MLB: Have we seen the best [Archive] - Front Office Football Central

JS19

07-12-2006, 12:11 AM

SackAttack

07-12-2006, 12:17 AM

I know as a fan I felt robbed by not getting to see the greatness that is Mark Redman take the mound with the game on the line.

st.cronin

07-12-2006, 12:21 AM

I'm sorry, but the greatest shortstop of all time is SPIKE OWEN. You young 'uns have no idea.

MrBug708

07-12-2006, 12:22 AM

Jeter as the best SS of all time?

stevew

07-12-2006, 12:23 AM

I definitely don't think Jeter is among the best SS of all time. He has played for a bunch of title winning teams, so he tends to be put into another level which he isn't at. ARod would have been the best SS of all time if he didn't have to move to 3b. He's still played SS a lot more than 3b for now. One could easily argue that Schmidt was the greatest 3b, and i think Wright will end up passing him by.

Ozzie Smith had a great glove at SS, as did/does Visquel. You also can't overlook Ripken Jr.

JS19

07-12-2006, 12:25 AM

I'm sorry, but the greatest shortstop of all time is SPIKE OWEN. You young 'uns have no idea.

Thats actually pretty much what i'm getting at. I like to think I know a good amount about baseball history, but since I didnt get to watch all these other guys play I dont feel like I really get the true appreciation of great they were, which is why I think some of the ones I mentioned above are, since I have seen them throughout their entire careers for the most part.

JS19

07-12-2006, 12:26 AM

I take back my Jeter argument, he was the 1st that came to mind, cant believe I forgot about Smith and Ripken.

MrBug708

07-12-2006, 12:27 AM

I wish Gagne wouldnt have gotten hurt. :(

stevew

07-12-2006, 12:42 AM

I wish Gagne wouldnt have gotten hurt. :(
Yeah, he only needed to have 7 or so more of his great seasons, plus win a title or two to get anywhere near Rivera's level.

Vince

07-12-2006, 12:48 AM

Pujols has been amazing so far, but it's a bit much to say "best ever" already.

Schmidty

07-12-2006, 12:52 AM

The next legend from the bullpen -

http://www.rwbl-ootp-online.com/league/p1858.html

stevew

07-12-2006, 01:11 AM

The next legend from the bullpen -

http://www.rwbl-ootp-online.com/league/p1858.html

911 is a joke.

I can just see the ESPN guys riding his jock.

Of course they would have a permanent saddle on Edwin Ryan's (http://www.rwbl-ootp-online.com/league/p838.html) Nuts

MrBug708

07-12-2006, 01:22 AM

Yeah, he only needed to have 7 or so more of his great seasons, plus win a title or two to get anywhere near Rivera's level.

Interesting. Incorrect, but Interesting

stevew

07-12-2006, 01:38 AM

Interesting. Incorrect, but Interesting
How do you figure? Gagne had 3 spectacular seasons. Rivera had 8 spectacular years out of 10, with the 2 that weren't spectacular is merely very good. It's totally correct, but I do realize that you are all about your guys, and I made a promise to myself to not argue LA sports with you anymore, which i should not have broken.

MrBug708

07-12-2006, 01:58 AM

So what does a title have to do with anything?

TheGreatestManAlive

07-12-2006, 02:07 AM

ARod would have been the best SS of all time if he didn't have to move to 3b. He's still played SS a lot more than 3b for now. One could easily argue that Schmidt was the greatest 3b, and i think Wright will end up passing him by.

Let's not forget Brooks Robinson in that equation. 16 straight gold gloves and a good bat for his era have to count for something.

IMetTrentGreen

07-12-2006, 04:50 AM

everybody knows players get 20% better when they sign with an la team

if you're talking best ever, only bonds, rivera, and maybe clemens belong on that list

oykib

07-12-2006, 08:30 AM

everybody knows players get 20% better when they sign with an la team

if you're talking best ever, only bonds, rivera, and maybe clemens belong on that list

A-Rod, as well. People seem not to understand that they may be looking at the best player in history (after all's said and done).

