Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, thestud said:

 

 


You’re right he’s horrid. Send him back to A ball, total noodle arm.

 

 

No, just keep him in Oakland.  It's obvious he would never be good enough to replace Springer.

 

Posted

Old Hoss Radbourne picked up a win today:

Quote

Old Hoss Radbourn: 59 or 60 Wins?

Posted by Alex Bonilla on April 10, 2019

Keen-eyed Baseball-Reference users have written us asking about an update made to the statistics of Hall of Fame pitcher Old Hoss Radbourn. In the past, we had displayed Radbourn with 59 wins in his 1884 season with Providence. However, in a recent update, Radbourn has been bumped up to 60 wins.

Before we delve into what the correct number is, let's zoom out a bit, first. It will probably surprise most baseball fans to discover that there was no league-mandated rule in place for assigning wins and losses before 1950. Wins were awarded, but they were entirely up to the discretion of the official scorer. Compounding this issue is the fact that while the leagues tracked pitcher wins for much of the Deadball Era, they made many errors, and even briefly stopped officially counting pitcher wins and losses for a few years in the 1910s as ERA was first gaining popularity. A SABR member named Frank Williams meticulously corrected the record, and his research formed the basis for the accepted totals you see today.

Williams unveiled his groundbreaking work in 1982 with the article All the Record Books Are Wrong. I'd encourage you to read the article at that link (and thank you to John Thorn for re-posting it in its entirety).

Williams was the original source for the 59 wins attributed to Radbourn in 1884. He arrived at this number by determining what practices were used at the time to determine pitcher wins and losses. Earlier record books had retroactively applied the 1950 rule to Radbourn's era and given him 60 wins as a result. However, it was discovered by Frederick Ivor-Campbell that this was done in error and that one of his 1884 wins (on July 28) should have actually been credited to his teammate Cyclone Miller.

Miller was indeed the correct winner if you applied the 1950 rule, since he pitched 5 innings and left with a lead. However, Radbourn pitched 4 shutout innings and was more effective. Practice in the 1880s allowed for the more effective pitcher to be deemed the winning pitcher, per Pete Palmer. While Williams originally concluded that Miller was the correct winner of this game (giving him 59 wins on the season), he has recently concluded that using practices of the time Radbourn is the correct winner, and therefore has 60 wins in 1884.

Ironically, we end up back at the original 60 wins attributed to Radbourn's 1884 season all the way back in 1920, but hopefully we've learned a good deal along this path. We hope this serves as a reminder how valuable the research done by SABR members is.

In conclusion, we are now showing that Old Hoss Radbourn was credited with 60 wins in his 1884 season.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
Old Hoss Radbourne picked up a win today:

Old Hoss Radbourn: 59 or 60 Wins?

Posted by Alex Bonilla on April 10, 2019
Keen-eyed Baseball-Reference users have written us asking about an update made to the statistics of Hall of Fame pitcher Old Hoss Radbourn. In the past, we had displayed Radbourn with 59 wins in his 1884 season with Providence. However, in a recent update, Radbourn has been bumped up to 60 wins.
Before we delve into what the correct number is, let's zoom out a bit, first. It will probably surprise most baseball fans to discover that there was no league-mandated rule in place for assigning wins and losses before 1950. Wins were awarded, but they were entirely up to the discretion of the official scorer. Compounding this issue is the fact that while the leagues tracked pitcher wins for much of the Deadball Era, they made many errors, and even briefly stopped officially counting pitcher wins and losses for a few years in the 1910s as ERA was first gaining popularity. A SABR member named Frank Williams meticulously corrected the record, and his research formed the basis for the accepted totals you see today.
Williams unveiled his groundbreaking work in 1982 with the article All the Record Books Are Wrong. I'd encourage you to read the article at that link (and thank you to John Thorn for re-posting it in its entirety).
Williams was the original source for the 59 wins attributed to Radbourn in 1884. He arrived at this number by determining what practices were used at the time to determine pitcher wins and losses. Earlier record books had retroactively applied the 1950 rule to Radbourn's era and given him 60 wins as a result. However, it was discovered by Frederick Ivor-Campbell that this was done in error and that one of his 1884 wins (on July 28) should have actually been credited to his teammate Cyclone Miller.
Miller was indeed the correct winner if you applied the 1950 rule, since he pitched 5 innings and left with a lead. However, Radbourn pitched 4 shutout innings and was more effective. Practice in the 1880s allowed for the more effective pitcher to be deemed the winning pitcher, per Pete Palmer. While Williams originally concluded that Miller was the correct winner of this game (giving him 59 wins on the season), he has recently concluded that using practices of the time Radbourn is the correct winner, and therefore has 60 wins in 1884.
Ironically, we end up back at the original 60 wins attributed to Radbourn's 1884 season all the way back in 1920, but hopefully we've learned a good deal along this path. We hope this serves as a reminder how valuable the research done by SABR members is.
In conclusion, we are now showing that Old Hoss Radbourn was credited with 60 wins in his 1884 season.
 

