of power* and his disappointingly high caught stealing totals. These are both demerits, especially the caught stealings, as these are something he presumably had some control over. (Some otherwise great players simply don't hit with power, but do everything else well; power is more God-given than most other baseball skills...arm strength and speed are pretty genetic, but one can train himself to field well and to hit for contact and with discipline to a pretty fair degree.)

I find the caught stealings puzzling when I pair it with the triples, and the low doubles totals. It seems clear that Butler stretched an inordinately high number of doubles into triples. Some of that is batting left-handed...when he got a hold of one it went to RF, making it hard to catch him at 3b. But mostly this indicates good baserunning, and indeed Butler had the reputation of being an excellent baserunner. His runs scored support this hypothesis too.

Baserunning is a fairly discrete skill from base stealing, of course...it could be that Butler just got poor jumps off the pitcher, or got picked off a lot. Still, with his speed and savvy, his thoroughly mediocre success rate is curious. Can anyone shed any light here?

I support him for the HOF, as I think both leadoff men and players with poor power but otherwise strong skill sets are historically undervalued. I can fully appreciate it's a close call, however.

*Although, I can testify, I saw him hit a HR once, in Candlestick, a screaming line drive into the RF seats. Not sure when now...I think it was 1988?

[brett]

What Butler gains to Saber stats he also loses to Saber stats.

Pluses:
On-base percentage driven 110 OPS+ (115% of league rate OB%)
1900+ games played in centerfield.
Played over 150 games in center 10 straight seasons.

Minuses: (some pointed out by others)
68.5% base stealing was basically a little better than break even.
Only a short stretch as a good centerfielder. Seems to have been below average for the bulk of his career.

If he had been an Ashburn type fielder, he would have a case. If he stole 72-74% he would have a real good one.

His OB% loaded OPS+ by the way is probably on par with about a 113-114 OPS+

[brett]

Not a sexy candidate, but a deserving one...through and through.

The defensive tools (sabermetrically) are somewhat divided on him...but the popular view was that he was a fantastic defensive CFer so I am more inclined to believe PCA's interpretation that he was among the 12 greatest defensive CFers of all time than FRAA's take (that he was barely average)...Win Shares agrees with me BTW...Butler has an A grade in James' book. Combine great defense with sterling OBP and good speed and you have one of the best lead-off hitters and most valuable CFers of his time.

If he's a top 20 defensive centerfielder then he deserves serious consideration.

[leecemark]

--OTOH alot of his "slugging" came from BA - and alot of his hits were bunts or infield hits. Those have less value than normal singles. That at least somewhat counterbalances the OBP heavy part of his OPS+.

[brett]

--OTOH alot of his "slugging" came from BA - and alot of his hits were bunts or infield hits. Those have less value than normal singles. That at least somewhat counterbalances the OBP heavy part of his OPS+.


Good point, though with no power he also didn't get too many strategic intentional and semi-intentional walks, plus infield hits would also indicate more bases on the hits/sacs of others.

[SABR Matt]

What Butler gains to Saber stats he also loses to Saber stats.

Pluses:
On-base percentage driven 110 OPS+ (115% of league rate OB%)
1900+ games played in centerfield.
Played over 150 games in center 10 straight seasons.

Minuses: (some pointed out by others)
68.5% base stealing was basically a little better than break even.
Only a short stretch as a good centerfielder. Seems to have been below average for the bulk of his career.

If he had been an Ashburn type fielder, he would have a case. If he stole 72-74% he would have a real good one.

His OB% loaded OPS+ by the way is probably on par with about a 113-114 OPS+

The key problem with your argument is the fielding analysis...which I'm assuming is based on Baseball Prospectus' ratings...because Win Shares, PCA, and DRA do not agree with you on his defensive peak being brief.

[SABR Matt]

--OTOH alot of his "slugging" came from BA - and alot of his hits were bunts or infield hits. Those have less value than normal singles. That at least somewhat counterbalances the OBP heavy part of his OPS+.

People use the same logic to dismiss Ichiro. Butler was not quite Ichiro-good on defense, though he had a few years that were close...but he was nearly as good as Ichiro offensively (without the amazing peak seasons and SB%) and for similar reasons. Infield singles are not significantly less valuable than regular singles for a leadoff hitter...on when there are already people on base does the value change, and Butler's primary job (and Ichiro's) was to get on base...something he did very well.