Warhammer

07-12-2006, 08:51 AM

A-Rod, as well. People seem not to understand that they may be looking at the best player in history (after all's said and done).

Too bad he's not a good clutch hitter...

*Runs for the hills*

TheGreatestManAlive

07-12-2006, 08:52 AM

A-Rod, as well. People seem not to understand that they may be looking at the best player in history (after all's said and done).

Sorry, postseason performance and the overall team performance have to count for something. It's a smaller part of the equation than individual stats, but not irrelevant. A-Rod, for some reason, seems to have a negative effect on teams overall performance and he's just been horrible the last two years in the playoffs.

Crapshoot

07-12-2006, 08:59 AM

Sorry, postseason performance and the overall team performance have to count for something. It's a smaller part of the equation than individual stats, but not irrelevant. A-Rod, for some reason, seems to have a negative effect on teams overall performance and he's just been horrible the last two years in the playoffs.

What is this, act like a troll day ? You realize A-rod outhit Jeter in the 2004 playoffs, right ?

John Galt

07-12-2006, 09:03 AM

So what does a title have to do with anything?

Your homerism really is incredible sometimes. The titles matter because of Rivera's role in them. These are his career post-season stats:

111.2 IP, 0.81 ERA, 34 Saves, 8 Wins, 1 Loss.

That is a performance that will likely never be repeated. At the highest leverage times, Rivera was the most dependable pitcher in history. Just an astounding performance.

Here are Gagne's career stats as a closer (I've eliminated his time as a starter because those numbers certainly don't help his case):

262.1 IP, 1.82 ERA, 161 Saves, 14 Wins, 7 Losses

In other words, Mariano has pitched in the post-season 40% of Gagne's total IP as a closer. And he has done so with a RIDICULOUSLY low ERA.

Here are Rivera's career stats (that exclude his incredible post-season performance):

852.2 IP, 2.30 ERA, 398 Saves, 58 Wins, 39 Loses

And Gagne is no spring-chicken as he is already 30 years-old. He would have to have to duplicate the incredible spurt as a closer 3 times before he would could claim to have surpassed Rivera. There have been many flash-in-pan closers (and Gagne was surely among the very best of those), but what makes Rivera incredible is his longevity and consistency at a position where longevity and consistency are rare.

With all that being said, of course the "best closer ever" would be in the modern era because closers didn't exist in their modern form until recently. So, in a sense it's kind of like best DH ever, IMO.

Crapshoot

07-12-2006, 09:07 AM

Interesting. Incorrect, but Interesting

You have no clue what you're on about. Riviera is the best closer - as defined today, in baseball history, and ought to be a first ballot HOF. Gagne, is not.

clintl

07-12-2006, 09:15 AM

I'm watching baseball tonight and they mention Mo Rivera is the best closer of all-time, which I agree with. Being that I'm 22 I wasn't around for all these other great ballplayers, but is it possible (now i'm using only the players who I have grown up watching) that we have seen perhaps what could be the greatest 3B ever (ARod), 1B (Pujols), C (Piazza, offensivley speaking) SP (Clemens), CL (Rivera), OF (Bonds) and i'll even be bold enough to put Jeter for SS since I cant think of any old timers off the top of my head. I bring it up bc i've been thinking about it and feel pretty lucky being able to witness what could be some of the greatest players at their respective positions.

A-Rod is the best SS ever, not the best 3B ever. He hasn't played nearly long enough to be considered the best 3B ever, and surpassing Mike Schmidt for that honor in the time he has left might be a tall order. Jeter's not even close, even if you take A-Rod out of the picture. Honus Wagner would be.

Pujols has a long way to go to equal Lou Gehrig, and he's not on pace to do so.

Piazza - yes, if you just consider offense.

Clemens - I think the case is getting pretty strong for him, especially considering he's won all these games in the era of the 5-man rotation and bullpen specialization.

Rivera - yes

Bonds - Babe Ruth was still better. With respect to the steroid suspicions, it's hard to judge Bonds beyond that. If you want to adjust for the steroids, I'd say Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle, and Stan Musial were better, too. That's where I'd draw the line.

