Page 1 of 1

Bill Buckner

Posted: Mon May 27, 2019 4:20 pm
by Pruitt
69 Years Old

Such a shame that he is only remembered for the one thing.

20 solid years in the majors.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Mon May 27, 2019 4:49 pm
by mister d
They should put Dave Stapleton in the casket instead.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Mon May 27, 2019 6:31 pm
by sancarlos
Pruitt wrote: Mon May 27, 2019 4:20 pm 69 Years Old

Such a shame that he is only remembered for the one thing.

20 solid years in the majors.
Well said

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 8:58 am
by Nonlinear FC
ESPN's chiron pissed me off. Guy had an amazing career.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 10:12 am
by mister d
I know its not the T or the P (and I'm just assuming we have no friends or relatives of the Buckners here), but he really didn't. He had a very long career.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 10:38 am
by EnochRoot
mister d wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 10:12 am I know its not the T or the P (and I'm just assuming we have no friends or relatives of the Buckners here), but he really didn't. He had a very long career.
His chance of realizing something truly special went up in smoke when he suffered a debilitating ankle injury in ‘75.

No way of knowing, but when you realize how often he made contact (and how low his OBP was considering), I’m guessing his exit velocity got sapped something significant,

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 10:39 am
by Ryan
He played with Jim Bunning and Phil Plantier. That's long.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 11:00 am
by mister d
If you like WAR, he's just better than half as good as the next lowest career WAR in the Last Half Century 10,000+ PA Club. Who wants to guess who that not-quite-double Buckner hitter is?

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 11:07 am
by L-Jam3
I'm only guessing by his similarity scores on BR, but
[+] spoiler
Steve Garvey
? And for the record, I don't think his comp is anywhere close to Hall-worthy either.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 11:07 am
by brian
mister d wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 11:00 am If you like WAR, he's just better than half as good as the next lowest career WAR in the Last Half Century 10,000+ PA Club. Who wants to guess who that not-quite-double Buckner hitter is?
Just looked it up and it's impressive in its own way that a dude who played for that long could have that low of a WAR.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 11:08 am
by Nonlinear FC
Amazing might not be the right descriptor... Remarkable is probably about right.

Also note, I didn't say he was a HOF'er.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 11:10 am
by L-Jam3
Hey. Scott Sanderson died about a month and a half ago, as per the home page for BR. I missed that one. #RememberingSomeGuys

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 11:23 am
by mister d
L-Jam3 wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 11:07 amAnd for the record, I don't think his comp is anywhere close to Hall-worthy either.
Its not your guess and I agree the comp isn't HoF worthy but ...

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 11:29 am
by Steve of phpBB
L-Jam3 wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 11:10 am Hey. Scott Sanderson died about a month and a half ago, as per the home page for BR. I missed that one. #RememberingSomeGuys
Yeah, both Sanderson and Buckner hit me pretty hard.

I think the amazing thing about Buckner was how long he lasted considering how badly he was injured (and I think multiple times). When he came to the Cubs in 77, he was already pretty gimpy. But from 80 to 83, he played in almost every game, and had a 116 OPS+.

Plus I have a feeling that if the baseball world knew the value of a walk back then, he would have taken a lot more of them and improved his OBP and his resulting stats. He had that good of an eye.

(Somehow he managed to lead the league in assists from 1B four times from 82 through 86.)

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 2:03 pm
by Rex
mister d wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 11:00 am If you like WAR, he's just better than half as good as the next lowest career WAR in the Last Half Century 10,000+ PA Club. Who wants to guess who that not-quite-double Buckner hitter is?
That's awesome.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 2:11 pm
by brian
Rex wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 2:03 pm
mister d wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 11:00 am If you like WAR, he's just better than half as good as the next lowest career WAR in the Last Half Century 10,000+ PA Club. Who wants to guess who that not-quite-double Buckner hitter is?
That's awesome.
So who was it?

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 2:15 pm
by mister d

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 2:17 pm
by mister d
If you expand to all-time 10,000+ PA, you get the same bottom two with 85 total members and a pretty interesting look at Bobby Abreu versus David Ortiz.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 2:41 pm
by A_B

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 2:51 pm
by Steve of phpBB
mister d wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 2:17 pm If you expand to all-time 10,000+ PA, you get the same bottom two with 85 total members and a pretty interesting look at Bobby Abreu versus David Ortiz.
I'm probably missing something obvious, but what is the logic behind docking a player 1.5 WAR per year for playing DH, a position that by definition doesn't require defense? Was Ortiz really that much worse at not playing defense as others who didn't play defense as DHs?