[SABR Matt]

Butler's defensive career by PCA:
Ps Yr EqG Wins PCA-BA
LF 1983 96 3.00 0.368
CF 1991 157 6.19 0.353
LF 1997 32 0.83 0.341
CF 1990 155 4.69 0.319
CF 1983 31 0.88 0.312
CF 1989 146 4.10 0.311
CF 1984 151 3.40 0.291
CF 1996 32 0.71 0.289
CF 1986 153 3.31 0.288
CF 1987 138 2.96 0.287
CF 1997 38 0.74 0.280
CF 1982 54 1.02 0.278
CF 1995 84 1.56 0.276
CF 1993 156 2.73 0.272
CF 1988 148 2.47 0.269
CF 1985 145 2.26 0.265
CF 1992 151 2.07 0.259
CF 1994 103 1.33 0.255
CF 1995 40 -0.18 0.192

Only 4 seasons running below average defensive lines in a fairly long career. Aside from his partial 1983 season in LF and his peak season in 1991, Butler lacks the flashy defensive win totals of most of the other great fielding CFers in the top 20 HOF Marker lists...but he was consistently above average for a long time.

[leecemark]

People use the same logic to dismiss Ichiro. Butler was not quite Ichiro-good on defense, though he had a few years that were close...but he was nearly as good as Ichiro offensively (without the amazing peak seasons and SB%) and for similar reasons. Infield singles are not significantly less valuable than regular singles for a leadoff hitter...on when there are already people on base does the value change, and Butler's primary job (and Ichiro's) was to get on base...something he did very well.

--They are leadoff hitters once a game (well possibly more, but your cleanup guy might leadoff a couple times in a given game too). The rest of the time they are just hitters.

[brett]

--They are leadoff hitters once a game (well possibly more, but your cleanup guy might leadoff a couple times in a given game too).

I'd like to know if cleanup guys with big walk totals walk as much when they are leading off.

All hits by leadoff hitters are worth a little less, but leadoff hitters WALKS are actually worth a little more than average because when leading off, they are not pitched around.

[Paul Wendt]

--They are leadoff hitters once a game (well possibly more, but your cleanup guy might leadoff a couple times in a given game too). The rest of the time they are just hitters.
Offhand I suppose that the first batter leads off about 200 extra innings per season, meaning 200 more than team average. More than one per game because the pitcher makes a more than equal share of third outs, both because the pitcher is a poor batter and because the eighth batter may be walked intentionally with two out.

As Mark hints, the distribution isn't uniform for the other eight batters.

On second thought I think 200 extra leadoff innings is a big overestimate. Maybe the truth is 200 more than the second batter. Rather than develop the thought I hope someone else can tell us the established answer.

[brett]

Rickey Henderson batted in the leadoff spot about 93% of the time so I'll look at him,

5356 of his 13346 plate appearances were leading off an inning.

If we take 13346 PA's and assume the league adjusted .327 OB% for his teams, then there should have been about 27026 leadoff appearances for his team. If he got 1/9 of that it would be 3002.

So he got about 178% of what a random assignment of leadoff opportunities would have given.

[Cougar]

Rickey Henderson batted in the leadoff spot about 93% of the time so I'll look at him,

5356 of his 13346 plate appearances were leading off an inning.

If we take 13346 PA's and assume the league adjusted .327 OB% for his teams, then there should have been about 27026 leadoff appearances for his team. If he got 1/9 of that it would be 3002.

So he got about 178% of what a random assignment of leadoff opportunities would have given.

Important to note that Rickey spent most of his career in a DH league, where the pitcher wasn't making mostly outs in the 9th spot behind him. NL leadoff hitters probably approach double the leadoff opportunities.

[SABR Matt]

--They are leadoff hitters once a game (well possibly more, but your cleanup guy might leadoff a couple times in a given game too). The rest of the time they are just hitters.

This is (sort of) true...but the lead-off hitter is still by far the most likely hitter to come to the plate with no one on base...and even when he's got guys on base, the difference in value is on the order of 0.05 runs per infield hit, so it's a very minor concern.

