I voted primarily based on franchise league considerations, although I also have a strong preference to avoid fluke seasons. I think this is likely a minority preference, but I'd rather have players 3rd or 4th best season included - so that it's reasonably representative of the player's career- but most nominations didn't go that way. If I recall correctly, I voted for Abreu, Rolen, Reyes, Ordonez and Molina.
That being said, I'd like to express concern about Ross Barnes's 1873 card, which if current voting trends hold on, will likely finish in the top 20. Baseball in 1873 was drastically different from even 10-15 years later-- batters could request high or low pitches, gloves were rudimentary, and umpires were not allowed to call strikes on the first pitch. Barnes, in particular, was known for exploiting a rule where a ball was in play if it first landed in fair territory, but then spun foul.
As a result, Barnes played in an offensive environment unlike anything we've seen. The league averaged 9 runs per game; Barnes's team averaged over 12. Strikeouts were very rare- the average team had less than 1 K per game, and Barnes had 2 strikeouts in 340 plate appearances. (
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NA/1873.shtml) There's no reason to think that Barnes would have been an elite player if he came around just a few years later. Beginning in 1877, when Barnes was age 27 and in the National League, he played in 168 games over the last 3 seasons of his career. He hit right around .270 each year with a league average OPS.
I don't know if Strat can adequately adjust for (1) the subpar quality of play in the National Association, or (2) the tremendous changes in rules, pitching techniques, and defense. But I don't particularly want to see Barnes with a 10 million dollar card based off of a very short season under drastically different playing conditions than all other cards in the set.
Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:10 pm