While I’m glad baseball has its Dick Lovelady’s, today’s game also really needs more Old Hosses

  • Like 1
Posted

There’s a lot of strange in this article. 

Quote

After playing in 67 games and parts of six seasons in the Major Leagues, mostly as a designated pinch-runner, Terrance Gore got his first start on Wednesday night against the Mariners.

Gore, perhaps the fastest player on the team that also has Adalberto Mondesi and Billy Hamilton, found out he might start after Tuesday night’s game.

“I had a gallon of milk in my hand and I was leaving the clubhouse,” Gore said, “and [manager Ned Yost] said, ‘Hey, Terrance, I might start you in left tomorrow.’

“I just sat the milk down and said, ‘Oh, OK.’ Then, I thought I better go home and get a good night’s sleep.”

Yost had decided last weekend that he needed to give 35-year-old Alex Gordon a day off on the homestand. And with a tough left-hander on the mound in Yusei Kikuchi and a day game on Thursday, Yost decided Wednesday was a good time to get Gore that first MLB start in place of Gordon.

But first, Yost had to playfully engage with a reporter who he thought was challenging the decision.

“Gore has been working his tail off,” Yost said. “He’s on our team. We got to play him. There are times when I’ll pinch-run with him and I’ll have to put him in the outfield. I got to play him.

“I’m not going to sit him on an island out by himself and send him little pigeons with notes tied on their legs. He has worked hard enough to earn a start. He’s worked all three outfield positions, Alex Gordon-type work.

“And the guy is the only guy on the team hitting 1.000. Why wouldn’t I play him?”

Gore was 1-for-1 entering Wednesday night’s game after a pinch-hit single on Monday.

 

Posted

Watching the Yanks getting shelled. Good Lord the media here tomorrow is going to be full-blown apocalypse mode.

Early season baseball means very little. The Red Sox look like a dumpster fire, but I imagine they'll right the ship. I wish fans and the media could just enjoy the games. 

And damn that Altuve blast got out as fast and far as a Stanton homer. 

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, spystud13 said:

There’s a lot of strange in this article. 

 

And he goes 3-4, with 2 steals, a hr shy of the cycle, and he had two diving catches in the field. 

Edited by youdunnf'dup
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

And he goes 3-4, with 2 steals, a triple shy of the cycle, and he had two diving catches in the field. 

Ned is now gonna start him and bat him leadoff the rest of the season.  

Posted (edited)

I wonder if there’s ever been 4 consecutive hitters in any lineup in mlb history faster than the Royals 9-1-2-3 tonight (Gore, Merrifield, Hamilton, Mondesi). That’s a damn 400 meter relay team right there.

Edited by youdunnf'dup
Posted
47 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

I wonder if there’s ever been 4 consecutive hitters in any lineup in mlb history faster than the Royals 9-1-2-3 tonight (Gore, Merrifield, Hamilton, Mondesi). That’s a damn 400 meter relay team right there.

Gore goes 3/4 and makes a legit web gem in his first career start. good for him.

Posted (edited)

Wow, Seattle still has the horseshoe up their ass.  Two outs in the 9th with two on and Billy Hamilton has it in his glove and can't hold it.  It goes for a triple and both runners score to tie the game.

Edited by WBT
Posted
1 hour ago, Scraps said:

Ozzie Albies got a case of the dumbs

Signed 7 yr 35 mil.

Also gave the Braves 2 option years at $7M per.  He needs to kill his agent, because he got robbed.

Posted
30 minutes ago, WBT said:

Wow, Seattle still has the horseshoe up their ass.  Two outs in the 9th with two on and Billy Hamilton has it in his glove and can't hold it.  It goes for a triple and both runners score to tie the game.

Hope they are enjoying their run. They finish no better than third in the AL West this season. 

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Seasick Sailor said:

Hope they are enjoying their run. They finish no better than third in the AL West this season. 

Thanks, we're enjoying it.

 

Edited by MC Fresh Breath
  • Like 1
Posted
Ozzie Albies got a case of the dumbs

 

Signed 7 yr 35 mil.

Where are the Braves holding their player’s relatives hostage?

 

 

But seriously, somebody on the Braves side has to be getting to the families. That’s all I can figure...perhaps they haven’t learned their lesson from a couple of years ago?

Posted
1 hour ago, spystud13 said:

Mikie Mahtook was 0-23 this season for Det, DFA’d today. 

Is that the same Mahtook that was on LSU when we played them in the national championship, or am I thinking of someone else.

Posted
Is that the same Mahtook that was on LSU when we played them in the national championship, or am I thinking of someone else.

Yes
Posted
4 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

Also gave the Braves 2 option years at $7M per.  He needs to kill his agent, because he got robbed.

on mlb radio they theorized that it's gonna end up being tied into a braves kimbrel signing, because kimbrel and albies have the same agent.

hmm, seems legit.

Posted

you cannot hit a ball any cleaner than that. i would pay money to see that shot from behind home plate. i think giancarlo might be the only guy i've seen hit one that far, that fast. that shit was a missile.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...