The Most Underrated/Overrated player ever?

[PumpsieGreen]

I have forever believed that Stan Musial is the most underrated player ever. This guy is one of the top ten players of all time, right there with Ted Williams in my book, yet he still goes too unnoticed. In that 1999 All-Century Team, he wasn't picked. Of course, I suppose that doesn't mean much. What scares me more is that, in a recent thread, a poster claimed that Musial wasn't even one of the top three Cardinals in Missouri! He, in these eyes, is the greatest Cardinal ever, even superior to Rogers Hornsby(not by a lot though.)

I'm not quite sure who the most overrated player of all time is, but my question to you is, who are the most overrated and underrated players of all time?

[janduscframe]

would think that many of those who had careers during World War Two would have to be considered. Musial, Feller,Williams etc....One can only speculate what kind of numbers some of these fellows may have put up during the one -three years missed.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I'd have to pick Nolan Ryan as the most overrated player of all-time, based on the perception of many of the genral public that he's the greatest pitcher of all-time. Ryan's HOF induction was well-deserved, and he is a great ambassador of the sport, but his acclaim supercedes his career.

As for underrated, I don't connect being undervalued through time as underrated, which means I can't pick any well-regarded HOF player for this. Musial, Spahn, etc. were well-recognized during their day, and because Joe Fan can't tell you who they are 40+ years after they played ther last game doesn't make them underrated to me. Underappreciated, yes, but you can't expect everyone to be a historian. The All-Century team is not an indicator of reality.

Without researching further back, I'd pick Vada Pinson as the most underrated player of all-time. He put up some big numbers trapped in a number of shadows.

[Captain Cold Nose]

would think that many of those who had careers during World War Two would have to be considered. Musial, Feller,Williams etc....One can only speculate what kind of numbers some of these fellows may have put up during the one -three years missed.

How does that make them underrated? Ted Williams?

[PumpsieGreen]

I agree that Ryan is highly overrated as well, Captain Cold Nose. He had this cool, fan-loving swagger about him, but really, his career doesn't match up. He isn't one of the top 20 greatest starting pitchers of all time, although some people are led to believe that he's one of the top ten.

I think Reggie Jackson can tend to be overrated, as well. Everyone remembers his 3 home run playoff game, his brashness, and his powerful bat, but he is the all time leader in strikeouts, and his batting average surely doesn't hold up.

Pumpsie

[shlevine42]

Underrated?

Jackie Robinson.

A superb fielder, able to play several positions.
A dangerous hitter with decent power, who was at his best in the clutch.
A dazzling base runner.
Capable of using any or all of those skills to completely dominate a game.
A ferocious competitor who simply would not let his team lose.

It's sad -- and wrong -- that he's almost never mentioned among the all-time greats because his role as a pioneer has obscured his extraordinary talents as a player.

[PumpsieGreen]

I agree, shlevine. Robinson was a great player, one of the five greatest second basemen ever in my opinion, who gets passed up and unnoticed too often.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Underrated?

Jackie Robinson.


It's sad -- and wrong -- that he's almost never mentioned among the all-time greats because his role as a pioneer has obscured his extraordinary talents as a player.

I agree 100% with this statement. Robinson's ability to dominate a game with all he brought to the sport makes him a truly unique player. One thing that has hurt his perception as a player is many of his Negro League contempoaries have stated there were far better players in the Negro Leagues than Robinson. While that may be true, Robinson excelled under the most adverse of circumstances.

[janduscframe]

I was trying to point out that some of these all time greats COULD have been considered even greater if not for missing a few years during the war.

[ElHalo]

Overrated? Easy, Mike Schmidt. A role player who somehow gets accorded all time great status because of the weakness of his competition... same goes for Pete Rose and Joe Morgan.

Underrated? I've always said Hornsby, because your average Joe Schmoe fan out there doesn't even get a glimmer of recognition in his eye when you mention his name... most baseball fans I've met have never, and I mean not even once, heard the guy's name. If that doesn't say underrated, I don't know what does.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Overrated? Easy, Mike Schmidt. A role player who somehow gets accorded all time great status because of the weakness of his competition... same goes for Pete Rose and Joe Morgan.

