Todd Helton: Fighting the Media Bias
by ShadowPenguin on Sep 30, 2009 4:26 PM MDT
Email
PrintSo, here goes my first FanPost, hopefully I have done this well enough to meet the requirements ;-)
Joe Posnanski wrote an article glorifying Chipper Jones.
Why do I care? Because it says Chipper is a first-ballot Hall of Famer. It then goes on to glorify Chipper's achievement of doing better than .300/.400/.500 in playing over 2000 games. Only 14 players in MLB history have done that, most of them in the Hall. Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig, Stan Musial, Ty Cobb, Rogers Hornsby, Tris Speaker, Mel Ott, and Harry Heilmann. These 10 are in the HoF. Also listed are Frank Thomas, Manny Ramirez, and Edgar Martinez, but who knows how they'll be judged for the HoF. Anyway, fair enough, let's consider Chipper a HoFer.
Anyway, the real reason for this? Todd Helton. Todd and Chipper have many parallels. They are consistently great players. They have long careers with one team. They've battled for batting titles, silver sluggers, and have been voted to 5 (Todd) and 6 (Chipper) all-star games.
Chipper's career line: .308/.407/.542 in 16 seasons.
Todd's career line: .328/.427/.566 in 13 seasons.
However, Todd is just over 1800 games played, he needs 200 more to join the previously mentioned list.
Must he pass 2000 games to become the 15th player on that list, before he starts getting HoF respect? Assuming he does as bad as his worst season for 200 more games (I took his injury plagued 2008 season stats for this). We end up adding 200 games, 867 PAs, 718 ABs, 190 hits, 38 doubles, 17 homers, 70 RBI, 146 walks, and 120 Ks. Todd's line ends up .321/.423/.566 (SLG% seems weird, the numbers for total bases don't add up...)
So even if Todd Helton falls apart these next 2 seasons, his numbers still dwarf Chipper's numbers.
Is this more LOLCORZ bias?
Let's look at some splits, remembering that the humidor era began in 2002.
Chipper's Home splits: .317/.416/.564
Chipper's Away splits: .299/.397/.520
Todd's Home splits: .361/.458/.642
Todd's Away splits: .294/.395/.489
Todd's away splits are still somewhat comparable to Chipper's, but he absolutely blows him out of the water at home. LOLCORZ! However, Todd has spent 8 years in "Humidor Coors", and only 5 before. In fact, every year of Todd's career, he has hit over .330 at Coors (except 2008), and over .360 6 times. 4 times he's hit over .300 on the road (5 if he manages .416 in LA this weekend). Not to mention he has been in the .280 range on the road many times.
Chipper's year-to-year stats are much harder to trend. He has seasons around .310 home, .290 away, but others where he hits better on the road by 30-40 points. One season where he nearly hit .400 at home. It really doesn't average out too well.
The most telling thing is this. Todd only has 1 season below .300, and that was his injury shortened 2008. Chipper has dropped below .300 5 times in his career (only 1 appears to be injury related). Also, Todd has gold gloves, Chipper has none! Chipper does have a WS ring, and a MVP award. Maybe we can fix that WS ring this year!
Is the only reason Chipper is glorified because he played on the Braves who made the playoffs every year during the 90s?
I think this definitely has something to do with it. His teams were successful, therefore he got more exposure, so the media likes him more. TBS exposed the Braves to a large portion of the country, while we barely see the Rox on nationally televised games. Chipper played on the team of the 90s while Todd toiled away in the Rockies forgettable early 2000s era.
Basically, they're both good players, but we still have to fight the media and Coors field biases that exist.
Bleh, just had to rant about how ridiculous the disparity is. These last couple seasons are at least starting to legitimize Coors Field and the Rockies, and change perceptions. Hopefully it gets fully corrected by the time Todd retires and we start thinking about getting him into the Hall!
Eat. Drink. Be Merry. But the above FanPost does not necessarily reflect the attitudes, opinions, or views of Purple Row's staff (unless, of course, it's written by the staff [and even then, it still might not]).
16 comments
|
8 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great Post
I ahve always considered the two to be the same caliber of player it is good to see that it has proof even in the statistics. With the added bonus that Helton might have a little bit of an edge on Chipper.
Dex Knows
I love him
and he deserves more than he gets. These stats and his personality are the reasons I have spent the last 12 years collecting 550+ Todd Helton Baseball Cards. Keep swinging big guy you are the man.
"We made too many wrong mistakes." ~Yogi Berra
"The ballplayer who loses his head, who can't keep his cool, is worse than no ballplayer at all." ~Lou Gehrig
JFK
Excellent post!