[SABR Matt]

Important to note that Rickey spent most of his career in a DH league, where the pitcher wasn't making mostly outs in the 9th spot behind him. NL leadoff hitters probably approach double the leadoff opportunities.

Even assuming the 178% inflation is over-playing the typical lead-off hitter thing, and 40% of one's plate appearances leading off an inning...if the difference for Butler compared to another plater is (say) 500 career infield hits (which is a VERY high overestimation IMHO), and 60% of them were worth 0.05 runs less than a typical hit, you're having a cow about approximately 15 runs of production overestimation.

Maybe this isn't the monster concern?

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

Brett Butler and Eddie Murray were my two favorite players growing up, but that said, I can't support Butler's candidacy. As Brett mentioned, the poor SB% percentage meant that his basestealing was almost as detrimental than not running at all. The .377 career OBP is not nearly stellar enough for a singles hitting CF with only 2375 hits. Furthermore, while Butler was a very good defender in terms of flagging balls down, his poor arm lead to teams running ragged on him on balls in the gap. In fact, his arm was almost Johnny Damon-like, although it wasn't quite that bad.

At his finest, Butler was a very good player; a .300 hitter who drew walks, scored a bunch of runs, stole some bases and played solid defense (minus the arm). But in my opinion, Butler would have had to have had 3000 hits and a career +.300 BA to make the Hall since he was predominantly a singles hitting CF. I also don't buy the fact Butler was a Top 12 defensive CF since many extra bases were taken on his patrol. The poor SB% really seals the deal on the debate. He's not even a borderline candidate to me.

[SABR Matt]

GMBF does raise a good point about his arm lacking...that's the kind of thing that will not show up in your basic sabermetric analysis without a PBP-level analysis that includes an analysis of baserunning advances. So if his arm was truly worse than the average that's a factor I'm not seeing.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

Sabr Matt, curious of your opinion as to where Devon White stands in terms of greatest defensive outfielders of all-time. He was certainly the best I ever saw and his range was spectacular. Does sabermetrics see it the same way as I have witnessed it anecdotally?

[SABR Matt]

Heh...Domenic (another member here) asked me exactly the same question about two evenings ago. :)

Devon White is seen by Win SHares and PCA (my own creation) as being a superior defender for quite a long time...here's his defensive card by PCA:
Ps Yr EqG Wins PCA-BA
CF 1991 156 6.92 0.371 GG
CF 1989 155 6.53 0.363 GG
CF 1987 49 1.66 0.333
RF 1987 117 2.88 0.320 Net GG
CF 1992 149 4.03 0.307
CF 1993 148 3.99 0.307
CF 1994 98 2.20 0.290
CF 1998 134 2.85 0.286
CF 1997 67 1.30 0.279
CF 1995 99 1.70 0.271
CF 1990 125 2.03 0.268
CF 1988 122 1.47 0.252
CF 1999 115 1.36 0.252
CF 2000 29 0.31 0.248
CF 2001 70 0.61 0.240
CF 1996 135 1.15 0.239

Not sure what happened in 1988 and 1990 that robbed him of some of his statistical performance...it could be a fluke of his surroundings, although in 1988 and 1990 both, he was hurt for part of the year so that may have something to do with it. Other than that, his peak was tremendous...not quite Andruw Jones tremendous...but amazing still.

On my all time CF defensive leaderboard, Devon White is 13th...although notably...Brett Butler is ahead of him owing somewhat to his better longevity at the position.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

Butler ahead of White eh? Just 13th all-time defensively? Hmmmmm. Coulda sworn he was better than that but I guess the numbers speak for themselves.

Much appreciated Sabr Matt thanks.

[ol' aches and pains]

--OTOH alot of his "slugging" came from BA - and alot of his hits were bunts or infield hits. Those have less value than normal singles. That at least somewhat counterbalances the OBP heavy part of his OPS+.

Last time I looked at a box score, a single was a single, they don't tell you if it was a bunt or an infield hit. How does a bunt or infield hit have less value? Butler was a leadoff man, his job was to get on base. I don't support him for the HOF, but I don't understand this argument.