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 09:19 AM

Ramzavail

07-12-2006, 09:20 AM

Me llamo Pedro.

tanglewood

07-12-2006, 09:23 AM

Bonds - Babe Ruth was still better. With respect to the steroid suspicions, it's hard to judge Bonds beyond that. If you want to adjust for the steroids, I'd say Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle, and Stan Musial were better, too. That's where I'd draw the line.

BUt if we assume, as most seem to do now, that the last few years have been the 'steroid era' Bonds outperformed his peers by a huge amount. If everyone was taking steroids then it's a level playing field still.

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 09:23 AM

What about the one position we haven't mentioned -- who's the greatest 2B of all time?

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 09:23 AM

... I'd say Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle, and Stan Musial were better, too. That's where I'd draw the line.
Ty Cobb!

Huckleberry

07-12-2006, 09:24 AM

clintl

07-12-2006, 09:28 AM

Ty Cobb!

Yes - how could I forget Cobb?

John Galt

07-12-2006, 09:30 AM

As for Jeter, while I've been critical of him in the past and agree he isn't in the debate about the best SS ever, it is still possible he could be someday. He is only 31. He is putting up his best season ever. If he were able to maintain a high level performance for at least 6 more years, he would certainly enter the discussion of best SS ever (despite his defensive shortcomings). Do I think he will legitimately enter that discussion? No. But it is still a possibility. I will say that he is more likely to be a candidate for best SS ever than Pujols is to be the best 1B ever (because injury and performance dropoffs mean Pujols has MANY more obstacles to overcome). So, I don't think "head explodes" is really the proper reaction to the claim that Jeter is the best SS ever unless you have the same reaction to Pujols, IMHO.

An interesting thing I was wondering about Jeter the other day. This is total speculation and based entirely on wild conjecture. What if Jeter succeeds at career high levels for the next 5 or 6 years? Could we suggest that Jeter was actually a "victim" of the steriods era (presuming he is clean and many pitchers were dirty)? Do those who think we should look at Bonds and others skeptically then think we should look at Jeter's already impressive numbers in a more positive light? Anyway, it's based on a lot of hypotethical, but I thought it was an interesting thought experiment.

clintl

07-12-2006, 09:32 AM

What about the one position we haven't mentioned -- who's the greatest 2B of all time?

If offense is the main criteria, it's pretty hard to argue against Rogers Hornsby.

Ryche

07-12-2006, 09:33 AM

What about the one position we haven't mentioned -- who's the greatest 2B of all time?

Nap Lajoie.

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 09:34 AM

Nap Lajoie.
Earl Weaver Baseball was awesome.

Crapshoot

07-12-2006, 09:40 AM

Painful as it is to say, Joe Morgan or Eddie Collins are probably near the top (Morgan in particular) of candidates.

clintl

07-12-2006, 09:42 AM

An interesting thing I was wondering about Jeter the other day. This is total speculation and based entirely on wild conjecture. What if Jeter succeeds at career high levels for the next 5 or 6 years? Could we suggest that Jeter was actually a "victim" of the steriods era (presuming he is clean and many pitchers were dirty)? Do those who think we should look at Bonds and others skeptically then think we should look at Jeter's already impressive numbers in a more positive light? Anyway, it's based on a lot of hypotethical, but I thought it was an interesting thought experiment.

Isn't the issue with Jeter more a sense that he's overrated defensively rather than devalued as a hitter? That's the issue in my mind - that A-Rod is a much better denfensive SS, and that if you wanted to put your best defense on the field, Jeter is the one who should have been moved.

If you're going to take that stand on hitting with Jeter, why wouldn't you do it with Piazza, too? Nobody seems to.

