Its something to factor in but its way to early to even go there. Even if he was projected for a releif role the Twins like to have those guys start a few years to improve their stanima & work on secondary pitches more.

I never said tall guys didn't exist.

 

Guys 6'1" or shorter and under 200lbs:

 

Mays, Mantle, Aaron, Musial, Matthews, Hodges, Snider, Berra, Killebrew, Robinson, Banks... I stopped there.

 

Guys are bigger now. I didn't realize this was news.

 

It's not news, did someone besides AsburyJohn say that it was? (See above:o)

 

No question that baseball is the small man's game of the 4 major sports. Nutrition, training regimens and a good genetic infusion has done exactly what you said to change that stereotype to 6'3"/230#s. But you made it sound like it was DiMaggio and Williams and that was pretty much the extent of the outliers to your thesis, when it wasn't the case- it's pretty clear that size still played a part as a data point for predicting potential overperformance for slugging types of hitters, even when the average baseball player was significantly shorter than he is today.

 

Highest MLB Career SLG and 6'2" or over for those whose careers began by 1914-1958:

1)Ruth

2)Williams

6)Greenberg

10)DiMaggio

16)Johnny Mize

27)Ralph Kiner

45)Babe Herman

51)Willie Stargell

57)Wally Berger

58)Hal Trosky

 

#1, #2 SLG spots all-time, 3 of the top 6 spots, 4 of the top 10, 10 of the top 58. Definite large over-representation sample relative to the average height player of the era.

 

Highest Career SLG and 6'0" or under whose careers began by 1914-1958

3)Gehrig

4)Foxx

11)Hornsby

18)Musial

20)Mays

21)Mantle

23)Aaron

31)Hack Wilson

33)Chuck Klein

35)Duke Snider

40)Al Simmons

44)Mel Ott

48)Ken Williams

 

13 of the top 48 in SLG all-time, but only 2 of the top 10.

 

"I stopped there...."

The over-representation of taller players, especially relative to the average-sized baseball player of the era, continues as the all-time SLG list progresses (and the career OPS+ list is similarly proportioned).

 

You also had to hedge your list up to 6'1" to pump up that number from your original characterization that most every "Beasty" guy in baseball was 5'11" or 6', which technically removes Banks, Matthews,.....etc.

 

Bottom-line, all other things being equal, it makes sense for KLAW to factor in height in his analysis for potential ceilings for both pitchers and hitters. I'm sure he's well aware of the Pedro Martinez and Kirby Puckett factor and takes that into account that more diminutive types are also fully capable of accomplishing great things on the diamond.

Edited December 6, 201312 yr by jokin

I was skeptical about the height advantage assumption but....(and) I don't believe there's any evidence that height correlates with durability though.

 

Eddie Bane says: "Now you tell me!"

Edited December 6, 201312 yr by jokin

You also had to hedge your list up to 6'1" to pump up that number from your original characterization that most every "Beasty" guy in baseball was 5'11" or 6', which technically removes Banks, Matthews,.....etc.

 

I truncated the rest. Really interesting stuff there, jokin.

 

I bumped it to 6'1" because my point wasn't only about height. It was about build and frame.

 

Every guy I listed was 200 lbs. or under.

 

For an example, Mickey Mantle... He was a pretty solid guy, right? 6'0", 195 lbs.

 

Justin Morneau is a big guy but he's pretty skinny compared to a guy like Albert Pujols, right? Well, he's 6'4", 215 lbs.

 

I brought up Jimmie Foxx's weight for a reason. Guys weren't only an inch or two shorter back then, they were also at least 15-20 lbs lighter.