[leecemark]

--Its pretty simple really. Runners don't score from second or go from first to third on a bunt or infield single. They often do on singles to the outfield. Getting on base was an important part of Butler's job, but it was his ONLY job and he wasn't very good at the other part - bring his teammates around.

[SABR Matt]

I guess Ichiro can't be a hall of famer either than, ey Mark? 50 infield hits a year...those 2.5 runs created (at WORST) each season are the difference between a HOFer and a mediocre run producer in your mind?

[jalbright]

--Its pretty simple really. Runners don't score from second or go from first to third on a bunt or infield single. They often do on singles to the outfield. Getting on base was an important part of Butler's job, but it was his ONLY job and he wasn't very good at the other part - bring his teammates around.

While guys with low isolated power (i.e. few extra bases from XBH) in general aren't good RBI guys, you've also got to realize that a leadoff batter is trying to drive in some of the worst hitters on the team (spots 7, 8 and 9). On most teams, that means that the leadoff guy gets a well below average number of opportunities to drive in runs.

[leecemark]

I guess Ichiro can't be a hall of famer either than, ey Mark? 50 infield hits a year...those 2.5 runs created (at WORST) each season are the difference between a HOFer and a mediocre run producer in your mind?

--Ichiro will be and should be a Hall of Famer. Butler won't and shouldn't. I merely pointed out a factor to be considered.

[ol' aches and pains]

I guess Ichiro can't be a hall of famer either than, ey Mark? 50 infield hits a year...those 2.5 runs created (at WORST) each season are the difference between a HOFer and a mediocre run producer in your mind?

Exactly what I thought when I read Mark's response-I guess he won't like Ichiro for the Hall, either. I'm glad to see he does. We shouldn't evaluate leadoff men by the same criteria as middle-of-the-order guys. Leadoff men aren't expected to drive in a lot of runs. If we measure them all against Rickey Henderson, Rickey will be the last leadoff hitter inducted.

[SABR Matt]

Mark...I don't see why that factor even merits consideration. I put a shorthand number on it and it's a tiny freakin' number. I don't think it's significant enough to worry about. If you want to worry about something, worry about whether Butler was defensively gifted enough to compare favorably to other lead-off hitters, worry about his mediocre baserunning (despite good speed)...those are valid reasons to be concerned, to be sure.

I think Butler is a deserving HOF candidate, but PCA is the most optimistic defensive tool out there when it comes to his net defensive value, so if I'm wrong about his glove (and legit points were raised as to why that might be the case)...then this debate changes.

[leecemark]

--Butler is at best a borderline candidate. The small things matter for a guy who needs the benefit of every doubt to be a viable candidate. As for his defense, I saw him play plenty and thought he was pretty good - but certainly not the historically great defender he would need to be to put him over the top. He may have retained a good level of play longer than most and accumulated alot of defensive value that guys who were better at their best, but nobody gets to Cooperstown on their glove until they were really special.

[Paul Wendt]

(my emphasis)
The defensive tools (sabermetrically) are somewhat divided on him...but the popular view was that he was a fantastic defensive CFer so I am more inclined to believe PCA's interpretation that he was among the 12 greatest defensive CFers of all time than FRAA's take (that he was barely average)...Win Shares agrees with me BTW...Butler has an A grade in James' book. Combine great defense with sterling OBP and good speed and you have one of the best lead-off hitters and most valuable CFers of his time.

In the Win Shares book James gives Butler a B+. I suppose that is below average for a career CF but it may be average. I count ten A+ grades in the roughly 10% of listings that precede Butler alphabetically: Agee, Almada, Andrews, Ashburn, Averill, Berry, Birmingham, Blair, Brody, Busby.

[SABR Matt]

I thought he had an A or A-...but you're wrong about B+ being average or below average for career CFers...the average is a B- for CFers and a C- for LF (C for RF).

[SABR Matt]

--Butler is at best a borderline candidate. The small things matter for a guy who needs the benefit of every doubt to be a viable candidate. As for his defense, I saw him play plenty and thought he was pretty good - but certainly not the historically great defender he would need to be to put him over the top. He may have retained a good level of play longer than most and accumulated alot of defensive value that guys who were better at their best, but nobody gets to Cooperstown on their glove until they were really special.