Ryche

07-12-2006, 09:44 AM

Interest list of the top 75 all time at each position:

http://www.thebaseballpage.com/index.php

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 09:45 AM

As for Jeter, while I've been critical of him in the past and agree he isn't in the debate about the best SS ever, it is still possible he could be someday. He is only 31. He is putting up his best season ever. If he were able to maintain a high level performance for at least 6 more years, he would certainly enter the discussion of best SS ever (despite his defensive shortcomings). Do I think he will legitimately enter that discussion? No. But it is still a possibility.
He would need to have about six more career years to even knock on Honus Wagner's door -- and that's if we agree to ignore defense at a position where defense is critical.

Pujols is young enough that he could still be improving, so we can at least pretend that his numbers will keep going up. Jeter may continue racking up 200 hits but he's unlikely to improve his power in the second half of his career. And despite playing in the greatest offensive era of all time, he's still outslugged by Wagner who played in the Dead Ball era.

Barring Jeter turning into a Pete Rose like freak of longevity, I don't see him getting into the "all time greatest" picture based on anything more than New York and ESPN hype. Which, sadly, will probably be more than enough.

John Galt

07-12-2006, 09:57 AM

Isn't the issue with Jeter more a sense that he's overrated defensively rather than devalued as a hitter? That's the issue in my mind - that A-Rod is a much better denfensive SS, and that if you wanted to put your best defense on the field, Jeter is the one who should have been moved.

If you're going to take that stand on hitting with Jeter, why wouldn't you do it with Piazza, too? Nobody seems to.

You won't find me arguing that Jeter should have been moved to 3rd. I posted a few times about that back when the decision was made (and I even thought it would add to the silly "legend of Jeter" if he was willing to sacrifice (and I thought a move to CF may have been the best for all involved).

As for Jeter's defense, I think it is a little different than Piazza (although they are similar). First off, Jeter's defense seems to have shown some miraculous improvement according to various metrics (the usual caveats apply). Whether that is something he can maintain, I don't know. Second, is that Piazza truly is a total loss at stopping the running game. Jeter, even when he has been worse than his peers, has not been completely unable to perform a part of his defensive game. In that way Jeter was like (but not as bad as) Soriano at 2nd and not as much like Piazza, IMO. Third, catchers are just weird and hard to compare. Since we have no evidence that who is catcher really affects pitcher performance, evaluating catchers is just tough.

With that being said I do think Piazza belongs in the debate of being the best catcher ever, but I think he is ultimately on the losing side of that discussion. But without looking at his numbers, I think he is first ballot HOFer.

clintl

07-12-2006, 09:59 AM

Interest list of the top 75 all time at each position:

http://www.thebaseballpage.com/index.php

The guys who put together those lists are full of crap. Rickey Henderson above Willie Mays as an outfielder?

And you've got guys like Joe Ferguson, Alan Ashby, Brad Ausmus, and Butch Wynegar on the list of 75 best catchers, but no Manny Sanguillen?

John Galt

07-12-2006, 10:05 AM

Barring Jeter turning into a Pete Rose like freak of longevity, I don't see him getting into the "all time greatest" picture based on anything more than New York and ESPN hype. Which, sadly, will probably be more than enough.

I certainly agree with the hype factor, but I also think we can all be a little guilty of joining in the backlash against the hype and ignoring how good Jeter is.

As for Wagner, his defense is kind of an unknown quantity, but I've always assumed (and this may be a bad assumption) that because he played so many other positions besides SS that he wasn't the best defensive player. If we assume (and again this may be a bad assumption) that he is on par with Jeter defensively, then I think Jeter has a shot. Again, I agree it would take several more career years and a lot of longevity, but that is possible (unlikely, but possible). But I like those odds better than Pujols because Pujols has a foot problem that rarely goes away, has indications that he may have back problems (which is bad for a young player), and there have been many great players over the years who had their careers derailed by injuries. It's a close call, but I still think Jeter has a better chance of being in the debate for best SS than Pujols does for 1B (but I think both have them have long odds right now).

edit: One other oddity about comparing Wagner and Jeter's SLG percentages is that Wagner may have been helped by the dead ball era. He only had 101 career HR's. Almost all of his SLG is due to the ridiculous number of 3B's he was able to get in the expansive OF's of the deadball era. So, although I agree Jeter's numbers don't look as good in the current era, I also think Wagner's numbers need to be looked at in the unusual dead ball era.

