Kirby Puckett dies

[Sarge]

[:(]

[Soft Heap]

That's a very young age to say goodbye; sad.
As I'm a European: was he like Pele or Maradonna were for soccer?

[Amaroq]

No. He was an elite player, very well respected, and elected to the Hall of Fame, but I wouldn't say he had the legendary status that Pele and Maradona did. I don't imagine telling my grandkids that I saw him play, for example.

Here's his page from baseball-reference.com, which is a great site dedicated to baseball statistics, etc.

[Beach23BoyP]

ORIGINAL: Soft Heap

That's a very young age to say goodbye; sad.
As I'm a European: was he like Pele or Maradonna were for soccer?

He was a excellent player, but just below a superstar. He always had a great attititde and the fans loved him.

[Edward]

I would classify Kirby as a regional superstar.
Superstar status in Minnesota & a household name everywhere else.

He was fun to watch. He never disgraced the game.

[Sonny]

I really stopped following baseball closely when he retired. He was an asset to baseball and my favorite player at the time. I think most people were amazed that a "stocky" guy like Kirby could be so athletic. I think that is why his leaping catch in the world series was so great.

[Soft Heap]

Okay I see, thank you gentlemen.
I've been looking to his stats at baseball-reference.com and came to the conclusion that baseball is really higher mathematics. It's an incredibly difficult game to comprehend for a European nono like me[&:]

[Amaroq]

LoL. There is a lot of statistics, and some mathematicians have been off inventing numerical analysis to determine who truly benefits their team the most.

But, there's also a subjective feeling - is 15 goals in a Premiership season good for a striker, average, or poor?

So, I'll try to give you that for the stats across the top line at the Baseball Reference website.

...

G - Games played - 0 to 162. Players who can play more than 150 games a season are rare and durable.

AB - At Bats - 0 to 600+. Number of times the player came up to bat, and had the at bat result in a hit or an out. More than 500 or so tends to represent a full season as the team's starter at that position.

R - Runs - 0 to 150+. Number of times the player scored. 100+ is a very good season. Some players who are expected to 'drive them in' won't have as many runs, as they are expected to get RBI, not to score runs themselves.

H - Hits - 0 to 200+. Number of times the player hit the ball, and reached base safely without any of his teammates getting out either. Not typically considered.

2B - Doubles - 0 to 50+. Number of times the player hit the ball and reached exactly second base. 30 or more is solid, 40 or more a very good season.

3B - Triples - 0 to 10+. Number of times the player hit the ball and reached exactly third base. More than one is pretty good, in this day and age; in older seasons, players used to hit 20 or more, which would be incredible nowadays.

HR - Home Runs - 0 to 73*. Number of times the player hit the ball out of the playing field, or reached home plate. 30+ is soilid for a 'power hitter', and 40+ is a very good season. 61 is the record before steroids, and 73 is the modern record.

RBI - Runs Batted In - 0 to 150+. Number of his teammates who scored due to the player's hits. (Counts himself on a home run). 100+ is very good for a hitter expected to 'drive them in'; some hitters are more expected to 'get on base', and so will have very low numbers here.

SB - Stolen Bases - 0 to 80+. Number of times the runner advanced a base without help from his teammates. I usually think of 40 or more stolen bases as a very good season. Some players are so slow that they aren't asked to steal much, if at all.

CS - Caught Stealing - 0 to 20+. Number of times the runner tried to get a stolen base, but was thrown out instead. Compare SB to CS - stealing a base is successful about 66% of the team, so a ratio better than 2-1 is good, and lower than 2-1 is bad.

BB - Walks (bases on balls) - 0 to 200+. Number of times the batter reached base without a hit (by taking four balls). A big part of some player's games, a small part of others, you can get a feel for how 'patient' a hitter was by comparing BB with SO. 100+ walks is a very impressive total.

SO - Strike Outs - 0 to 200+. Number of times the batter struck out without making contact. High numbers are bad; low numbers are good. Its only really useful to compare against AB or BB to get a picture for how patient the hitter was.

BA - Batting Average - .150 to .350+. Simple math: H / AB. This is the 'old school' means of determining how good a hitter was. .260 is about average. .300 is very good. The best in the league will be around .330 to .350 each year. In olden days, players used to bat above .400, but the last time was many years ago by a hitter now legendary for the feat, and it is major news anytime a player is even flirting with .400 by the middle of the season.

OBP - On Base Percentage - .200 to .400+. Simple math: (BB + H) / (AB + BB). Somebody figured out that 'walks' are useful to the team, so this formula calculates the number of times the player reached base safely. Many now consider it more useful than BA as a measure of the hitter. Tends to be about fifty points higher than BA, on average.

SLG - Slugging Percentage - .350 to .800+. Simple math again: (H + 2B + (2*3B) + (3*HR)) / AB, or often expressed as 'total bases / AB'. A real measure of a power hitter. .450+ is good, .600+ is incredible, and the record is .863.

...

The other stats, I think you can ignore for now, but it is useful to scroll to the bottom of the page and not the 'leaderboard' appearances.

Looking at those stats through those eyes, his durability (150+ G, 600+ AB) was incredible, and at his height, 1988, he could score runs and RBI both, get hits, and that .356 batting average in '88 was very impressive... but all of that data are about offensive ability.

'Gold Gloves' are the highest honor for defensive skill - an honor which he won six times in seven years ('86-92).

...

A Hall-of-Fame career, certainly.

RIP, Kirby.

[Soft Heap]

Thanks for explaning, shed some more light in my baseball-ignorant world.

[motnahp]

We Yanks appreciate your interest in baseball. I can understand your dilemma. Many years ago, I was home-based in a country where I was able to view cricket matches on a network called Eurosport. I was fascinated by the similarities to baseball. I watched many hours before I could get a good understanding of the game.

I liken cricket to baseball without the foul balls. I recall advertisements months in advance for the "Ashes" (Great Britain v Australia). I always wondered, however, about the construction of the ball used in cricket. What's the ball made of, and how does its' size compare to other balls. It appeared to be about the size of a croquet ball. Can you shed some light on this?

Also, are there any PC-based cricket games you can recommend?

[Amaroq]

I took two Indian gentlemen to a Giants game last season, and they were two of the most knowledgeable, informed fans I'd seen this side of long-time baseball players.

I was particularly impressed with their critique of one of the Giants rookies for not shortening his swing with two strikes - he was still swinging for the fences, and struck out.