Underrated? I've always said Hornsby, because your average Joe Schmoe fan out there doesn't even get a glimmer of recognition in his eye when you mention his name... most baseball fans I've met have never, and I mean not even once, heard the guy's name. If that doesn't say underrated, I don't know what does.
At the least, people have heard of him because of A League of Their Own, where he's mentioned in Tom Hanks's "No Crying in Baseball" speech.
When the "experts" put together list of all-time greats, Hornsby is mentioned. I just don't see how a person who only goes to a game for some entertainment with the family not knowing a player whose career ended twenty years before they were even born is expected to know or care who that is.
What Joe Schmoe Family Guy does or does not know shouldn't be the gauge of who is underrated, to me.
Rose is overrated. Not to take anything away from him as a hustling player with big numbers, but when Cincinnati radio heads shout out how Hank Aaron and Bob Feller (who arguments can be made abut being overrated and underrated) have no right to question Rose's integrity because they're not the all-time hits leader is ridiculous. No player, ever, or even person, is too big to be questioned.
Schmidt was the best of a weak era. In terms of history, he might get looked at a bit more closely than he deserves. Very possibly the greatest third baseman of all time, but third base is historically one of the weakest positions.
Morgan is like Scmidt in this matter, excpet second basemen are better at the very top than third basemen.

I'd like to know what exactly your definition of role player is. For me, there isn't much difference between role player and utility player. In a sense, every player is a role player. But some roles are far bigger than others.

[dgarza]

Avg Joe probably doen't even know any of the early pitching greats either.

[baclightning]

Underrated, HOF division: Stan Musial, Eddie Collins, Martin Dihigo, Hank Greenberg.

Underrated, non-HOF division: Joe Gordon, Ted Simmons, Vern Stephens, Tim Raines.

Overrated: Nolan Ryan, Thurman Munson, Pie Traynor :D .

(The last one named is a joke, referring to a recent thread, before anyone flames me!)

[julusnc]

Overrated -
Nolan Ryan (Great pitcher but not the greatest)

Cal Ripken (Good player that never missed a day of school - would have been a much better player and team leader if he had rested up every once in awhile)

Joe DiMaggio (Great player but he was never the greatest)

Underrated -

Jimmie Foxx (One of the greatest hitters of all-time and just because he played in an era of greats they forget about him)

Juan Marichal (He was as good as Koufax for about twice as long)

Warren Spahn (He was simply amazing and people forget just how amazing)

[PumpsieGreen]

Great choices, baclightening. Collins is, in my opinion, the second greatest second baseman ever, and Greenberg is the third, and yet they still fail to get noticed too much, although I think the appreciation of Greenberg has been growing. I think both Simmons and Raines should make the hall one day, although Simmons is overshadowed by Johnny Bench, and Raines seemed to be overshadowed by Rickey Henderson.

Julusnc,
Couldn't agree more with you, particularly about Marichal, in my opinion the greatest pitcher of the entire 1960s.

[torez77]

Warren Spahn (He was simply amazing and people forget just how amazing)

Actually, I think Spahn is slightly overrated. I never saw him pitch, so all I can do is look at the stats. I respect his longevity and consistency, but he was no where near as dominant as W Johnson, Koufax, Grove, Clemens, Martinez and many others IMO. Sorry, when looking at the stats, I just don't see anything "amazing".

[torez77]

Underrated -

Wade Boggs - His .328 lifetime BA leads all 3B, yet I never see him mentioned in discussions about the greatest 3B ever.

Rube Waddell - Fireballing lefty in the early 1900's. Dominated the K column. Is on the level of Johnson, Mathewson, Alexander and Young but never gets the recognition they get.

Billy Hamilton - Statistically, the best leadoff man ever!

Ed Delahanty - .346 BA is 4th-highest ever, an extra-base hitting machine!


Overrated -

Warren Spahn - see above post.

Hank Aaron - some people actually say he's underrated, yet I see a lot that say he's the best HR hitter, and even the best PLAYER ever. Check out the HRs per at-bats, and also check how many games and at-bats he had, and you'll see there are many others who are better.

Pete Rose - many people have said this, and it's darn true! Just like Aaron was not a better HR hitter than Ruth (among many others), Rose was not a better base-hitter than Cobb (among many others).

The above 3 players mentioned got their numbers because they played so many years. Now don't get me wrong - I will have to give them credit for their consistency and longevity, but at their peaks they were NO WHERE NEAR the best players of all time! Also, I happen to believe that there's a lot of luck that comes with that kind of longevity.

