Bill James on Player Popularity
Is this still true 45 years later?
Bill James on Player Popularity
We tend to think of Bill James as a stats-first kind of guy.
Nothing could be further from the truth, of course.
The joy of reading those old Baseball Abstracts is reading James’ excellent prose. Bill James was an English major and a writer first and foremost. James had success because he could take difficult statistical concepts and explain them in a way that made sense to ordinary baseball fans — a talent that is sadly lacking in the modern sabermetrics world.
And sometimes James would talk about subjects that were decidedly not statistical. Today’s subject, which comes from this summary of the 1980 Baseball Abstract, is a great example:
Some of these criteria points make no sense, and so we’ll skip over them. I don’t know what James means by “a player who plays in circumstances which emphasize his particular talent,” though I presume that he expounded on this in the actual text (remember, we’re looking at a summary here). I’m guessing this has something to do with how well a player fits into his home park, though I’m not entirely certain I understand how James is measuring this.
Anyway — is this still the case today? Do these criteria points still hold true in 2025?
I think it does. Take a look, for example, at MLB’s most recent listing of the current top 100 players. Let’s take a look at a few of the guys on the top of this list and see if they qualify:
Shohei Ohtani
Does he play in New York or Los Angeles? Yes.
Is he on a championship team? Yes.
Does he have charisma or cater to the press? I’d argue that his personality certainly comes out in his interviews, sure. The presence of an interpreter makes things a bit difficult, of course.
Is he white? No.
Does he excel in stats the public understands? Yep. Home runs, stolen bases, strikeouts (as a pitcher), etc.
Is his primary contribution defensive? No.
Does he do a comparatively few things well? No — but the fact that he combines generational pitching talent with generational hitting talent makes up for this fact.
Aaron Judge
Does he play in New York or Los Angeles? Yes.
Is he on a championship team? No — and this is well known among his critics. Judge is missing a ring. He did go to the World Series last year, of course.
Does he have charisma or cater to the press? I’d say so, yeah. Having said that, he’s certainly not up to, say, Reggie Jackson levels of superstardom. Again — he needs a ring.
Is he white? Nope - he’s biracial.
Does he excel in stats the public understands? Naturally. Judge his a home run hitter on the lines of Mickey Mantle.
Is his primary contribution defensive? No.
Does he do a comparatively few things well? Yep. He sees the ball and destroys it. He also is good at drawing walks, though he still strikes out at the pace most classic sluggers strike out. Then again, who doesn’t strike out a lot these days?
Let’s do one more:
Bobby Witt Jr
Does he play in New York or Los Angeles? No.
Is he on a championship team? No.
Does he have charisma or cater to the press? Not in any remarkable way that I’m aware of. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Is he white? Yes.
Does he excel in stats the public understands? I guess? I mean, he was the American League batting champion in 2024, but I’m honestly not sure how many baseball fans realize that. He can hit for power, though he’s not quite a heavy home run threat like Ohtani and Judge.
Is his primary contribution defensive? Not really. I should note, however, that he gets a WAR boost for playing shortstop, and that he’s certainly not a bad shortstop by any means.
Does he do a comparatively few things well? I’d say no. Witt strikes me as a solid all-around player — not just a great fielder or a guy who hits a lot of home runs or steals all the bases or whatever.
Okay — we could go on. However, next in line is Juan Soto, who plays in New York, followed by Mookie Bets, who plays in Los Angeles, and then Francisco Lindor of the Mets. In fact, the top 10 is dominated by Dodgers, Yankees, and Mets — which is precisely what James predicted.
So, out of these 7 questions, which ones seem to still be relevant today?
Playing in New York or Los Angeles — this is absolutely relevant. Of course, the fact that the Yankees and Dodgers played against each other last year probably has something to do with the players of both teams being treated as stars. Still, the presence of two Mets players in the top 10 despite that 89-73 record is telling.
Being on a championship team — this is still relevant.
Charisma in the press — this is probably less important than ever. You simply don’t see baseball players conducting interviews outside of baseball specific platforms these days. It’s a rare day when you see one of these guys on ESPN, for crying out loud. This is nothing like how things were in the early 1980s, when certain stars (Pete Rose, Reggie Jackson, etc.) seemed to show up everywhere.
Race — this is less important than ever.
Stats the public understands — this is also pretty unimportant. Many of the non-sabermetrically minded fans have aged out of the sport. We’re in the midst of a massive shift of baseball fanhood from ordinary blue collar guys towards tech-minded kids who like playing with numbers. That’s a post for another day.
Offensive contribution — this is actually still important, though not as much as it once was. The prevalence of sabermetrics helps good defensive players get noticed.
One dimensional or few dimensional skill — I’m not entirely sure what James was trying to get at here, or how this differs from the defensive point. If this is still important, it’s important because fans like seeing big sluggers who can kill the ball — or large pitchers who can throw over 100 miles an hour.