Just thought I’d give you an idea of what OPS+! means. It obviously does not have the spread that OPS+ has.
Some all time greats, and a few not so greats…
154.4 Ruth
151.6 T Williams
147.2 Hornsby
143.6 Mantle
142.4 Gehrig
137.1 Cobb
137.0 Musial
135.6 Mize
133.6 DiMaggio
133.5 Foxx
133.4 Mays
133.1 Greenberg
133.0 Wagner
132.9 Aaron
132.8 F Robinson
131.7 Schmidt
131.1 Kiner
130.1 Lajoie
129.9 Speaker
128.7 Mathews
128.5 McCovey
126.9 Killebrew
126.0 REGGIE
123.5 Chance
123.4 Brett
123.1 Anson
123.1 E Collins
122.4 P Waner
122.1 Cepeda
122.0 Hafey
121.3 Winfield
120.9 Carew
120.8 Konetchy
120.4 J Robinson
120.0 Yastrzemski
119.9 Boggs
118.5 Bottomley
115.8 Banks
115.4 Santo
115.2 Perez
114.2 Rose
113.2 McDougald
112.9 Yount
112.0 George Kelly
109.4 Traynor
109.2 Evers
108.4 Brock
107.1 B Robinson
103.8 L Waner
103.7 Tinker
103.0 Rizzuto
98.9 Maranville
98.2 Ozzie Smith
96.5 Mazeroski
95.0 Aparicio
Not a lot of comments to make, but I like how Rose and Perez are next to each other, as are Santo and Banks. And I like how Mays, Aaron and Robinson are all bunched together.
Does this seem like a HOFer to you? The categories are Games, At Bats, Hits, Doubles, Triples, Home Runs, Walks, Batting Average, On Base Average, Slugging Percentage, Runs Scored and RBIs
085 345 094 13 3 13 18 .272 .309 .441 042 058
162 654 193 22 5 27 47 .295 .342 .468 094 100
161 629 177 37 9 22 62 .281 .346 .474 093 107
148 596 197 26 5 24 57 .331 .389 .512 107 099
157 637 179 34 7 18 43 .281 .326 .441 083 095
162 625 199 27 3 18 53 .318 .372 .458 096 086
152 611 199 44 7 33 59 .326 .385 .583 123 137
160 615 173 27 3 21 73 .281 .358 .437 087 089
161 624 147 18 4 17 59 .236 .302 .359 061 071
161 630 172 25 5 30 64 .273 .340 .471 091 107
162 606 160 14 2 26 51 .264 .321 .422 074 084
156 609 138 30 4 17 41 .227 .275 .373 056 082
063 202 049 05 3 06 17 .243 .301 .386 021 025
092 318 089 15 5 10 28 .280 .338 .453 044 049
019 046 013 01 1 01 15 .283 .459 .413 008 005
016 041 011 02 1 01 01 .268 .286 .439 005 006
001 001 000 00 0 00 00 .000 .000 .000 000 000
Totals: 2018 7789 2190 340 67 284 688 .281 .340 .451 1085 1193
A very good ball player to be sure. He would likely have between 35-40 HOF Standards points, 80-85 HOF Monitor points. Not an automatic HOFer, but he did play on 5 pennant winning teams, three as a center fielder, one each at the corner outfields. Paul O’Neill caliber player, perhaps?
Who this is, is Hugh Duffy, adjusted as if he had played in the National League in the 1980s. I haven’t talked a lot about my Great Stat, but this is what his record would look like using my equations. A lot of air is taken out of Duffy’s raw stats for two reasons: the 1890s were a huge offensive era and he played in the best hitter’s park of his time.
Just thought I’d show why I don’t rank him as high as everyone else seems to.
It takes me about an hour to do each player (about 4 minutes per season), so please don’t inundate me with requests. I just finished Tiernan. The categories are Games, At Bats, Hits, Doubles, Triple, Home Runs, Walks, BA, OBA and SLG. I didn’t do Runs and RBIs for Tiernan, as he was predominantly a leadoff or #2 hitter. I haven’t as yet figured out how to compute Runs and RBIs (to my satisfaction) all but the middle of the order type hitters. And just a side note: Walks actually includes both walks and HBP.