I also have to agree with others that say Ryan, Ripken and Morgan are overrated.

That's all I can think of right now.

[leecemark]

All Overrated...............All Underrated
C: Ray Schalk..............Bill Freehan
1B: George Sisler..........Norm Cash
2B: Roberto Alomar........Joe Gordon
3B: Pie Traynor.............Stan Hack
SS: Ozzie Smith............Arky Vaughan
LF: Lou Brock...............Tim Raines
CF: Hack Wilson............Wally Berger
RF: Pete Rose...............Mel Ott
P: Nolan Ryan..............Carl Hubbell

--All the "overrated" players were very good or even great. They just have bigger reputations than their accomplishments merit.

[prof93]

All Overrated...............All Underrated

C-Johnny Bench................Bill Dickey
1B-Mark MacGwire..............Gil Hodges
2B-Joe Morgan....................Joe Gordon
3B-George Brett...................Al Rosen
SS-Ozzie Smith.....................Vern Stephens
OF-Lou Brock.......................Roger Maris
OF-Pete Rose........................Tim raines
OF-Ken griffey Jr...................Duke Snider

[ElHalo]

Well, if we're doing teams...

Overrated:

C: Carlton Fisk
1B: Willie McCovey
2B: Joe Morgan
SS: Cal Ripken, Jr.
3B: Mike Schmidt
OF: Pete Rose
OF: Hank Aaron
OF: Reggie Jackson
SP: Nolan Ryan
SP: Sandy Koufax
SP: Ed Lopat
SP: Kid Nichols

Underrated:

C: Wally Schang
1B: George Sisler
2B: Rogers Hornsby
SS: Arky Vaughan
3B: Pie Traynor
OF: Stan Musial
OF: Ed Delahanty
OF: Mel Ott
SP: Addie Joss
SP: Chief Bender
SP: Warren Spahn
SP: Bob Feller

Now that I look at it, I think my all underrated team would be my all overrated team pretty handily.

[Bushrod]

under: Nap Lajoie
Johnny Mize
Ralph Kiner
Chuck Klein
Ed Delahanty
Pete Rose
Joe Adcock
Sam Crawfish
Lee May
Dave Kingman
Duke Snider
Luis Aparicio
Mario Soto
Robin Roberts

Overate:
Yount
Ripken
Barry Bonds
Sammy Sosa

[nightal]

Off the top of my head:
overrated
DiMaggio
Aaron
Ripken
Ryan

underrated
Musial
Heilmann
Vaughan

[PumpsieGreen]

Overrated
Don Mattingly
Ozzie Smith
Cal Ripken, Jr.
Sammy Sosa
Pete Rose
Pie Traynor
Brooks Robinson

Underrated
Pedro Guerrerro(just look at the stats-they rival Mattingly's)
Arky Vaughan
Stan Hack
Wade Boggs

[dgarza]

All Overrated...............All Underrated

C-Johnny Bench................Bill Dickey
1B-Mark MacGwire..............Gil Hodges
2B-Joe Morgan....................Joe Gordon
3B-George Brett...................Al Rosen
SS-Ozzie Smith.....................Vern Stephens
OF-Lou Brock.......................Roger Maris
OF-Pete Rose........................Tim raines
OF-Ken griffey Jr...................Duke Snider
So the Cards and Reds are overrated... :)

[Retire21]

Overrated-Current
1.Barry Bonds
2.Sammy Sosa
3.Miguel Tejada
4.Alex Rodriguez
5.Pedro Martinez-I can't say this enough times: Most.Overrated.Pitcher.Ever.

Underrated-Current
1.Jorge Posada
2.Nomar Garciaparra
3.Todd Helton-I don't understand how a guy who hits this well gets so little attention outside of Colorado.
4.Albert Pujols-Yes, I'm serious. Any discussion of the NL's best player should start with him and then move on to Bonds.
5.Mike Piazza

Overrated-Retired
1.Hank Aaron
2.Reggie Jackson
3.Ozzie Smith
4.Cal Ripken, Jr.
5.Sandy Koufax

Underrated-Retired
1.Tony Lazzeri
2.Don Mattingly
3.Ted Williams
4.Whitey Ford
5.Cap Anson

[Imapotato]

Overrated

every 'great' hitter in the majors today
every stat broken in the last 10 years
LH batters at Fenway and Yankee stadium (aside from the GREATS, Williams, Ruth and Gehrig)
1920 Negro Leaguers
1920 midlevel hitters
Barry Bonds as a top 10 player in baseball history
Closers

