Color Commentators

[sharksrog]

dk..I explained this once before...in his best of years Mel sometimes hit more homers on the road than at home

Rog -- But that is a fallacious argument. It is sort of like saying that because there are a few weeks in which the Bay Area has more days with rain than without, it isn't true that there are more days in the Bay Area without rain than with.

Or like saying that because John Bowker got off to his Giants career by hitting more early homers than Ott did, Bowker is the better home run hitter of the two.

Or like saying that because Tim Lincecum didn't walk a single batter last night, he's a control pitcher.

Or like saying that because Willie Mays started his career by going 1 for 26, he wasn't a good hitter.

Or like saying that because Buster Posey went 100 at bats with just two or three doubles among his hits, he doesn't have power.

The exception doesn't necessarily disprove the rule.

The fact is that Mel Ott hit nearly twice as many home runs at home as he hit on the road. To a very high degree of statistical certainty, he was helped by his home park.

My guess is that Mel hit more home runs in the Polo Grounds than ANY other hitter. But I'll bet there are a few handsfull of hitters who hit more on the road.

Let's look at it this way: Duke Snider hit 104 fewer homers than Mel, yet he came within five homers of Mel on the road. At home, he hit 99 fewer.

Gary Sheffield was two homers short of Mel on his career, yet he hit 59 more on the road.

Eddie Mathews hit just one more homer than Mel, yet he hit 86 more on the road than Mel did.

Willie Mays broke Mel's NL home run record and went on to hit 149 more homers than Mel. Yet Willie had only 12 more homers than Mel at home.

Are you seeing a trend here?

Let me ask you this, Don: Has there EVER been a home run hitter with say 200 or more homers who has hit as high a percentage of his homers at home as Mel did?

Now, the greatest of the greats would have been great almost no matter WHERE they played. And Mel was truly one of the very greatest.

But it is highly unlikely (almost impossible) he would have hit as many homers as he hit had he played in another home park.

Todd Helton has played his home games in what is likely the biggest hitters' park in major league history, and even HE didn't hit as high a percentage of home runs at home.

The comment Kruk and Kuip made was certainly not out of line.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=1#10556#ixzz2SADn3Vev

[donk]

May 2, 2013 15:53:51 GMT -5 sharksrog said:

dk..I explained this once before...in his best of years Mel sometimes hit more homers on the road than at home

Rog -- But that is a fallacious argument. It is sort of like saying that because there are a few weeks in which the Bay Area has more days with rain than without, it isn't true that there are more days in the Bay Area without rain than with.

dk..this is the most assinine argument you have ever put to print...what I wrote was 100% fact...some of his best years he had more road homers that home blasts...that is a fact....his road home runs tailed off when he aged and was saddled with managing the club...however, I believe his road BA was higher than at home...I resent the implication that the only reason he hit homers was because he played in the Polo Grounds and the Polo Grounds had short fences...ask Vic Wertz about the short fences....the ball park had the deepest fences in baseball sloping away from the short foul poles...how many balls do you see go into the stands at the foul pole compared by theers lost in 440' power alleys or 505 CF...

Or like saying that because John Bowker got off to his Giants career by hitting more early homers than Ott did, Bowker is the better home run hitter of the two.

Or like saying that because Tim Lincecum didn't walk a single batter last night, he's a control pitcher.

Or like saying that because Willie Mays started his career by going 1 for 26, he wasn't a good hitter.

Or like saying that because Buster Posey went 100 at bats with just two or three doubles among his hits, he doesn't have power.

The exception doesn't necessarily disprove the rule.

The fact is that Mel Ott hit nearly twice as many home runs at home as he hit on the road. To a very high degree of statistical certainty, he was helped by his home park.

dk..only a stat nerd would take that as a certainty..my statement was that during his prime years he hit almost as many homers on the road as he did in NY....he played the last 7 years as a playing manager...might have something to do with the inbalance....I don't argue the facts, I argue the implication that he needed short fences to hit home runs...that is the lie...he hit more road homers during his career than any other hitter of that era....that is a fact...

My guess is that Mel hit more home runs in the Polo Grounds than ANY other hitter. But I'll bet there are a few handsfull of hitters who hit more on the road.

Let's look at it this way: Duke Snider hit 104 fewer homers than Mel, yet he came within five homers of Mel on the road. At home, he hit 99 fewer.

Gary Sheffield was two homers short of Mel on his career, yet he hit 59 more on the road.