1887 129 477 123 15 6 19 50 .258 .328 .434
1888 133 495 152 21 6 20 76 .307 .399 .495
1889 151 591 182 24 10 27 100 .308 .408 .519
1890 160 629 198 30 12 40 75 .315 .388 .591
1891 160 598 191 36 8 37 82 .319 .401 .592
1892 123 462 134 19 6 16 49 .290 .358 .461
1893 149 555 150 22 5 26 73 .270 .355 .468
1894 132 461 103 17 5 15 50 .223 .299 .380
1895 147 541 156 21 11 24 74 .288 .374 .501
1896 162 596 180 22 9 26 86 .302 .390 .500
1897 150 583 160 30 5 22 68 .274 .350 .456
1898 106 421 106 16 7 22 48 .252 .328 .480
1899 037 140 030 04 1 03 10 .214 .267 .321
Totals
1739 6549 1865 277 91 297 841 .285 .366 .491 Tiernan
2018 7789 2190 340 67 284 688 .281 .340 .451 Duffy
Just a quick word about my Great Stat, or rather Great Stats. I baseline everything on the National League from 1982 to 1992, an eleven year period that had no expansion, no strikes, no new ball parks and no DH. What I do radically differently from others is not take from the average or replacement level, but rather from an all-star level. Every Great Stat begins with an assumption. And that is mine. I assume that a great player in 1880 or 1900 or 1920 or 1940 or 1960 would be a great player in the 1980s. Whether that is a “good” assumption or not, you can decide for yourself. I’m not going to go into detail about how I derive my formulas, but I try to take as many things as I can into consideration. I adjust for ball park, I adjust for batters not hitting against their defense (both pitching and fielding), I adjust for the timeline (tho not as greatly as most do, otherwise you end up with Wagner hitting .230 for his career). And a host of other little things that don’t really matter much. My formulas enable me to compare hitters across eras to a degree that I am fairly confident with. I have never figured out a Fielding Great Stat that I have any confidence in. My pitching Great Stat doesn’t really put, say a Bobby Mathews, in a 1980s context. It works to my satisfaction fairly well within eras, meaning that I feel very confident comparing Mathews to Mullane, Mathewson to McGinnity, Grove to Bridges, Spahn to Wynn, Seaver to Carlton, Maddux to Clemens. I think it compares well across eras, but I’m not sure I could convince anyone else it does.
Ten, fifteen years ago, I did about 400 hitters, filling up three notebooks. I moved recently and can find only one of the notebooks. The one I found has most of the super-duper superstars from the 20th century, and I may post those from time to time; but I can’t find the notebook with the 19th century stars. As I said, it’s a lot of work, work that I’m not sure I want to re-do. But I’ll do the ones that have been asked for; just give me a little time to do the work.
I just finished Fielder Jones. Again, since he batted first or second, I did not compute Runs Scored or RBIs. I also left out his two Federal League seasons. Categories are Games, At Bats, Hits, Doubles, Triples, Home Runs, Walks, BA, OBA and SLG:
1896 127 448 139 13 5 14 61 .310 .393 .455
1897 161 627 157 18 5 16 73 .250 .329 .372
1898 159 644 180 19 6 22 49 .280 .330 .430
1899 110 387 090 10 1 09 56 .233 .330 .333
1900 155 611 161 32 3 14 71 .264 .340 .394
1901 157 587 166 19 2 10 117 .283 .402 .376
1902 158 590 177 18 3 09 96 .300 .398 .386
1903 160 603 176 21 3 10 91 .292 .385 .386
1904 155 575 138 18 3 13 86 .240 .339 .350
1905 157 574 152 20 9 17 95 .265 .369 .420
1906 151 510 118 29 3 13 128 .231 .386 .376
1907 159 584 151 26 1 12 92 .259 .359 .368
1908 155 549 151 16 5 14 122 .275 .407 .399
1964 7289 1956 259 49 173 1137 .268 .367 .389
I should point out that I am NOT saying that this is what Jones would have done if he had played in the 1980s, but rather that this is EQUIVALENT to what his numbers would look like. Jones likely would not have hit 173 Home Runs, but his numbers from 1896 to 1908 would look similar to what someone would accomplish.