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 3:12 pm
by EnochRoot
Probably because WAR makes adjustments for defensive capability, down to the position they play.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 3:15 pm
by Steve of phpBB
EnochRoot wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 3:12 pm Probably because WAR makes adjustments for defensive capability, down to the position they play.
Sure. But I don't see how Ortiz not playing defense cost his team 1.5 wins per year over a replacement designated hitter, who also would have not played defense.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 3:29 pm
by mister d
Who are you comparing Ortiz to here?

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 3:30 pm
by EnochRoot
Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 3:15 pm
EnochRoot wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 3:12 pm Probably because WAR makes adjustments for defensive capability, down to the position they play.
Sure. But I don't see how Ortiz not playing defense cost his team 1.5 wins per year over a replacement designated hitter, who also would have not played defense.
No, I don't think the replacement level player plays any particular position. It's just a definition of a bare-minimum skillset at anominal cost to help the team to a 120 loss season. Or something.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 4:22 pm
by Steve of phpBB
mister d wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 3:29 pm Who are you comparing Ortiz to here?
No one in particular, just looking at where he is on the WAR list with a career 140 wRC+ over 10,000 PAs.

(So I guess I'm comparing him to everyone else on that career WAR list.)

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 6:17 pm
by DaveInSeattle

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 7:33 pm
by mister d
Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 4:22 pmNo one in particular, just looking at where he is on the WAR list with a career 140 wRC+ over 10,000 PAs.

(So I guess I'm comparing him to everyone else on that career WAR list.)
I think I look at it the other way. Here's the 2004 Red Sox; is it in any way "fair" that David Ortiz is considered 4.2 win player to Manny Ramirez's 3.3 when Ramirez has slightly better offensive numbers and almost the exact same PAs?

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 7:42 pm
by EdRomero
Good article on him with more impressive info about his strikeout numbers: https://joeposnanski.com/billy-buck/
posnanski wrote:In 1980, the year he led the league in batting, he came to the plate 615 times. He struck out 18 of them.

Bryce Harper has struck out 19 times in the last two weeks.

Joey Gallo struck out 207 times in 2018.

Bill Buckner struck out 205 times in the 1970s. The whole decade.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 7:56 pm
by brian
Hasn’t the last half century of baseball scholarship proven that a strikeout is not that devastating of a result and the ability to not strike out - while impressive - not an especially important skill in the modern game?

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 8:09 pm
by EdRomero
That article kind of addresses it
That attitude, I suppose, is the big difference — for many players, for most players, the strikeout is an ordinary out now, no more or less damaging than an infield fly, better in many cases than a ground ball hit directly to an infielder. This is technically true — and always was true — but it only took hold as a universal philosophy in the last couple of decades.
It's impressive that he was the best at something that most batters valued when he played, but I like looking at it as a cool statistical thing comparing eras.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:22 am
by Steve of phpBB
mister d wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 7:33 pm
Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 4:22 pmNo one in particular, just looking at where he is on the WAR list with a career 140 wRC+ over 10,000 PAs.

(So I guess I'm comparing him to everyone else on that career WAR list.)
I think I look at it the other way. Here's the 2004 Red Sox; is it in any way "fair" that David Ortiz is considered 4.2 win player to Manny Ramirez's 3.3 when Ramirez has slightly better offensive numbers and almost the exact same PAs?
I guess if Ramirez played below average in the field, thus costing his team runs over what a replacement left fielder would have done, yes.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:42 am
by mister d
brian wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 7:56 pm Hasn’t the last half century of baseball scholarship proven that a strikeout is not that devastating of a result and the ability to not strike out - while impressive - not an especially important skill in the modern game?
I think its more that its an almost universal trade-off to get power than it not being a valuable skill. Dimaggio and Pujols not striking out is pretty insane. Buckner not striking out is ... fine.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:44 am
by mister d
Steve of phpBB wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:22 amI guess if Ramirez played below average in the field, thus costing his team runs over what a replacement left fielder would have done, yes.
But part of the reason Ramirez is in the field is because Ortiz is even less capable. I'm not even sure how you'd work it out mathematically, but bad should still be preferable to absent when it comes to something outside the player's control.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:48 am
by Steve of phpBB
mister d wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:44 am
Steve of phpBB wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:22 amI guess if Ramirez played below average in the field, thus costing his team runs over what a replacement left fielder would have done, yes.
But part of the reason Ramirez is in the field is because Ortiz is even less capable. I'm not even sure how you'd work it out mathematically, but bad should still be preferable to absent when it comes to something outside the player's control.
Yeah, I see that. On the other hand, if a second baseman is forced to play shortstop because of injuries or roster construction, and does so badly, he still gets dinged for bad performance.

Who knows.

Re: Bill Buckner

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:56 am
by mister d
Yeah. I feel like I'm trying to separate the actual results from the player's responsibility for those results. Or something.