rickey henderson

Fair enough. Perhaps you could detail the years when Rickey Henderson was a "great hitter." when was he the best player in the American League?

 

Every ballpark has a BPF though, correct? So it doesn't just account for atmospheric conditions. I don't have Fenway's bpf's for every Yaz season, so I have no idea whether that hurt him or aided him (bbreference has its AIR factor at 99 for his entire career, though). And every stadium can have dramatically different effect on a specific batter. Unless you are somehow saying that the Fens effect on a hitter can't be measured in any type of adjusted fashion, because it's so unique.

And Yaz couldn't have pulled the ball to left field.

 

Who was still considered to generally be the best at his position each year and played defense at the highest level. While offense is certainly what gets all the glory, defense is still a part of the game, last I checked.

 

Yaz may have hit considerably better at home, but Fenway benefits righty hitters far more than lefties. Might explain a little why Ortiz's power numbers with the Sox are so much better on the road.

 

Ricky was "one of" the best players in the American League during the '80s and early '90s, when the AL was significantly stronger than during Yaz's time. Whether you choose to look at OPS+ (Yaz - 196, 178; Ricky - 188, 181) or runs created, Ricky's best seasons were almost as good as Yaz's, and he had more of them.

There will always be difficulties in comparing different types of players, but there's fairly little debate that Ricky is the best leadoff hitter of all-time. Meanwhile Yastrzemski is not considered one of the best middle of the order hitters of all-time.

*sigh* BPF measures how a stadium compares to the average park for the average player. That average is why Fenway can have a near neutral figure despite strongly favoring some types of players and strongly hurting others. I brought up atmospheric conditions like Coors because those would affect all balls equally, regardless of whether they were hit to right, left, or center field. So it would theoretically be a good measure of that impact.

For stadiums with odd dimensions, however, the BPF will not accurately represent its effect on individual players. As I said, someone who hits the ball mostly straight away will see their numbers suffer in Fenway, while someone who hits down the lines will benefit. In Yaz's case, he would benefit from Fenway's short porch at the Peske pole. But look, the home/road splits are so obvious that no one can miss their significance:

.306 avg, .402 obp, .503 slg at home
.264 avg, .357 obp, .422 slg on the road.

It doesn't get any more obvious than that. On the road, Yaz was just ordinary during his major league career. Truly great hitters can still have splits, but they don't have mediocre career numbers on the road.

Yaz was a better defender than Ricky, but defense isn't nearly as important to winning games as the other aspects of the game according to various statistical analyses. Furthermore, let's remember that Yastrzemski played left field in Fenway. While he did become exceptional at playing the wall, Boston's left field is the smallest section of area to cover for any ballpark in the major leagues.

 

There is about a 15 foot strip that is beneficial. Otherwise, fenway is considered a graveyard to lefties. Especially those that pull the ball.

I'm not trying to argue that his splits are not dramatic. Of course, that really does not have anything to do with the issue at hand of whether Yaz was better than Henderson.

True it is small, but it is also one of the most difficult to play well.

 

Incorrect. It's very difficult for guys like Ortiz who hit most of their fly balls to center and right center, but those who pull the ball do well in Fenway (see also: Ted Williams).

Of course it does. Why do people think that Dante Bichette wasn't a great hitter? Yaz was a better player than Bichette, but how you play in different environments is certainly very relevant to any comparison between players.

It's very tricky, but I don't think that the mental challenge of knowing the angles and reading the bounces correctly is as difficult as having to cover massive amounts of ground. He's still a good fielder any way you look at it, but it's hard to argue that he was an all-time great in that respect. Meanwhile Ricky is clearly the all-time greatest base stealer.

 

lmao. Williams hit more homers away from Fenway than he did at Fenway.

 

In the first half of Yaz's career, he played with considerably less talent than did Henderson. How many runs would Yaz have driven in had the Sox had upgrades over such hitting machines as Chuck Schilling (.239 career average, .304 OBS), Roman Mejias (.254, .294), Feliz Mantilla (.261, .329), Eddie Bressoud (.252, .319) and Gary Geiger (.246, .337) hitting in front of him. (Pete Runnells was the exception: .291, .375). The Impossible Dream season of 1967 was all Carl Yastrzemski. He won the triple crown in spite of a group hitting in front of him that included Dalton Jones, Randy Foy, Jose Tartabull and a rookie Reggie Smith. Henderson, by and large, was surrounded by better players.

 

That's true, but you claimed that Fenway was a graveyard for lefties, which isn't correct. 25 more of Williams' 521 came on the road, but his average was nearly 30 points higher at home. Williams hit exceptionally well at home, just like Yaz (and Boggs, Mo Vaughn, etc).

I don't put much stake in RBI because it's so dependent upon other players. Heck, Tony Batista drove in 100+ three different times. In any case, Yaz's teammates were obviously much less of a disadvantage for RBI than Henderson always batting leadoff.