VPI97

07-12-2006, 10:12 AM

Piazza - yes, if you just consider offense.
There may be an argument that if you consider the era in which they played, Johnny Bench's offensive numbers are just as impressive as Piazza's. But when you consider defense, the comparison between the two isn't remotely close.

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 10:26 AM

There may be an argument that if you consider the era in which they played, Johnny Bench's offensive numbers are just as impressive as Piazza's. But when you consider defense, the comparison between the two isn't remotely close.
Does anyone else think that when you combine offense and defense, Ivan Rodriguez has to enter the "greatest catcher" discussion?

clintl

07-12-2006, 10:27 AM

I think the big difference offensively is that Piazza sustained his excellence over a longer period than Bench did. His OPS+ is 147, to Bench's 126.

But I agree, Bench was such a dominant catcher defensively, that more than closes the gap, and Bench was the better all-around catcher. For that matter, I think Yogi Berra was also a better all-around catcher than Piazza.

clintl

07-12-2006, 10:29 AM

Does anyone else think that when you combine offense and defense, Ivan Rodriguez has to enter the "greatest catcher" discussion?

I think he's not Bench's equal, nor probably Berra's. But certainly he belongs in the discussion of who belongs in the top 5.

John Galt

07-12-2006, 10:32 AM

Does anyone else think that when you combine offense and defense, Ivan Rodriguez has to enter the "greatest catcher" discussion?

His recent resurgence definitely helps his case. I think the sabermatic semi-revolution hurts him though because his OBP was hurt by his free-swinging ways. His MVP award was a pretty undeserved, IMO.

Another thing that has hurt his defensive reputation is the whispers (I originally heard this from a Yankees scouting report) that I-Rod made his pitchers throw fastballs with runners on base so he could keep his throwing percentages up. I never saw if anyone ever studied this to see if it was true (to see if I-Rod's pitchers had an unusually high BAA with runners on base). But it adds one wrinkle to his otherwise sterling defensive reputation.

I haven't looked at his numbers in a while, but my initial inclination is to think he is near the discussion, but still not in it, but I could be wrong.

st.cronin

07-12-2006, 10:38 AM

The guys who put together those lists are full of crap. Rickey Henderson above Willie Mays as an outfielder?

And you've got guys like Joe Ferguson, Alan Ashby, Brad Ausmus, and Butch Wynegar on the list of 75 best catchers, but no Manny Sanguillen?

I honestly believe that Rickey Henderson is the greatest player of the last 50 years.

JS19

07-12-2006, 10:44 AM

Rivera - Yes
Bonds - Possibly
Pujols - Long, long way to go. Gehrig and Foxx, anyone?
Piazza - You can't rule out defense when talking catchers
ARod - Might well be
Clemens - Tough to compare pitchers, I don't think so personally
Jeter - (Head explodes)

This actually pretty much the exact way I see it. I know it's too early for Pujols, but he very well could be the best at his position when all is said and done. Considering just offense, I think Piazza gets the nod over Bench, but Bench was obviously the best overall C. I also agree it's tough to compare SPs, but a great case can be made for Clemens being the best. I retracted my Jeter comment already. And someone already mentioned it, but its possible we are seeing the greatest player ever in ARod.

clintl

07-12-2006, 10:45 AM

Rickey was the greatest basestealer ever, and walked a lot. He was good hitter with decent power, and a fine defensive left fielder. But he couldn't touch Mays with respect to hitting for average and for power, and Mays was one of the greatest defensive center fielders ever.

Pumpy Tudors

07-12-2006, 11:01 AM

Wait, why did you guys stop talking about Greg Gagne?

Franklinnoble

07-12-2006, 11:01 AM

Cal Ripken Jr. was the greatest SS of all time.

oykib

07-12-2006, 11:10 AM

Cal Ripken Jr. was the greatest SS of all time.

If A-Rod never plays another inning at short, he's still better than Cal.