Eddie Mathews hit just one more homer than Mel, yet he hit 86 more on the road than Mel did.

Willie Mays broke Mel's NL home run record and went on to hit 149 more homers than Mel. Yet Willie had only 12 more homers than Mel at home.

Are you seeing a trend here?

dk..the trend is that you refuse to be able to read what I wrote...all your examples are guys that came after Mel Ott...I said during his era....You rush off to judgement to try to diss me but please look what I said.....

Let me ask you this, Don: Has there EVER been a home run hitter with say 200 or more homers who has hit as high a percentage of his homers at home as Mel did?

dk..I really don't care...it is a weak stat....tell me one thing, was there ever a home run hitter who managed a ball team for 7 years of his playing career and hit over 500 homers....has there ever been a 500 home run hitter who managed any games during his career.....tell me one thing, do you think managing a team might have some effect on a guys playing stats?

Now, the greatest of the greats would have been great almost no matter WHERE they played. And Mel was truly one of the very greatest.

But it is highly unlikely (almost impossible) he would have hit as many homers as he hit had he played in another home park.

dk..once more you a shooting off your mouth about something that is impossible to prove....I would guess just the opposite as you...with the much shorter power alleys and CF, I would guess that Mel would have hit more home runs in his career...but it is a guess...the only difference is that you look at stats and say no...I look at how he hit and say maybe....

Todd Helton has played his home games in what is likely the biggest hitters' park in major league history, and even HE didn't hit as high a percentage of home runs at home.

dk..has Hilton been playing since 1926-1947??

The comment Kruk and Kuip made was certainly not out of line.

dk..the implication was wrong, not the statement...he was talking to guys that never saw Ott and know very little about him....if he had said helped with the short fences at the pole, but hurt by the long fences in the power alleys...I would like it much better....and still no one tells me what was broadcast about Mel that I missed seeing...


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=1#10556#ixzz2SADn3Vev

[sharksrog]

Rog -- Let me ask you this, Don: Has there EVER been a home run hitter with say 200 or more homers who has hit as high a percentage of his homers at home as Mel did?

dk..I really don't care...it is a weak stat....tell me one thing, was there ever a home run hitter who managed a ball team for 7 years of his playing career and hit over 500 homers....has there ever been a 500 home run hitter who managed any games during his career.....tell me one thing, do you think managing a team might have some effect on a guys playing stats?

Rog -- Don, Mel was a fabulous player. As I mentioned, he was barely 17 when he first played in the majors. He was a star by 19 and a superstar by 20. As you mentioned, he was a player-manager for many years, and while wouldn't necessarily have a deleterious effect on his play, it certainly couldn't have helped.

I happen to think he is among the top 50 or so players ever.

But the fact remains that he hit so many more homers at home than on the road and over such a long career, that it is almost a certainly that power-wise, at least, he was aided considerably by the short right field fences.

I hadn't thought about it until just now, but the Polo Grounds was a marvelous park to hit in for a pull hitter. Short fences on the pull, and more than enough room straight away for balls to fall in for hits there.

Overall, the park appears to have played rather fairly between pitcher and batter. But the park would indeed have been death to a gap to gap hitter, while a hitter with pull power -- which Ott must have been -- would enjoy great benefits.

One thing that Mel did extremely well -- and which wouldn't be affected much by park affect -- is draw walks. He got a lot done at the plate without make a lot of outs.

So Mel was one great player. I would think when he retired, he would have been one of the top 10 hitters in NL history -- and probably top five. But the fact remains that he hit FAR more homers at home than on the road. Probably more than any batter in history.

As you point out, player-managing couldn't have helped him. Playing a quarter of his career during the war years likely did.

Can't we just agree that Mel was a fabulous player who doesn't appear to be overrated -- but hit so many more homers at home than on the road that he was likely helped to a decent extent by his home park.

Just because a player was aided by his home park doesn't mean he wasn't great. We've already discussed a player ad infinitum.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=2#10582#ixzz2SBpNWoEt

[allenreed]

has there ever been a 500 home run hitter who managed any games during his career

Allen- Frank Robinson.

[donk]

May 3, 2013 12:52:48 GMT -5 allenreed said:

has there ever been a 500 home run hitter who managed any games during his career

Allen- Frank Robinson.


dk..right, 2 years and his homers dropped from 22 as a player to 9 and 2 as a player-manager....Mel remained an all star during the first5 years as a manager and then his eyes went bad and he did very little his last 2 years...They have been many player=managers in the old days...some HOF players....Robinson, Ott, Terry, Frisch, Hornsby, McGraw, Boudreau, Cronin,

[allenreed]

Think that could have been becuse he was approaching 40 and played in less than 50 games each year?
Not chastizing Mel here. You asked a question and I answered it. Just (as usual) doing my best to fill the substantial gaps in your knowledge.

