All-Decade Team: 2000s – Left Fielders (Vote for 2) [Archive]

View Full Version : All-Decade Team: 2000s – Left Fielders (Vote for 2)

Freakshow

08-12-2009, 10:25 PM

I realize that the Current Events Forum has recently run polls on this. However, those ballots appeared to be drawn up somewhat unsystematically, the OF were all thrown together, and they weren’t even in alphabetical order. I think we can do this a bit better. Here’s my format:

• We’ll create a 25-man team, which will be the ballot for the final election.
• We’ll have ten preliminary polls, one for each position.
• We’ll vote for two players at each position (16 players total), plus five starting pitchers, plus four relievers. DH will not be listed separately, since only a handful of significant players played a majority of their games there.
• Data will be provided: total Win Shares 2000-2008 plus top 3 seasons in the decade; total WARP3 2000-2009 plus top 3 seasons; MVP award top 3 finishes in the decade. Other stats (OPS+, RC, etc.) are as of the 2009 all-star break.
• Players will be ranked only on their play in the decade 2000-2009; performance before 2000 should be ignored. Active players should be projected only to the end of this season; what you think they might do after this season is irrelevant.
• I’ll try and get the ten polls up fairly quickly. They’ll stay open for about a month.

We'll vote for two left fielders. If a LF is one of the Top 2 in a stat among these players it's highlighted below.
Player 3MVP ASG OPS+ RC OBP SLG G GG WARP3 Top 3 WS Top 3
Jason Bay 12-23-x 3 130 635 0.375 0.517 857 30.7 (8.6-7.9-7.2) 107 (30-24-21)
Lance Berkman 3-3-5 5 149 1211 0.414 0.561 1422 57.1 (9.2-9.1-6.7) 237 (36-32-31)
Barry Bonds 1-1-1 6 221 1171 0.517 0.724 986 69.3 (13.7-13.3-12.1)268 (54-49-48)
Adam Dunn 26-x-x 1 131 891 0.383 0.520 1218 27.7 (5.6-4.5-3.8) 154 (29-25-21)
Luis Gonzalez 3-25-x 4 123 935 0.382 0.508 1316 26.0 (10.1-4.6-4.5) 177 (37-27-27)
Matt Holliday 2-15-18 3 130 615 0.384 0.538 783 30.6 (9.8-7.2-6.1) 93 (27-21-19)
Manny Ramirez 3-4-4 9 162 1210 0.421 0.606 1290 59.5 (9.0-7.4-7.1) 239 (33-31-29)

dgarza

08-13-2009, 09:19 AM

Bonds & Ramirez.

Was Carlos Lee cut or was he forgotten? WARP3 = 39.7. He's a good 3rd or 4th place LFer.

Freakshow

08-13-2009, 09:43 AM

Bonds & Ramirez.

Was Carlos Lee cut or was he forgotten? WARP3 = 39.7. He's a good 3rd or 4th place LFer.Lee (and Carl Crawford) were the last cuts for the LF. While he is among the top 3-4 LF in totals for the decade, his lack of peak sinks him. He's never finished in the league's top ten in OPS+ or Runs Created.

Top 3
MVP: 17-18-19
WARP3: 6.4-4.6-4.5
WinSh: 22-22-22

Lee almost beat out Dunn, but my sense is that Dunn's generally thought of as better than Lee. In any case, Lee's not a candidate to win, place or show in the LF race.

Domenic

08-13-2009, 10:16 AM

Bonds and Ramirez.

It was quite a close call between Ramirez and Berkman (which I found somewhat surprising), but I consider Berkman a 1B at this point in his career - and he hasn't played LF as his primary position since 2003 or so, to boot.

Freakshow

08-13-2009, 10:38 AM

It was quite a close call between Ramirez and Berkman (which I found somewhat surprising), but I consider Berkman a 1B at this point in his career - and he hasn't played LF as his primary position since 2003 or so, to boot.Indeed, a tough call between Berkman and Ramirez. On another day I might have pulled the lever for Berkman.

How well a guy is playing this year, what position he's playing this year...these are minor considerations. We're looking at the body of work by the player 2000 to 2009.

CircleChange11

08-13-2009, 11:03 AM

I took Bonds and Berkman.