That's not even getting into Honus Wagner's career.

st.cronin

07-12-2006, 11:14 AM

Wait, why did you guys stop talking about Greg Gagne?

That's actually who I thought they were talking about! Anyway, he couldn't hold a candle to Spike Owen.

Pumpy Tudors

07-12-2006, 11:17 AM

Comedy response:

We have certainly seen the greatest players at EVERY offensive position in the past 20 years, and I really do mean "offensive!"

C - Benny Distefano (As far as I know, he's the last lefthanded guy to catch in MLB, even if it was only in 3 games in 1989)
1B - Nick Esasky (You spin me right round, baby!)
2B - Nelson Liriano (.409 batting average in 1991)
3B - Kelly Gruber (Don't argue with me on this)
SS - Andres Thomas (Bobbleheads are the cool thing this decade, but Thomas made "bobble hands" popular in the '80s)
OF - Joe Orsulak (Woo, remember that studly year he had with the Marlins? Me neither!)
OF - Gary Pettis (That boy run so good, you wished he knew how to get on base more often)
OF - Derek Bell (Obviously)

Come on, what are we arguing here, guys?

Franklinnoble

07-12-2006, 11:18 AM

If A-Rod never plays another inning at short, he's still better than Cal.

You blaspheme.

Pumpy Tudors

07-12-2006, 11:18 AM

That's actually who I thought they were talking about! Anyway, he couldn't hold a candle to Spike Owen.
I bet Spike Owen and Tom Foley got into some awesome brawls in that Montreal locker room. Those guys were bad-ass.

st.cronin

07-12-2006, 11:24 AM

Ramzavail

07-12-2006, 11:24 AM

I honestly believe that Rickey Henderson is the greatest player of the last 50 years.

Me and a couple of friends believe this as well.

At least, I think he's the best offensive player in my lifetime.

Ramzavail

07-12-2006, 11:28 AM

SS - Andres Thomas (Bobbleheads are the cool thing this decade, but Thomas made "bobble hands" popular in the '80s)

That is just hilarious.

Pumpy Tudors

07-12-2006, 11:30 AM

st.cronin is a real man, guys. He knows what he's talking about.

I'd like to give big ups to my main Daves, too: Dave Magadan and Dave Hansen. Watching those guys jump from 1B to 3B again and again reminded me of my days playing Frog Bog on my Intellivision.

Also, mad props to Gerald Perry, former Braves/Royals/Cardinals first baseman, only because his batting stance made him look like he was going to beat the fuck out of anyone who came within 20 feet of him.

st.cronin

07-12-2006, 11:34 AM

Also, mad props to Gerald Perry, former Braves/Royals/Cardinals first baseman, only because his batting stance made him look like he was going to beat the fuck out of anyone who came within 20 feet of him.

The baseball was usually safe from harm, though.

Pumpy Tudors

07-12-2006, 11:36 AM

The baseball was usually safe from harm, though.
I set 'em up, you knock 'em down.

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 12:26 PM

Kelly Gruber was awesome.

Pumpy Tudors

07-12-2006, 12:28 PM

Kelly Gruber was awesome.
Hair Canada, baby.

DanGarion

07-12-2006, 12:30 PM

Your homerism really is incredible sometimes. The titles matter because of Rivera's role in them. These are his career post-season stats:

111.2 IP, 0.81 ERA, 34 Saves, 8 Wins, 1 Loss.

Was he the closer in 95 and 96? because that's 25 innings right there that don't count then...

vtbub

07-12-2006, 12:32 PM

Was he the closer in 95 and 96? because that's 25 innings right there that don't count then...

He set up Wettland, but it shouldn't count against him.

DanGarion

07-12-2006, 12:33 PM

.

Pujols has a long way to go to equal Lou Gehrig, and he's not on pace to do so.

In what way is he not on pace? 675 HRs at the age of 35 seems to be a bit more then Gehrig. What are you basing this off of?

DanGarion

07-12-2006, 12:36 PM

Alex Rodríguez's postseason numbers are better than Jeter's in an admittedly smaller sample size.