Underrated
The great consistent pitchers of the 20's (Coveleski, Grimes, Rixey, Ted Lyons) and today's finesse guys like Greg Maddux and Jamie Moyer
Hank Aaron
Joe DiMaggio
deadball players
50's and 60's hitters...where baseball was even between pitching and hitting
Bob Meusel
SHERRY MAGEE!
relief specialists such as Hoyt Wilhelm, Elroy Face and Kent Tucklve...who pitched more than 150 innings a season

[RuthMayBond]

Great choices, baclightening. Collins is, in my opinion, the second greatest second baseman ever, and Greenberg is the third.Well, he would have been a good OFFENSIVE one

[RuthMayBond]

Overrated-Current

5.Pedro Martinez-I can't say this enough times: Most.Overrated.Pitcher.Ever.

Underrated-Current

2.Nomar Garciaparra
What's to underrate about Pedro other than stamina?
Maybe Nomah wouldn't be "underrated" if he could play a full season

[RuthMayBond]

Underrated

Joe DiMaggioNot until all the guys who claim DiMaggio was the "greatest ever" are gone

[ElHalo]

Yeah, wanted to make a question about that Pedro being the most overrated pitcher ever thing...

Other than stamina (which is a serious, serious knock against him), Pedro would probably be the single greatest pitcher of all time. The stamina problem knocks that down quite a bit, sure. But where is he overrated?

[Captain Cold Nose]

Yeah, wanted to make a question about that Pedro being the most overrated pitcher ever thing...

Other than stamina (which is a serious, serious knock against him), Pedro would probably be the single greatest pitcher of all time. The stamina problem knocks that down quite a bit, sure. But where is he overrated?
Probably in the same areas Ted Williams is underrated.

[santotohof]

most overrated- 1)Don Drysdale.Good pitcher but HOF,nah.Marichal,Gibson, and a host of peers outshine him.he must have bought drinks for every HOF writer/voter on a regular basis....2) dave winfield- he always had good numbers but it always seemed he did his best damage when the game was already decided.King of the 3 run double when you already had a 4 run lead................Underrated1) Ted Simmons. Switch hitting,often a 300 or close,hitting catcher with very good defensive skills.Always lost in the Bench,Fisk,Munson fog.2) Ron Guidry- His 78 season compares with any ever. His career is actually more consistent than Koufax yet you never hear Gid mentioned.Multiple 20 wins.Overpowering and also at the height of his career offered to hit the pen for the good of his team when injuries left the Yanks without a closer.Great player,great teammate.

[Retire21]

O.K. I'll defend myself.
First-Pedro
1.Pedro has had the good fortune to pitch in strikeout or homerun era. Especially in the AL with the blasted DH, hitters are all or nothing now.
2.The division he pitches in is the epitome of all or nothing so facing these teams all the time, he is going to have success.
3.As you have noted, his stamina is next to nothing. Where is the "greatness" when it's needed in the eighth and ninth?
Second-Nomar
1.Two time batting champ, and he's a righty-in the AL.
2.The last mentioned in the "trinity" and sometimes supplanted by Tejada.
3.For being one of Boston's most productive players over the last seven years and always playing second fiddle to someone.

Oh, and as far as Teddy Ballgame goes, if Bonds had one one hundredth of the respect for the game as he had, he might be half the overall player he was.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Oh, and as far as Teddy Ballgame goes, if Bonds had one one hundredth of the respect for the game as he had, he might be half the overall player he was.

I'm not going to touch the respect argument, considering who Bonds's godfather is and who his father was (if being a self-serving jerk means a complete lack of respect for baseball then Williams wasn't much better off in that respect) but I still fail to see how this means Williams was underrated. He's on a very short list of players regarded as the greatest hitter of all-time and received a huge ovation at the All-Century ceremony a couple years ago. He's probably the highest profile non-Yankee player since World War II with the possible exceptions of Rose, Ryan and Mays. (I'm talking about people who aren't die hard fans.) Considering he was practically a one-dimensional player (what a dimension!) I just can't see it.

Imapotato, since you hold that the hitting exploits of this era aren't so impressive, how do you feel about the top line pitchers of the last ten years?