Ramirez is a clown in the OF and even worse on the bases. Both guys, Bonds and Ramirez, are outstanding hitters for their whole careers, despite being cheats (not for their whole careers).

I chose Berkman over Ramirez because they're comparable hitters and Berkman is not a complete idiot, even though he is an Astro.

Jsquared83

08-13-2009, 11:15 AM

Ramirez and Berkman. I left Bonds out out of spite and PEDs.

Domenic

08-13-2009, 11:23 AM

Ramirez and Berkman. I left Bonds out out of spite and PEDs.

Why is Bonds penalized, yet Ramirez is not? Ramirez may have been caught twice at this point in time...

Jsquared83

08-13-2009, 11:29 AM

Why is Bonds penalized, yet Ramirez is not? Ramirez may have been caught twice at this point in time...

Idk, I think it aggravates me more that Bonds will not come out and admit it when plenty of other big names are out and he's probably the most obvious of all.

Senor Octobre

08-13-2009, 11:40 AM

CircleChange11

08-13-2009, 12:37 PM

Even though Berkman has played more games at 1B than LF...

Yeah ... I had Berkman as my #2 1B (behind Pujols) ... in the other thread. But, he's classified as a LF.

The OP described that he went by innings played at the position.

CircleChange11

08-13-2009, 12:39 PM

Idk, I think it aggravates me more that Bonds will not come out and admit it when plenty of other big names are out and he's probably the most obvious of all.

It pretty much bothers me that they are all cowards in this regard.

They'll thump their chest, walk to first, flip their bat, and other gestures to show everyone how "manly" they are or how superior their ability is, but when it comes to telling the truth, their bravado vanishes.

Jsquared83

08-13-2009, 12:51 PM

It pretty much bothers me that they are all cowards in this regard.

They'll thump their chest, walk to first, flip their bat, and other gestures to show everyone how "manly" they are or how superior their ability is, but when it comes to telling the truth, their bravado vanishes.

Agreed. But at the very least Giambi, Arod and a few other have talked about it and admitted to their mistakes. Bonds, who holds arguably the most coveted record in all of sports and the most physically obvious, will not budge. Who knows if someone "clean" will ever hit 763.

CircleChange11

08-13-2009, 12:57 PM

Agreed. But at the very least Giambi, Arod and a few other have talked about it and admitted to their mistakes. Bonds, who holds arguably the most coveted record in all of sports and the most physically obvious, will not budge. Who knows if someone "clean" will ever hit 763.

Barry BALCO knows if he does tell the truth, he will go to prison ... because he didn't tell the truth when he needed to.

I said in another thread that I give Giambi some respect because he wasn't "totally backed into a corner" (like ARod was, or Manny).

Ken Caminiti and Jose Canseco were the only guys that came out and acknowledged without have accusations or evidence pointing their way. Caminiti, is the only one that did it for perhaps, unselfish reasons.

Most other guys were 'outed' before they made a an apology.

As my mom used to say (in regards to my half-hearted apologies for punching my little sister) "That's not being sorry for what you did, that's being sorry that you got caught."

Domenic

08-13-2009, 02:22 PM

Yeah ... I had Berkman as my #2 1B (behind Pujols) ... in the other thread. But, he's classified as a LF.

The OP described that he went by innings played at the position.

I'm just nit-picking now, and I mean no offense to Freakshow (who is running this project incredibly well), but...

Berkman, by position:

1B - 578 Games, 4800.2 Innings
LF - 557 Games, 3901.2 Innings

I would've preferred to see Berkman in the first base portion, as I also have him right behind Pujols. That being said, I don't think that this is going to have much of an impact on the project on the whole.

Freakshow

08-13-2009, 02:59 PM

I'm just nit-picking now, and I mean no offense to Freakshow (who is running this project incredibly well), but...

Berkman, by position:

1B - 578 Games, 4800.2 Innings
LF - 557 Games, 3901.2 Innings

I would've preferred to see Berkman in the first base portion, as I also have him right behind Pujols. That being said, I don't think that this is going to have much of an impact on the project on the whole.My rationale is explained here in the 1B thread (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1589100&postcount=15).

STLCards2

08-13-2009, 04:04 PM

My rationale is explained here in the 1B thread (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1589100&postcount=15).