Let me introduce another stat tool I use. I call it “Super OPS Plus”. I take the league average SLG and add in 1.2 times OBA, which comes out to 758 for the National League from 1982-1992. Quick chart, OBA, SLG & OPS+! for the three guys I’ve done so far:
.340 .451 113.3 Duffy
.366 .491 122.7 Tiernan
.367 .389 109.4 Jones
I did one more, Joe Kelley, but I think I’ll stop there, as it’s a tedious process. Again, as Kelley was a top of the order guy, I didn’t figure Runs Scored or RBIs.
1891 014 049 011 01 01 01 002 .224 .255 .347
1892 070 240 058 09 04 05 018 .242 .295 .375
1893 156 574 149 32 07 23 078 .260 .348 .460
1894 162 609 190 42 08 27 106 .312 .414 .540
1895 161 606 173 28 09 25 087 .285 .375 .485
1896 161 605 179 35 11 26 107 .296 .402 .519
1897 156 579 179 32 05 24 077 .309 .390 .506
1898 130 484 138 19 10 21 049 .285 .351 .496
1899 154 576 152 22 07 23 071 .264 .345 .446
1900 138 494 135 24 11 20 062 .273 .354 .488
1901 142 550 148 23 07 17 055 .269 .336 .429
1902 115 413 117 30 06 12 067 .283 .383 .472
1903 120 428 124 27 03 11 058 .290 .374 .444
1904 127 471 122 27 10 10 061 .259 .344 .423
1905 094 338 084 08 04 09 036 .249 .321 .376
1906 137 527 110 24 10 13 047 .209 .274 .366
1908 076 238 060 10 01 08 035 .252 .348 .403
2113 7781 2129 393 114 275 1016 .274 .358 .459
Comparing the 4 players I did (OBA, SLG & OPS+!)
.366 .491 122.7 Tiernan
.358 .459 117.2 Kelley
.340 .451 113.3 Duffy
.367 .389 109.4 Jones
Okay, i did one more, and then I’m going to stop.
John McGraw. I combined 1903 to 1906
1891 038 130 034 04 3 04 015 .262 .338 .431
1892 084 295 079 16 1 06 032 .268 .339 .390
1893 158 556 152 11 5 16 112 .273 .395 .397
1894 156 608 164 19 6 14 098 .270 .371 .390
1895 118 450 130 14 3 10 065 .289 .379 .400
1896 028 089 023 03 1 02 013 .258 .353 .382
1897 126 449 125 18 2 10 114 .278 .425 .394
1898 150 546 166 10 7 22 110 .304 .421 .469
1899 125 437 136 14 2 12 113 .311 .453 .435
1900 113 368 116 12 3 10 117 .315 .480 .446
1901 088 264 080 14 5 07 086 .303 .474 .473
1902 063 188 044 03 1 05 059 .234 .417 .340
3456 026 027 007 01 0 00 008 .259 .429 .296
1273 4407 1256 139 39 118 942 .285 .411 .415
Short, brilliant batting career. Very short, only 6 seasons when he would have gone to the plate 502 times. His totals look a little like Tim Raines, if Rock had retired after the 1988 season. McGraw’s OPS+! is 119.8.
Okay, I lied. I did three more, Van Haltren, Ryan and Delahanty. I’ll just give their career totals, along with Tiernan, Kelley and Duffy. The number after the name is the OPS+!.