Great work… I certainly think that Todd deserves the Hall, and your number crunching bears that out. Let’s hope he stays hot in LA to finish out the season over .300 on the road! The more attention the Rockies get the better Todd’s chances are as the whole country gets a chance to see the awesome brand of baseball being played in Lodo, and by the Rockies on the road.
Again great post, it has become intimidating to post Fanposts here and you really hit one out!
"I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else." - W. Churchill
¡Vamos Rocosos!
me and my cubs fan roommate fight about the LOLCORZ all the time
sigh….reputations never die…
if you're reading this, it means my undying support for your team will result in its failure.
Again with this?
The analyses that put Todd’s case on the bubble at best are quite a bit more sophisticated than “LOLCORZ” or anything people have been putting up thus far in these threads.
The fact of the matter is that the run environment at Coors during Helton’s peak was hugely inflated, so the assessment of the value of Helton’s stats needs to be adjusted accordingly. There are plenty of analyses available on the net detailing the assessment. Take a look at them. If you disagree, feel free to post a counter-analysis. We just went through one a couple months ago.
One reason why Chipper’s career is so highly regarded is that he’s put up those numbers as a 3rd baseman, not as a 1B. Outside of context, Chipper and Todd are close in rate stats, with Chipper being a little better. Chipper also has 1500 more plate appearances than Todd. So, slightly better player in terms of rate stats, longer career thus far, more difficult defensive position—together that means a lot.
Helton has had a pretty short career thus far. If he keeps playing well into his late 30’s, his HoF case will improve. Remain calm, take the chip off your shoulder.
Leave Dexter alone! You're lucky he even performs for you!
I guess I feel like Helton being such a good 1B
kind of puts his play at a different premium than a DH who stands on 1B and lets grounders float away
EXECUTE: It's the Clutch thing to do
by Andrew Martin on Oct 1, 2009 11:57 PM MDT up reply actions
that is to say his 1B is better than just 1B in general.
EXECUTE: It's the Clutch thing to do
by Andrew Martin on Oct 1, 2009 11:58 PM MDT up reply actions
How much defensive impact does a 1B have?
From what I’ve seen, 1st basemen don’t have a huge defensive impact due to the comparative lack of difficult chances. Even with scooping throws included. So, compare him to all those other guys. Is it enough to make up for the fact they there a numbers of guy who have an edge in rate stats and in playing time? You’re PR’s numbers guy, so you’re in a position to make Todd’s case.
At any rate, I also don’t see why so many find it so surprising that a guy who’s basically played 12 seasons doesn’t yet have a strong HoF case. To make the case for Helton now, you’d have to do it on his peak, and his peak just doesn’t stand out for a 1st basemen in his era; that is, when you’re comparing him to other HoF candidates from his time. I mean, take his peak of 2000-2004, and compare it to Frank Thomas’s first 7752 PA (the length of Todd’s career thus far). The rate stats are pretty close. Helton’s got to make up an awful lot on defense to make up for things like that.
Maybe Frank Thomas is a bad example because he moved to DH fairly early, and you assign just a huge number of demerits to a DH (enough to do away with that difference in offense?). You could almost do the same thing for Bagwell, and he was a good fielder and base runner. Does the defensive difference make Todd equal to Thome? Doesn’t seem so at first glance.
Leave Dexter alone! You're lucky he even performs for you!
BTW, I don't think this means we should love him any less
Todd means the world to the Rockies. He’s amazing to watch. Even now that he’s turned 36, this is the guy you want up when you need a hit, he’s executes such a good approach at the plate. His HoF case shouldn’t change any of this.
Leave Dexter alone! You're lucky he even performs for you!
Look, if Jim Rice made it...
EXECUTE: It's the Clutch thing to do
by Andrew Martin on Oct 2, 2009 4:59 PM MDT up reply actions
"Helton is so bad, let's make another really crappy decision and let him in"
In other words. I hate those HoF arguments. “Tommy So-and-so” is the worst player in the HoF, and Todd’s better, so he belongs."
No, sometimes voters make bad choices.
Leave Dexter alone! You're lucky he even performs for you!
it was a joke
You can’t just throw stats at the BBWAA and expect those dinosaurs to have any idea what they’re talking about, unless it’s a major milestone like 500 HR or 3000 hits
EXECUTE: It's the Clutch thing to do
by Andrew Martin on Oct 4, 2009 9:10 PM MDT up reply actions
I don't think that the post was a "chip on shoulder" thing at all
I, on the other hand, do approach this issue with a chip on my shoulder. I have read countless analyses of Todd Helton’s Hall candidacy, and damn few of them are more sophisticated than LOLCORZ. In fact, the most “sophisticated” that they get is to bring up home/road splits.