BTW, the more research I do, the more I am coming to the belief that Sherry Magee is the most unheralded and underrated player of the first half of the twentieth century. It might even go beyond that.

[RuthMayBond]

O.K. I'll defend myself.
First-Pedro
1.Pedro has had the good fortune to pitch in strikeout or homerun era. Especially in the AL with the blasted DH, hitters are all or nothing now.
2.The division he pitches in is the epitome of all or nothing so facing these teams all the time, he is going to have success.
3.As you have noted, his stamina is next to nothing. Where is the "greatness" when it's needed in the eighth and ninth?

Oh, and as far as Teddy Ballgame goes, if Bonds had one one hundredth of the respect for the game as he had, he might be half the overall player he was.Yeah, Pedro has the "good fortune" to pitch in the highest offense era in about 65 years, and facing the Yanks (and Toronto and Baltimore have had some hitters) is easy.

Yeah, Teddy "respected" the game, he spat on fans and the "overall player" hardly worked on his defense unlike Bonds' eight gold gloves

[ElHalo]

Yeah, there are plenty of arguments for why Ted Williams was a better hitter (and, I believe, better player overall) than Barry Bonds... but Bonds wins the fielding/baserunning part of the competition going away.

And as for your Pedro arguments... the ONLY one that makes sense to me is the stamina thing. He's got a problem with Stamina. Other than that, he's Addie Joss incarnate, only putting up Joss-like numbers in the greatest offensive era in history. Go ahead... look up the career WHIP list. An un-adjusted stat.

1. Addie Joss
2. Ed Walsh
3. Pedro Martinez

Sorry, Pedro's freakishly, amazingly, all time great, who's only stopped from being called the greatest pitcher in history because of his stamina.

[csh19792001]

Overrated-Current
1.Barry Bonds
2.Sammy Sosa
3.Miguel Tejada
4.Alex Rodriguez
5.Pedro Martinez-I can't say this enough times: Most.Overrated.Pitcher.Ever.

Underrated-Current
1.Jorge Posada
2.Nomar Garciaparra
3.Todd Helton-I don't understand how a guy who hits this well gets so little attention outside of Colorado.
4.Albert Pujols-Yes, I'm serious. Any discussion of the NL's best player should start with him and then move on to Bonds.
5.Mike Piazza

Overrated-Retired
1.Hank Aaron
2.Reggie Jackson
3.Ozzie Smith
4.Cal Ripken, Jr.
5.Sandy Koufax

Underrated-Retired
1.Tony Lazzeri
2.Don Mattingly
3.Ted Williams
4.Whitey Ford
5.Cap Anson

Why is Pedro the most overrated pitcher ever?

Good call on Cap Anson. Somebody else said Eddie Collins and Musial. Great calls there, too.

I'd say Ryan, Ripken, Jim Rice, Joe Morgan, are good choices.

But again, this is hard to say, because we haven't defined our populace- if we're talking about amongst common baseball fans who aren't students of history, my list will be much different than if we are talking about SABR members, octogenarians, etc.

[Retire21]

O.K., again I'm in the firing range. I love this!
Now, for Williams: Most people, including Captain Cold Nose, say he was one dimensional. The thing is that one dimension is the most overall important aspect of the game. Not only could the man hit, but he could analyze the swing of any other hitter, could read any pitcher. As a pure hitter there has never been any better, and hitting scores runs. Runs win games. Williams, by the way, had enough respect for the real fans, the ones who don't turn on you when you get an ofer. As far as his relationship with the media, who can blame him?

Pedro-I cannot call a pitcher great when he decides arbitrarily to hit guys in the head everytime, everytime! someone gets the best of him. If my statistical arguments are not valid enough, what about the kind of ballplayer he is. His temperament is that of Ty Cobb without the boyish aspect. The way he acts on the field is better left to a pro wrestling match. You have to show respect to the game or otherwise you do not belong on the diamond. Pedro has never shown the game one iota of repect and goes alone like he has some right to things always going his way. I will not stand behind a player who would put his own ideals ahead of the game. I know this is an emotional rather than logical argument, but it is important to me that if you put on the uniform, you represent baseball. He plays in the American League of Professional Baseball Clubs, not the Pedro League. His stats mean nothing when he spits on the game.