Not when they're small on the order of a couple of runs created per year at best.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I liked Brett Butler, but Dom DiMaggio was a better HOF candidate.

[Cougar]

I liked Brett Butler, but Dom DiMaggio was a better HOF candidate.

They're very similar, but Dom was a little better in just about all respects, I concur.

(Except for retention of ability...)

[SABR Matt]

Um...no?

Dom DiMaggio lasted just ten seasons to Butler's 17 (6400 PA to 9500)

They had similar career OPS+ values but Butler, despite being too aggressive on the bases, was the significantly better baserunner.

DiMaggio was the better fielder, but Butler lasted a lot longer at the position.

There's no good argument that Dom DiMaggio has a better HOF resume than Butler.

[leecemark]

--There is a mitigating factor in the playing time difference. Dom missed 3 years - his age 26-28 seasons - to WWII. With even a modest projection for those years he was a clearly greater player. Butler still has the longevity edge, but it is less and not enough to make him the better candidate. Not that I support either.

[SABR Matt]

I know he missed time due to WWII, but two things to keep in mind:

1) They look kind of similar as hitters until you start noticing all of the little things that Butler did significantly better:

GIDP: Butler grounded into just 64 of them in a 17 year career...DiMaggio averaged 14 per year in his prime.

Baserunning: Butler was clearly the superior baserunner, stealing 558 bases in his career and being caught 257 times (a rate of 68.4%)...and it's not just the steals we're talking about here...it's the baserunning advances. He was most likely a significantly more valuable player on the bases all around. You can tell something about a player's raw speed by looking at SB attempts and things like triples per double (Butler hit 131 triples and 237 doubles, DiMaggio hit 57 triples and 308 doubles)...it's evident to me at least that Butler was more valuable all around on the bases.

Peak Seasons: DiMaggio had no peak at all. He was basically the same 110 OPS hitter chugging along year after year after year for the entirety of his career. There's value in that...but not so much when it comes to picking hall of famers.

Side by side comparison of Butler's top 5 Seasons with DiMaggio's top 5 seasons using the PCA HOF Marker, offense first, then defense:

Offensive Marker Points
DiMaggio Butler
8.5 17.4
8.1 15.8
7.6 13.8
7.2 13.7
6.5 12.6

LOL!

Defensive Marker Points
DiMaggio Butler
9.7 9.7
9.0 6.8
7.8 6.0
7.6 5.7
7.4 4.3

WINS
DiMaggio Butler
11.9 13.9
11.2 13.1
11.2 13.1
11.0 12.5
10.7 10.5

It's better to have a career 110 OPS+ and have some of that concentrated into great seasons than to have a career 110 OPS+ and do that every single year +/- a few OPS points...Butler was a clearly better player at his best than DiMaggio.

If you are uncomfortable with using PCA to gauge that assertion, how about good old fashioned EqR:

Butler's top five EqR seasons add up to 572 runs...DiMaggio's top five seasons add up to 475 runs. BIG difference.

I didn't use OPS+ here because for both guys baserunning and the minor events are important since they're lead-off hitters.

Defensively Butler had all of the ability of DiMaggio, but none of the sustainability...DiMaggio was a superior fielder almost every season of his career, and the same cannot be said of Butler, but the difference there does not change the reality that Butler, even with war credit given to DiMaggio, was both more durable at the same average skill level AND better at his peak than DiMaggio.

[leecemark]

--Perhaps, although I don't really see the "great" seasons for Butler. It may well also be that some of DiMaggio's missing peak came when he was wearing a different kind of uniform.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I would argue that some of DiMaggio's GIDPs are a function of the slower Red Sox teams he played on, as well as playing in an era that did not emphasize speed in a player.

Butler has it over DiMaggio in ability retention, although I don't know why DiMaggio just petered out in 1952; his 1952 season wasn't that bad. He did play only 128 games in 1952, so maybe he had a serious injury toward the end of the year. I would be interested in finding out.

I think that if both Dom D. and Butler played in the same era, Dom would have clearly been the superior player.