2150 8269 2526 545 106 340 933 .305 .376 .520 Delahanty 128.1
2301 8795 2472 306 97 282 943 .281 .351 .434 Van Haltren 112.8
2368 9106 2467 482 92 333 972 .271 .341 .454 Ryan 113.9
2018 7789 2190 340 67 284 688 .281 .340 .451 Duffy 113.3
2113 7781 2129 393 114 275 1016 .274 .358 .459 Kelley 117.2
1739 6549 1865 277 91 297 841 .285 .366 .491 Tiernan 122.7
Just me, but I rank these six in this order: Delahanty, Ryan, Van Haltren, Kelley, Tiernan, Duffy
Oh, what the heck, I’ll list the three new ones entire ledger
Van Haltren
1887 057 208 036 05 00 04 20 .173 .246 .255
1888 096 368 100 12 10 13 33 .272 .332 .426
1889 160 612 187 21 07 24 87 .306 .392 .480
1890 112 415 120 08 05 15 45 .289 .359 .441
1891 162 630 194 18 09 27 66 .308 .374 .494
1892 158 631 183 27 08 22 63 .290 .354 .463
1893 153 598 174 16 06 15 75 .291 .370 .413
1894 162 569 150 20 02 15 55 .264 .329 .385
1895 161 591 167 21 10 24 68 .283 .357 .474
1896 162 637 183 20 12 24 66 .287 .354 .469
1897 153 621 171 22 05 20 52 .275 .331 .424
1898 161 658 190 30 10 28 54 .289 .343 .492
1899 161 624 158 23 02 14 72 .253 .330 .364
1900 162 628 177 31 04 16 61 .282 .345 .420
1901 155 585 185 24 04 14 75 .316 .394 .443
1902 030 105 025 01 02 03 21 .238 .365 .371
1903 096 315 072 07 01 04 30 .229 .296 .295
2301 8795 2472 306 97 282 943 .281 .351 .434
Jimmy Ryan
1885 004 018 007 02 0 00 02 .389 .450 .500
1886 108 410 102 20 5 11 20 .249 .284 .402
1887 161 611 149 26 5 20 76 .244 .328 .401
1888 154 631 201 42 7 30 63 .319 .380 .550
1889 161 648 200 32 9 37 75 .309 .380 .557
1890 139 516 153 33 3 16 64 .297 .374 .465
1891 140 560 151 27 9 25 62 .270 .342 .484
1892 141 537 164 26 6 26 59 .305 .374 .521
1893 105 396 103 25 3 11 62 .260 .360 .422
1894 130 527 142 32 3 12 48 .269 .330 .410
1895 132 497 125 20 4 16 56 .252 .327 .404
1896 157 570 136 27 6 14 54 .239 .304 .381
1897 160 580 144 34 9 24 62 .248 .321 .462
1898 153 605 170 34 9 26 64 .281 .350 .496
1899 133 541 138 21 5 17 46 .255 .313 .407
1900 117 437 111 26 3 14 38 .254 .314 .423
1902 141 528 154 30 4 17 78 .292 .383 .460
1903 132 494 117 25 2 17 43 .237 .298 .399
2368 9106 2467 482 92 333 972 .271 .341 .454
I might add, he elected to leave the ML in 1901 to play with St Paul for more money. It might have padded his numbers just a nudge or two, getting him to 2500 games, 2600 hits, 500 doubles, little things that help his HOF Monitor and Standards numbers.
Ed Delahanty
1888 091 353 074 15 01 05 015 .210 .242 .300
1889 070 288 077 14 02 05 015 .267 .304 .382
1890 142 571 157 27 08 21 039 .275 .321 .461
1891 150 592 149 23 06 18 045 .252 .305 .402
1892 129 484 145 36 12 21 028 .300 .338 .554
1893 161 651 214 41 08 38 062 .329 .387 .591
1894 142 555 181 34 08 22 066 .326 .398 .535
1895 141 550 180 45 05 26 094 .327 .425 .569
1896 153 584 186 49 10 31 078 .318 .399 .596
1897 156 599 191 40 08 28 075 .319 .395 .553
1898 156 582 180 38 06 28 079 .309 .392 .540
1899 154 589 204 58 05 27 060 .346 .407 .599
1900 151 598 172 33 06 18 058 .288 .351 .453
1901 161 598 189 40 10 25 085 .316 .401 .542
1902 144 505 173 41 10 23 100 .343 .451 .600
1903 049 170 054 11 01 04 024 .318 .402 .465
Two things about Delahanty…
1 Take a look at his rookie year. We often talk about Mike Schmidt as having the worst rookie season for a HOFer. Delahandy rivals that. Schmidt’s slash numbers are 196/326/373 in 132 games. Delahanty in 91 games went 210/242/300.
2. Bill often gets asked about what happened to Delahanty in ’91, just looking at the raw stats. Looking at his adjusted numbers here, I think the better question is what happened in 1892. What did he learn over the winter/spring?
I forget where I read it, a BJames Historical Abstract probably, but some old timer compared DiMaggio as the second coming of Delahanty. Here’s the two of them using my formulas…
2150 8269 2526 545 106 340 933 .305 .376 .520 Delahanty
2252 8837 2756 439 136 490 944 .312 .378 .559 DiMaggio (making reasonable guesses for ’43-’45)
DiMaggio is clearly better, but it is in the neighborhood.
Bob Gregory's Gallery of Renown 