Bruce Grossberg

Bruce Grossberg

  •  
     
    Generating profile stats...

Latest Articles Written

About

Bruce has yet to fill out a bio.

Bulletin Board

Default-user-icon-comment
or to post this comment
  • Michael W posted 1694 days ago

    Michael  W

    Bruce,

    How have you been?
    You probably never check this website out anymore.

    But just in case, I just wrote a new article on the 10 best relief pitchers from the 1980s.

    If you get time later, check it out and let me know what you think.

    It’s at:

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/386011

    Thanks,

    Talk to you later

  • Michael W posted 2177 days ago

    Michael  W

    Hey Bruce, Mike here, wanted to let you know that I picked up a copy of Bill James "Win Shares" book. I like it, always like his books. There's only 2 problems with the book, not to complain because again, it's a hell of a book.

    BUT--problem #1--he doesn't take length of career into account on defense, he grades strictly on a per 1000 innings curve, no LOC taken into account. I was surprised by this. Not a big problem though, we can adjust for that ourselves.

    Problem #2--not really a problem, it's just a hell of a curve that he grades on. Of the 229 First Basemen that played in at least 800 games, he only has 43 with a grade less than average (less than a C grade). So, he's saying that only 19% of First Basemen in history were below average defensively. I wish I had a teacher when I was in school that graded with that type of curve. He says that 164 of the 229 were above average (C+ or higher), that's 72% above average. That's not really possible is it? Like he grades Hal Chase a C, but he ranks 174 of 229. Bruce, 174 of 229 should probably be a D+, not a C. Definitely a D+ if it's a natural curve, so he letter grades most of the players higher than they should be, maybe he's just a nice guy. He never puts them in order in the book, but if you put Chase against the other 228, he falls 174, it's probably why he doesn't put them in order; he'd have trouble explaining how 174 of 229 is a C--because he knows it should be a D+. This jumped out at me because I had Chase ranked as a C -, slightly lower than King James--but I had him ranked 152 of the 229, 22 spots higher than King James, but with a slightly lower letter grade because of his " super nice guy" grading curve.

    Anyway, it's the only 2 things wrong with the book, but they're not huge problems. Thanks again for recommending the book, even with those 2 things, I love it, it's a great book.

    Talk to you soon, hope you're having good holidays.

  • Michael W posted 2201 days ago

    Michael  W

    Bruce, I'd never seen his minor league stats. O'Doul had some impressive minor league #s. Damn. Those other stories about O'Doul I've heard before, they're great stories. I'd always heard that he was more than reluctant to take any of the credit for DiMaggio. He would say things to the effect of--he wasn't broke, so I didn't try to fix him. You know, downplaying his own role in his development. Sounds like he might have been as good of a person as he was a player.

    Oh, I do mention Dave Orr when I talk about Zeke Bonura on my First Base list. I've got Bonura at #1. I basically say that Orr would be #1 if he'd played more games. Hey, you knew I wouldn't forget that man. I mentioned you when I talked about Bonura and Orr too. I think I also mention you in my introduction and under Tip O'Neill (1st on my Left Field list). Shouldn't surprise you Bruce, you know I love your stuff. Talk to you soon.