[EdTarbusz]

Butler has it over DiMaggio in ability retention, although I don't know why DiMaggio just petered out in 1952; his 1952 season wasn't that bad. He did play only 128 games in 1952, so maybe he had a serious injury toward the end of the year. I would be interested in finding out.

.

According to Fenway by Golenbock, Lou Boudreau was more intersted in putting younger players in tghe Red Sox and would bench his older players. Supposedly Dom DiMaggio was so irate at being replaced by a younger player (Tom Umphlett maybe) that he retired.

[Cougar]

DiMaggio's ballpark and era played a factor as well.

No one stole many bases in the '40's (well, maybe George Case). Dom would have stolen many more, it can be reasonably inferred, if he played contemporaneously with Butler.

As far as triples, it's awfully hard for a right-handed hitter to hit a triple in Fenway (especially a "speed triple"; righties can get "power triples" with bombs to right center field). Again, Dom plays in the eighties in those big concrete multipurpose stadiums, he hits more triples.

[SABR Matt]

A lot of wild speculation here.

1) We have no concrete evidence that DiMaggio's peak is hidden by his wartime service apart from his age. He showed no signs of retaining some masterful peak performance level before or after the war.

2) Slower Red Sox teammates would not influence his GIDP rate much...the strongest influences on DP rates are YOUR OWN speed (because most DPs start with getting the force at second, which is, in about 75% of DP attempts, the easiest play to make...usually involving a throw from third, short, the pitcher or second to the second base bag)...your groundball ratio (which was similar for Butler and DiMaggio) and your contact rate. I don't see any excuses for DiMaggio among the leading list of candidates to explain his DPs aside from his own lack of speed. Also...even if his teammates caused some DPs...the difference in rate is very large and that's real value that DiMaggio was losing.

3) I see the point regarding it being difficult for a righty to hit triples at Fenway...I hought about that. But you play half your games at home and half on the road...and no...the HUUUUUUGE parks of the 40s and 50s would have been way better for triples than the small concrete stadiums in which Butler played. Big gaps = more triples...end of story. So yes...the triples factor for DiMaggio explains so of the 3B/2B ratio gap...but not all.

4) No...you cannot assume that DiMaggio of the 0s would have stolen way more bases...he was BAD AT IT...his SB rate was 62%...significantly worse than Butler...in the modern game...he may not have been allowed to run as much as Butler was.

[leecemark]

--Butler shouldn't have been allowed to run as much as he did - he was pretty bad at it too:thumbsdown:

[SABR Matt]

The dogmatic 70% is good, 67% is bad thing that sabermetrciains hang on to regarding SB% is overblown. He wasn't a particularly good base stealer, but we don't know enough about the situations in which he was gambling...I'm guessing he, like most prolific runners, was running when that extra base was worth a lot more (when it was leveraged) compared to the average situation, changing the ratio you need to have a positive impact with your legs.

[leecemark]

--70% is not "good" it is merely acceptable. I also don't know why you would think running more means you are running in more leverage situations. I mean you probably are running more in those situations than someone who rarely attempts a steal, but you are probably also running more in situations where the out hurts more or where the steal helps less. Particularly since so much has been made of the different expectations of a leadoff hitter. If the importantance of getting on base is higher then the opportunity loss of getting erased from the bases would also be higher.

[Paul Wendt]

Do the most prolific base thieves run in situations with higher leverage than the moderate thieves, and so on?

I would have guessed the opposite --above the level of Mo Vaughn and David Ortiz who run when they notice the team is asleep, presumably in low leverage situations. That is, I would have guessed that the moderate thieves tend to run with high leverage and the most prolific thieves run on those occasions but also in more medium and low leverage situations.

Supposing I understand correctly (in the first line above), does this pattern appear throughout the retrosheet era? Or is it a recent development, perhaps under the influence of sabrmetrics?

[SABR Matt]

I nwas not speculating with confidence that Butler ran in higher leverage spots...I was saying it's entirely speculative to assume the null hypothesis (that runners tend to run in the same-leverage on average) or to make any alternative assumption. A dismissive "Butler steals 68% successfully, and is therefore VALUELESS on the bases, is folly.

We need to quantify his steals by leverage AND we need to quantify the positive impacts of his other baserunning advances.