[ElHalo]

Pedro-I cannot call a pitcher great when he decides arbitrarily to hit guys in the head everytime, everytime! someone gets the best of him. If my statistical arguments are not valid enough, what about the kind of ballplayer he is. His temperament is that of Ty Cobb without the boyish aspect. The way he acts on the field is better left to a pro wrestling match. You have to show respect to the game or otherwise you do not belong on the diamond. Pedro has never shown the game one iota of repect and goes alone like he has some right to things always going his way. I will not stand behind a player who would put his own ideals ahead of the game. I know this is an emotional rather than logical argument, but it is important to me that if you put on the uniform, you represent baseball. He plays in the American League of Professional Baseball Clubs, not the Pedro League. His stats mean nothing when he spits on the game.

I'll grant you that Pedro's probably not the nicest clubhouse presence, but he hardly "spits on the game." Sure, he's no Derek Jeter... he's not going to play through pain, he's not going be a vocal team leader, and he's not going to cheer his teammates through the hard times and keep everybody's spirits high. Few players are like that, though. He's probably a bit more of a prima donna than I'd like in a player, but that's only a slight knock against him.

As for the head hunting... that's part of the game. That's the intimidation factor. As a pitcher, you want batters to not just be worried about trying to hit your stuff... you want them to be afraid of you. And throwing 95 mph at people is definitely something that would make the average hitter afraid of the pitcher. I give him bonus points for that... most pitchers don't have the gumption to pitch inside and go head hunting. I know that if I'm a pitcher, and I see somebody like Barry Bonds standing up there with his body armor crowding the plate, I'm going to go out of my way to hit him as hard as I can someplace where there is no padding covering things up... that's just baseball.

[RuthMayBond]

I'll grant you that Pedro's probably not the nicest clubhouse presence, but he hardly "spits on the game." Sure, he's no Derek Jeter... he's not going be a vocal team leader, and he's not going to cheer his teammates through the hard times and keep everybody's spirits high. Few players are like that, though. He's probably a bit more of a prima donna than I'd like in a player,And wasn't Williams pretty much like this?

[Captain Cold Nose]

O.K., again I'm in the firing range. I love this!
Now, for Williams: Most people, including Captain Cold Nose, say he was one dimensional. The thing is that one dimension is the most overall important aspect of the game. Not only could the man hit, but he could analyze the swing of any other hitter, could read any pitcher. As a pure hitter there has never been any better, and hitting scores runs. Runs win games. Williams, by the way, had enough respect for the real fans, the ones who don't turn on you when you get an ofer. As far as his relationship with the media, who can blame him?

.

That's fine. The guy had hitting to a science. It is well-documented, and I think one of the coolest displays at the Hall of Fame is the Williams display where it has a different baseball with his average over each part of the strike zone.

But, again, how is he underrated? This thread is about being underrated, not how well a player could hit, or how he didn't like the media. How is he underrated? I have never seen anyone slight him as a hitter, you've added nothing new to the argument about him being the greatest hitter of all time. He has not suffered from lack of recognition, part of the definition of being underrated.

As long as a player has not deliberately broken rules, or put himself well above the sport, and Pedro Martinez has not done the above, to say he has only spit on the game is ridiculous. What has Pedro done that is disrespectful to the sport? The guy pitches his heart out every time he's on the mound. That's why his record is so good, because few pitchers actually take the approach to pitching as he does. How is that a disrespect to the game?

[WillieKamm]

Underrated?

Jackie Robinson.

A superb fielder, able to play several positions.
A dangerous hitter with decent power, who was at his best in the clutch.
A dazzling base runner.
Capable of using any or all of those skills to completely dominate a game.
A ferocious competitor who simply would not let his team lose.

It's sad -- and wrong -- that he's almost never mentioned among the all-time greats because his role as a pioneer has obscured his extraordinary talents as a player. I'm new here and this makes the second time you really made an impression on me. Very good and accurate post.

[WillieKamm]

Actually, I think Spahn is slightly overrated. I never saw him pitch, so all I can do is look at the stats. I respect his longevity and consistency, but he was no where near as dominant as W Johnson, Koufax, Grove, Clemens, Martinez and many others IMO. Sorry, when looking at the stats, I just don't see anything "amazing". 13 20 game winning seasons isn't amazing? How about over 360 wins? More evidence that the modern "stat geeks", apostles of Beane, etc are taking over in the court of public opinion. When someone can take a cursory glance at Spahns stats, never having seen him pitch and then pronounce him "overrated", all I can do is shake my head.