However, Jeter's numbers stay even with his overall numbers across the board. A-Rod's BA and OBP stay even but his SLG is lower in the postseason. Still 60 points or so higher than Jeter's, IIRC.
Jeter is a passable SS though, and that's about it. I've read a number of studies on how his defense is nothing to write home about.

Stevebsfan

07-12-2006, 12:58 PM

You have no clue what you're on about. Riviera is the best closer - as defined today, in baseball history, and ought to be a first ballot HOF. Gagne, is not.

I can't even believe people would even talk about Gagne in the same breath as Rivera when talking about the best closers in history. I say this even as a Red Sox fan.

Gagne had 3 great seasons, but even Rocker proved that is possible to do. Granted Rocker's 3 great seasons weren't as good as Gagne's, they were still great seasons. Before he started opening his mouth, people really feared the guy.

Btw, has the 'S' word been mention for Gagne yet? I haven't heard it mentioned, which is surprising. Nomar tears his groin, and a Boston writer hints at it. Pujols goes on a tear, and there are whispers. Ortiz shows his power once he's given a full time role, and many Yankee fans have no problem accusing him of it. Just kind of shocking more people aren't hinting at roids when it comes to Gagne.

st.cronin

07-12-2006, 01:02 PM

I can't believe nobody's mentioned Floyd Rayford yet.

GoldenEagle

07-12-2006, 01:08 PM

What is this, act like a troll day ? You realize A-rod outhit Jeter in the 2004 playoffs, right ?

He states his opinion and backs it up and you call him a troll? :confused:

John Galt

07-12-2006, 01:39 PM

Was he the closer in 95 and 96? because that's 25 innings right there that don't count then...

:confused: Why don't those count?

The reason I excluded Gagne's numbers as a starter is because they only hurt his case. If I include them, he looks like a much worse pitcher. I could similarly exclude Rivera's one season as a starter (when he was awful), but he still looks incredible DESPITE that season.

I guess I just don't understand what you are saying.

DanGarion

07-12-2006, 01:54 PM

:confused: Why don't those count?

The reason I excluded Gagne's numbers as a starter is because they only hurt his case. If I include them, he looks like a much worse pitcher. I could similarly exclude Rivera's one season as a starter (when he was awful), but he still looks incredible DESPITE that season.

I guess I just don't understand what you are saying.
I was trying to pad Gagne a bit. :)

mckerney

07-12-2006, 01:55 PM

Ortiz shows his power once he's given the green light to hit for power instead of try for singles, and many Yankee fans have no problem accusing him of it.

Fixed.

Maple Leafs

07-12-2006, 01:58 PM

DanGarion

07-12-2006, 02:05 PM

Hey, here's a question: Gagne was considered a marginal talent for the first half of his career, suddenly became an elite power pitcher from 2002-2004, then his body breaks down before he's even 30. Why don't you ever hear him mentioned in steroid rumors?
I think it's because the elite part happened with a change in duties, he goes from a starting pitcher to a closer. He had always thrown the heat, it was just he never had the stamina to really stay competitive when he started. Plus he was still pretty young when he was starting. I personally think that if he had continued starting he would have developed as well. But that's just my personal opinion.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/G/Eric-Gagne.shtml Here are his numbers including minor league stats.

st.cronin

07-12-2006, 02:12 PM

John Galt

07-12-2006, 02:23 PM

I was trying to pad Gagne a bit. :)

Fair enough. I think Gagne may go down as the best of all the short-term dominant closers in history (Wild Thing, Thigpen, Rocker, Myers, and on and on and on). But he is so far from the achievements of Rivera that I found MrBug's comments to be bizarre.

stevew

07-12-2006, 02:27 PM

Rick Mahler was the shit. Fear the Palm Ball.