If someone legitimately doesn’t believe that Todd Helton is a Hall of Fame player, I have absolutely no problem with that, so long as there is sound reasoning to the argument. I have yet to hear one argument that lends any legitimacy to the side that disagrees with me.
For the record, I don’t believe that there is necessarily a bias per se against Rockies players so much as there is an ignorance about the real impacts of Coors Field. I will never dispute the fact that it is a tremendous offensive park, and in the pre-humidor days, it was probably the best offensive park ever built.
When it comes to Todd Helton’s Hall of Fame candidacy, though, I’ve been waiting for the past five years to hear someone – anyone – come up with an argument that doesn’t start with, “Well, he plays in Coors Field…”. So? That doesn’t make him any less of a player.
One thing I would quibble with in your post, FooMan, is the point about Helton needing more time. Not that I don’t think that his case will be bettered with more time (which is why baseball’s infatuation with numbers can really bother me), but I just don’t see how that makes that much of a difference. Helton has been a great player for 12 years. This isn’t a one-year wonder we’re talking about. If Albert Pujols retired today, he’d be a 1st-ballot Hall of Famer, and deservedly so. Obviously, they’re different players, but at some point, the argument about the length of a player’s career just doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe that’s my Broncos love for Terrell Davis sneaking in.
"You were born to be a player. You were meant to be here. This moment is yours." -- Coach Herb Brooks' pregame speech prior to the Miracle on Ice
We've been through this before
In this fanpost thread among others. I don’t know if Jaffe’s article is behind the BPro pay wall now but it’s based on a lot more than mere splits.
When you say this:
"Well, he plays in Coors Field…". So? That doesn’t make him any less of a player
I’d agree, as long as you’re also NOT saying that Helton’s value as a player = his raw stats. There’s nothing about playing in Coors field that magically makes a player worse. IT DOES mean the raw stats need to be put into context, but they always do.
As for playing time, baseball HoF voters have used different criteria from football HoF voters, which makes sense given the career lengths. Career length carries a lot of weight. If the player doesn’t have that career length, he needs to have been dominant. (Though really, a player needs to have some of both, or it’s unlikely he’ll be seen as great.)
Helton has a peak of 5-6 years to consider (2000-2004, perhaps with 2005 in there). As crazy as it seems, those seasons just don’t stand out among first basemen HoF candidates in Helton’s era. I brought up career length because I’m sympathetic to Helton’s case—building on his record with additional seasons would help.
So let me ask you—if all the counter arguments lack sophistication, if none of them are based on sound reasoning, if none of them add legitimacy to the “Helton’s not quite there yet” PoV, what is the case FOR Helton? What criteria are you basing this on? How many first basemen from a 20-30-yr period are you willing to have in the HoF? Does Coors Field have any impact on how you evaluate Helton’s career?
Leave Dexter alone! You're lucky he even performs for you!
We do go 'round and 'round on this
In my opinion, no player’s value can be contained in raw stats, advanced stats, or any other kind of number. It sells some players short, and it sells other players long.
To the length of career point, my quibble isn’t with you or anyone in particular. It’s just something that’s never made sense to me, particularly when a guy has played longer than 10 years. For that reason, baseball’s infatuation with numbers sometimes irks me. I think we’d be better served, when considering stats, to look at career averages rather than final totals.
In my opinion, Helton doesn’t have a peak of 5 or 6 years. He has been remarkably consistent throughout his career. If anything, he has one “peak” year and a collection of a bunch of remarkable years. Say he goes .320/15/90 for another 5 years, mixing in 30 doubles and Gold Glove defense along the way. Would that really make his case any better? He is what he is, and that’s one of the best players in the game. If that would make him a Hall of Fame player in 5 years, then he’s a Hall of Fame player now, in my opinion.
Here’s what I base Helton’s case for the Hall on, at least in part: two guys named Mark Grace and the aforementioned Chipper Jones. Two contemporaries that get a lot of love nationally, and I think that Helton is and has been a better player than both of them. If they are considered Hall of Fame players, then Helton is undoubtedly a Hall of Fame player in my book. Beyond that, when it comes to numbers, Helton’s career offensive numbers as a whole stack up very, very well with the likes of Ruth, Mantle, and Gehrig (with the exception of homeruns). The park has to be accounted for, but I don’t think it’s as big a discount as some do.
Finally, I don’t think that you can constrain the number of players that get in. In that vein, I guess I view the Hall of Fame differently than some. Sure, it is and should be highly selective, but if there are 100 great 1B in a 30 year period, then 100 great 1B should get in the Hall of Fame.
"You were born to be a player. You were meant to be here. This moment is yours." -- Coach Herb Brooks' pregame speech prior to the Miracle on Ice
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Purple Row
Related FanShots on Purple Row
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