[PumpsieGreen]

I agree, WillieKamm. Spahn is sometimes unfairly underrated, seen as a player who waited a long time to collect milestones, a la Eddie Murray. But really, he is so much more.

[shlevine42]

I'm new here and this makes the second time you really made an impression on me. Very good and accurate post.

Thanks.

Your post implies that you saw Robinson play. If so, share some of your recollections with us.

[J W]

13 20 game winning seasons isn't amazing? How about over 360 wins? More evidence that the modern "stat geeks", apostles of Beane, etc are taking over in the court of public opinion. When someone can take a cursory glance at Spahns stats, never having seen him pitch and then pronounce him "overrated", all I can do is shake my head.

That's the thing about any overrated/underrated debate in any sport. And, that thing has two faces to it.

One the one hand, there is absolutely no way to appreciate a player unless you've seen him enough. If you've never seen a player, the only thing you can go on, unless there's some film of the player lying around, is the player's stats. In the case of the Negro Leaguers and earliest 19th century players, you don't even have stats to rely on; merely heresay and the press.

On the other hand, there is a tendency for someone if he/she has seen a particular player play an awful lot, to misjudge whatever that player's worth is to his team because personal biases come into play. I think this problem has become worse in today's era of media coverage, where in most cases what you see from player X is his highlight package and rap sheet.

It's difficult, and that's why I can't take any overrated/underrated argument that personally. I may not understand it based on my own priorities, but I can certainly see anyone promoting anybody as underrated or overrated in their own mind.

[J W]

Anyways, here are my all-overrated team and all-underrated teams, starting off with catcher:

Overrated

Until recently I would've said Mike Piazza... but all I ever hear about now from the talking heads is that he's the greatest offensive catcher in history. I can't argue that he isn't one of, if not the best hitter at that position. Funny how a sexual-orientation scandal and a few injuries have erased him from the limelight. I would go as far as to say he's underrated now.

So this is an awfully tough call for me. There aren't many catchers throughout history who are talked about much except by students of the game. So that would raise a flag for Bench and Berra, the only two catchers I hear about with regularity from Joe Baseball Fan. But I can't really knock either one of those guys; they are two of the premier players at their position, ever, and there isn't much separation at the top.

After them, I really have to think... Carlton Fisk would be a good choice, but I value his endurance behind the plate tremendously. The man caught 116 games at age 42, and hit .285 that year. No, I'm afraid I'm going to have to go with a similar player to him, who through unfortunate circumstances didn't play even half the seasons Fisk did. Thurman Munson was a leader, an all-star, a gold glover, and even an MVP, but when people mention his name before my all-underrated catcher's, I have to wonder if they're assuming he would simply play 10 more seasons just like his first 11. Catchers have an uncanny ability to implode in their mid thirties. If I play the percentages, I can't assume he would finish his career that much better than, oh, Gary Carter. Overall though, Munson would be far from my #1 all-time I'm sure.

Underrated

Who is the greatest catcher of all time? Most times, you'll automatically hear "Johnny Bench" or "Yogi Berra". High-profile players who played on well-known dynasties. But I offer a man who played only 13 seasons, won no gold gloves, and played in only 2 all-star games. Nonetheless, what two-time AL MVP Mickey Cochrane did was dominate his position. He won his first MVP playing for the most underrated franchise in MLB history--the Philadelphia Athletics--and that I will say emphatically. The knock against him compared to the other two was that he only slugged .478 in the offensive happy 20's-30's. Adjusting for league average, Bench and Berra were undoubtedly better sluggers (.476 in the 60's-70's; .482 in the 50's-60's). Heck, Piazza blows them all out of the water. But Cochrane was perhaps the single best pure hitter behind the plate in history. He was a career .320 hitter and had an OBP of .419... both highest among HOF catchers (and Piazza and I-rod to boot). Bench and Berra don't even approach those numbers; adjust for era and ballpark, and factor in their superior slugging and everything, and their OPS+'s break surprisingly even (128 for Cochrane; 126; 125).

Cochrane could also handle his business defensively; so much so that a few students of the game who saw him play proclaim him equal if not superior to Bench. Of course, you hear the same argument from supporters of everyone from Ivan Rodriguez to Wally Schang. In any case, if Cochrane played at the same time as Bench, there's a good chance he'd be gobbling up AL GG's at nearly the same rate.