[donk]

May 3, 2013 16:16:11 GMT -5 allenreed said:

Think that could have been becuse he was approaching 40 and played in less than 50 games each year?
Not chastizing Mel here. You asked a question and I answered it. Just (as usual) doing my best to fill the substantial gaps in your knowledge.

dk..what has that got to do with the price of butter...I knew exactly how many games that Frank played....and Mel played even fewer in his last 2 years...35 v 85...I tried to show you what could happen when a player takes a dual role as a manager, too...Frank was older than Mel....you are really a piece of crap......

[sharksrog]

Allen- Frank Robinson.


dk..right, 2 years and his homers dropped from 22 as a player to 9 and 2 as a player-manager....Mel remained an all star during the first5 years as a manager and then his eyes went bad and he did very little his last 2 years...

Rog -- Come on, Don. You asked if anyone (else) had hit 500 homers and managed. Allen gave you the answer: Frank Robinson.

Now you're alibi-ing for Ott, who really doesn't need to be defended.

It may be ironic in this context, but when I was considering where Mel ranked among all-time right fielders, it was clear that Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron were one-two. But then I wondered whether #3 was Mel Ott -- or Frank Robinson.

Depends in part, I guess, on whether one considers Frank a right or left fielder. Frank played about three games in right field for every two in left, so I guess that would make him a right fielder.

But in 1958 when Frank won his sole Gold Glove, he played 85 games in left, 55 games in center -- and 11 games at third base! Over his full career, Frank played only 101 games in center and 13 at third.

So how did the Reds reward Frank for his outfield Gold Glove? They moved him to first base the following season, where he played 125 of his 305 career games at the initial hassock.

Coincidentally, Ott played 256 games at third, 6 games at second, 140 games in center, and 30 games in left.

Obviously Ott was extremely strong, but at 5-foot-9, 170 pounds, he would be a small player in today's game. In fact, that's not too far off Tim Lincecum's dimensions.

But, please, let's not forget that we can point out what might be considered negatives about Ott without trying to take away from his greatness. That is something we can't do, even if we tried.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=2#10594#ixzz2SHK9V52v

[sharksrog]

dk..I explained this once before...in his best of years Mel sometimes hit more homers on the road than at home

Rog -- But that is a fallacious argument. It is sort of like saying that because there are a few weeks in which the Bay Area has more days with rain than without, it isn't true that there are more days in the Bay Area without rain than with.

dk..this is the most assinine argument you have ever put to print...what I wrote was 100% fact...

Rog -- Absolutely. But you were trying to use your 100% fact to disprove that Mel hit far more homers at home than on the road, when in fact that is indisputable.

Don -- some of his best years he had more road homers that home blasts...that is a fact....

Rog -- Once again you are correct. In his top home run season, he hit 22 on the road and 20 at home. That certainly does nothing to disprove that he hit 63% of his career homers at home.

Don -- his road home runs tailed off when he aged and was saddled with managing the club...

Rog -- Amazing, wasn't it, that being saddled with managing affected his power only on the road and not at home. Incredibly, of his last 142 home runs, Mel hit 108 at home and only 34 on the road.

One could make an argument (I have no idea how true it would be.) that when Mel lost his power late in his career, he could still hit the ball over the short right field fence at the Polo Ground, but didn't have enough power to consistenly hit it out in the fair stadia on the road.

Don -- however, I believe his road BA was higher than at home...

Rog -- You are correct -- and that is bit unusual for a player. One could argue that Mel may have tried too hard to pull the ball in the Polo Grounds in order to take advantage of the right field fence.

Once again, I don't know, and I don't believe Mel is around to ask. I'm simply saying the postulates I posed here are reasonable.

Don -- I resent the implication that the only reason he hit homers was because he played in the Polo Grounds and the Polo Grounds had short fences

Rog -- I would resent that too. I suspect when Mel retired he had more road homers than any other National Leaguer, so it's clear he had power. It is also clear that he hit FAR more homers at home than on the road -- even though as you pointed out, he hit for a higher average on the road.