DanGarion

07-12-2006, 02:31 PM

Fair enough. I think Gagne may go down as the best of all the short-term dominant closers in history (Wild Thing, Thigpen, Rocker, Myers, and on and on and on). But he is so far from the achievements of Rivera that I found MrBug's comments to be bizarre.
Yeah Rivera is the guy that I want to give the ball to day in and day out for a career (although I'd of liked to have Gossage or Marshall back in the 80s and 70s)

But if it came to a single season I think Gagne would be the guy I want to give it to.

clintl

07-12-2006, 04:46 PM

In what way is he not on pace? 675 HRs at the age of 35 seems to be a bit more then Gehrig. What are you basing this off of?

One, he's on pace for about 600 HRs at the age of 35, not 675, and that's if his age is accurate (which some people think he might be a bit older than 26).

Two, and here's why I think he's not on pace - his career OPS+ (169) is 10 points less than Gehrig's (179), and he's only had one season, 2003, where his season OPS+ is higher than Gehrig's career OPS+. By Gehrig's fifth year, he had already had two seasons with an OPS+ better than Pujols' best so far. And there on, Gehrig pretty much put up monster seasons every year. So, as great as Pujols has been, I think he still needs to pick up the pace to match Gehrig's value as an offensive player. But he's within striking distance, for sure, and if he stays healthy, and he's really 26, he's almost certainly going to end up passing Gehrig in HRs as you said.

DeToxRox

07-12-2006, 05:02 PM

Pudge Rodriguez is better then Piazza.

Pudge is no slouch offensivley, and rivals Bench defensivley.

Pudge might be the best catcher of all time. Piazza just might be the best offensive catcher of all time.

JonInMiddleGA

07-12-2006, 05:09 PM

SS - Andres Thomas (Bobbleheads are the cool thing this decade, but Thomas made "bobble hands" popular in the '80s)

You young folks just kill me. Andres Thomas? Shit.

He couldn't carry the jockstrap of Darrell Chaney.

I'm not even sure that Thomas deserves to be mentioned before Pepe Frias.

ISiddiqui

07-12-2006, 07:10 PM

I agree that A-Rod may indeed be the best 3B ever when all is said and done. He isn't all that far from Schmidt in OPS+ and, Hell, his HR numbers could be phenomenal.

As for Jeter, he's got one Hell of a way to go to get to Honus Wagner, but then again, seeing as the era was so different, people may not even be willing to compare the two.

Rivera gets the closer award and Clemens deserves to be in the best starting pitcher discussion (but probably will always lose out to Walter Johnson or Lefty Grove). Then again, when Pedro Martinez retires, who knows how we'll look at him. He may be in the discussion (and probably should be).

sterlingice

07-15-2006, 04:12 PM

Interest list of the top 75 all time at each position:

http://www.thebaseballpage.com/index.php

Bill James's Historical Abstract is pretty much the same thing, except it's 100 players and it's a much better read.

SI

sterlingice

07-15-2006, 04:17 PM

Do we get to count Ernie Banks when we're talking SS or does he get left off because he had to move to 1B later in his career?

SI

Maple Leafs

07-15-2006, 04:26 PM

Do we get to count Ernie Banks when we're talking SS or does he get left off because he had to move to 1B later in his career?
I think he counts, but he's not as good as Wagner.

rowech

07-15-2006, 05:15 PM

This would be my team:

c -- Berra (Bench is a close second...Rodriguez has been juiced up for years)

1b -- Gerhig

2b -- Joe Morgan (Hornsby close as well)

ss -- toughest position for I think anyone to decide other than picking only 3 OF. Ozzie Smith was very one-dimensional. I believe Larkin was every bit as good as Ozzie defensively with a heck of a lot more offense. Ripken was good but he wasn't the hitter Honus Wagner was...not even close.

3b -- Mike Schmdt....like Brett, AROD, and Brooks but I'll take Schmidt.

lf -- Ted Williams

cf -- toughest call...Mantle, DiMaggio, Mays, or Griffey. Tough to argue against any of them, but I'll go with Mays

rf -- Greatest hitter of all-time...Ruth

sp -- Clemens and Walter Johnson...Seaver is up there as well.

rp -- Rivera...he is without question the best closer of all-time. The guys from the 70s were good but it was a different kind of closing. Eck was good but not for the duration Rivera has been this good.