Will there be a bench or utility spot to vote on - I bet Berkman would fair very well in that regard. Hate to see him miss the All - Decade team due to positional semantics.

Tiboreau

08-13-2009, 04:31 PM

I voted for Bonds & Berkman.

Rather than Win Shares or BP's WARP I looked at tango tiger's WAR, which is available at Fangraphs (http://fangraphs.com), and tacked on Dan Rosenheck's WARP for '01 & '02 (I only have through '05).
Berkman 6.8 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.2 50.4
Ramirez 7.3 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.1 46.9

No matter what metric you use the competition between the two is very close, but Ramirez's defensive issues are apparently enough to counteract his offensive superiority & (slight) positional advantage (if I'm reading things correctly . . . ).

STLCards2

08-13-2009, 04:45 PM

Domenic

08-13-2009, 07:47 PM

My rationale is explained here in the 1B thread (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1589100&postcount=15).

I have no idea how I missed that, and it does make perfect sense. My apologies.

Freakshow

08-13-2009, 08:00 PM

Hate to see him miss the All - Decade team due to positional semantics.Well, I'd hate to see a guy make the All-Decade team just cuz a couple guys thought I should wedge him into a position he doesn't really belong. ;)

Look, there's nothing "official" about this team, it's just one of many possible approaches. However, you do raise a valid issue: What about guys who get shut out of the 25-man team because they're stuck at a "stacked" position?

Here's how I'm considering doing the final vote. These ten elections are nominating rounds. Everyone will rank their top 25 players, but the ballot will include more than the 25 "winners". I'm thinking of a 35-player ballot, with the ten wild cards coming from the top also-rans. We can then play around a little with the results, the player rankings for the decade. We can perhaps debate who exactly should be on that 25-man squad for the decade, considering other positions where a player was successful.

STLCards2

08-13-2009, 08:03 PM

Well, I'd hate to see a guy make the All-Decade team just cuz a couple guys thought I should wedge him into a position he doesn't really belong. ;)

Look, there's nothing "official" about this team, it's just one of many possible approaches. However, you do raise a valid issue: What about guys who get shut out of the 25-man team because they're stuck at a "stacked" position?

Here's how I'm considering doing the final vote. These ten elections are nominating rounds. Everyone will rank their top 25 players, but the ballot will include more than the 25 "winners". I'm thinking of a 35-player ballot, with the ten wild cards coming from the top also-rans. We can then play around a little with the results, the player rankings for the decade. We can perhaps debate who exactly should be on that 25-man squad for the decade, considering other positions where a player was successful.

Sounds great - you are doing a great job!

Fielding Marshall

08-14-2009, 11:46 PM

Bonds and Berkman, though I could have easily swapped Berkman for Ramirez.

Freakshow

09-08-2009, 02:34 PM

No surprise here, it's Barry and Manny. Berkman likely makes the 25-man squad as well.

KCGHOST

09-08-2009, 03:50 PM

Barry and Manny.

ghostofelvis

09-08-2009, 05:08 PM

bonds and berkman...!

tcb~

yankillaz

09-10-2009, 09:31 AM

I felt sorry for Berkman, but Bonds's six seasons are far superior than anyone.

Paul Wendt

09-11-2009, 06:03 PM

I realize that the Current Events Forum has recently run polls on this. However, those ballots appeared to be drawn up somewhat unsystematically, the OF were all thrown together, and they weren’t even in alphabetical order.
The outfield polls have fewer voters than the others. Maybe 10-15% of the traffic cannot handle such slicing and dicing.

For this decade, these polls hint that the same four or same six players would be the winners as "corner outfielders" or simply outfielders.

I think we can do this a bit better. Here’s my format:

• We’ll create a 25-man team, which will be the ballot for the final election.
• We’ll have ten preliminary polls, one for each position.
• We’ll vote for two players at each position (16 players total), plus five starting pitchers, plus four relievers.
It's figuratively incredible how neatly the opinions surveyed here match these numbers. The only close contest is at catcher. Otherwise there is a clear consensus for precisely five starting pitchers, four relief pitchers, and two men at every fielding position. Except at LF and RF the clear consensus may fairly be called overwhelming consensus.