It is possible -- and again, I don't really know -- that had Mel played at home somewhere else, he would have hit fewer home runs but wound up with an even higher batting average.

I think you are being overly protective of Mel, Don. When he retired, I suspect he was the best hitter in a Giants uniform there had ever been. One of the very best in the entire National League.

But the fact is that he hit 63% of his homers in the Polo Grounds. Perhaps you can come up with a different explanation how he had an even higher percentage of home homers, so to speak, than Todd Helton, when Helton had the advantage of playing in the most homer-happy of stadia.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=2#ixzz2SHNsVs6U

[sharksrog]

Rog -- The fact is that Mel Ott hit nearly twice as many home runs at home as he hit on the road. To a very high degree of statistical certainty, he was helped by his home park.

dk..only a stat nerd would take that as a certainty..

Rog -- No one took that as an absolute certainty. But only a fool would argue that it wasn't true to a high degree of statistical certainty.

Let's put it this way, Don. If you flipped a coin 511 times and it came up heads on 323 occasions, wouldn't youi have a VERY high degree of certainty that the coin wan't a fair one?

Don -- my statement was that during his prime years he hit almost as many homers on the road as he did in NY....

Rog -- If we take Mel's career through 1938, he hit 58% of his homers at home. That's more than four out of seven, and a very high rate of homers at home.

But it's not as extreme as his more than five out of eight over his full career.

Don -- he played the last 7 years as a playing manager...might have something to do with the inbalance....

Rog -- We believe that if we believe being a player manager affected his power only when he was playing on the road. Man, he must have had SOME home cookin'.

Don -- I don't argue the facts, I argue the implication that he needed short fences to hit home runs...that is the lie...

Rog -- You say it is the lie. A science major such as yourself should realize it is a truth to an extremely high statistical probablity. Your side of the argument would have us believe that when 511 flips of the coin yields 323 heads, it is a lie that the coin is probably unfair.

Don -- he hit more road homers during his career than any other hitter of that era....that is a fact...

Rog -- Yes. And one that has nothing to do with the fact that he hit far MORE homers at home than on the road.

You tried to use this same argument with Sandy Koufax. That in his five Dodger Stadium seasons Sandy was also the best pitcher on the road doesn't do anything to explain why he was so much MORE better at home than on the road.

You MUST have taken logic classes along the way to getting your engineering degree, Don. Remember back to what those classes taught you, and you will realize there is no lie involved here -- unless it is you misleading yourself with false logic.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=2#ixzz2SHToRjrV

[sharksrog]

Rog -- Let me ask you this, Don: Has there EVER been a home run hitter with say 200 or more homers who has hit as high a percentage of his homers at home as Mel did?

dk..I really don't care

Rog -- This, Don, shows perhaps more than any other comment you have made on this subject that you don't CARE about the facts, that your mind is already made up.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=2#ixzz2SHWsjlSq

[sharksrog]

My guess is that Mel hit more home runs in the Polo Grounds than ANY other hitter. But I'll bet there are a few handsfull of hitters who hit more on the road.

Let's look at it this way: Duke Snider hit 104 fewer homers than Mel, yet he came within five homers of Mel on the road. At home, he hit 99 fewer.

Gary Sheffield was two homers short of Mel on his career, yet he hit 59 more on the road.

Eddie Mathews hit just one more homer than Mel, yet he hit 86 more on the road than Mel did.

Willie Mays broke Mel's NL home run record and went on to hit 149 more homers than Mel. Yet Willie had only 12 more homers than Mel at home.

Are you seeing a trend here?

dk..the trend is that you refuse to be able to read what I wrote...

Rog -- There clearly IS a trend above. Yet you seem very hard to be trying to skirt it.

Don -- all your examples are guys that came after Mel Ott...I said during his era....You rush off to judgement to try to diss me but please look what I said.....

Rog -- I used players who had similar numbers of home runs (or similar numbers of ROAD home runs).

Perhaps you would prefer Stan Musial, whose career overlapped Mel's. Stan hit 35 more homers on the road than Mel did -- but 71 FEWER at home.

Or maybe Ralph Kiner, whose career also overlapped by a tiny bit. Ralph too had a very high percentage of his homers in home games. But even he was over 50% by only about half as much as Mel was.

Or perhaps you would prefer Rogers Hornsby, who I'm guessing held the NL home run record prior to Ott. Hornsby hit 54% of his homer at home -- or about a third as many more as Mel did.

Any other examples you would like?


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1690&page=2#ixzz2SHXLdYwI