Now, for those who noticed, yes I put a catcher down here who only played one more meaningful year than Munson. But Cochrane's career was complete; he broke down in a normal fashion for a 33 year old catcher, and his career can be looked at as a whole. That career, despite all the accolades Munson meant to the Yankees and all the hardware he got, was simply much more above the mean.

While I'm on the topic of the other great catchers, I'll rattle off the names of Bill Dickey, Gabby Hartnett, and Roy Campanella. While there isn't much separation at the top, there is a big dropoff in my mind after these elite catchers (and I suppose Piazza, or maybe Buck Ewing but that's a special case). Joe Torre was good offensively, Ted Simmons was a complete catcher, Gene Tenace had a terrific peak, and you had defensive whizzes like Bill Freehan, but... those guys aren't there with the rest of them.

Next up: First base. Whenever I get to it. :p

[torez77]

13 20 game winning seasons isn't amazing? How about over 360 wins? More evidence that the modern "stat geeks", apostles of Beane, etc are taking over in the court of public opinion. When someone can take a cursory glance at Spahns stats, never having seen him pitch and then pronounce him "overrated", all I can do is shake my head.

OK, OK, maybe I was a little rough on Spahn. His consistency and longevity is amazing, so yes he was a great pitcher. When I said I didn't see anything amazing, I was looking at single seasons and comparing him with guys like Koufax. He wasn't as dominant as Koufax (and many others) in his peak years, that's for sure. If I had 1 game to win with my life on the line, there are many pitchers I'd take over Spahn.
But yes, I applaud him for his consistency and longevity!

[torez77]

How about Smokey Joe Wood for an underrated pitcher? If only he would have played longer, he'd have been a sure HOFer. Walter Johnson said nobody threw as hard as Smokey Joe. His 2.03 lifetime ERA would be 3rd all-time if he had enough IP to back it up. I like this guy!

[csh19792001]

13 20 game winning seasons isn't amazing? How about over 360 wins? More evidence that the modern "stat geeks", apostles of Beane, etc are taking over in the court of public opinion. When someone can take a cursory glance at Spahns stats, never having seen him pitch and then pronounce him "overrated", all I can do is shake my head.

Kamm-
One of the best truncated posts I've read. You're right on the money! Keep it up!!

[csh19792001]

Anyways, here are my all-overrated team and all-underrated teams, starting off with catcher:

Overrated

Until recently I would've said Mike Piazza... but all I ever hear about now from the talking heads is that he's the greatest offensive catcher in history. I can't argue that he isn't one of, if not the best hitter at that position. Funny how a sexual-orientation scandal and a few injuries have erased him from the limelight. I would go as far as to say he's underrated now.

So this is an awfully tough call for me. There aren't many catchers throughout history who are talked about much except by students of the game. So that would raise a flag for Bench and Berra, the only two catchers I hear about with regularity from Joe Baseball Fan. But I can't really knock either one of those guys; they are two of the premier players at their position, ever, and there isn't much separation at the top.

After them, I really have to think... Carlton Fisk would be a good choice, but I value his endurance behind the plate tremendously. The man caught 116 games at age 42, and hit .285 that year. No, I'm afraid I'm going to have to go with a similar player to him, who through unfortunate circumstances didn't play even half the seasons Fisk did. Thurman Munson was a leader, an all-star, a gold glover, and even an MVP, but when people mention his name before my all-underrated catcher's, I have to wonder if they're assuming he would simply play 10 more seasons just like his first 11. Catchers have an uncanny ability to implode in their mid thirties. If I play the percentages, I can't assume he would finish his career that much better than, oh, Gary Carter. Overall though, Munson would be far from my #1 all-time I'm sure.

Underrated

Who is the greatest catcher of all time? Most times, you'll automatically hear "Johnny Bench" or "Yogi Berra". High-profile players who played on well-known dynasties. But I offer a man who played only 13 seasons, won no gold gloves, and played in only 2 all-star games. Nonetheless, what two-time AL MVP Mickey Cochrane did was dominate his position. He won his first MVP playing for the most underrated franchise in MLB history--the Philadelphia Athletics--and that I will say emphatically. The knock against him compared to the other two was that he only slugged .478 in the offensive happy 20's-30's. Adjusting for league average, Bench and Berra were undoubtedly better sluggers (.476 in the 60's-70's; .482 in the 50's-60's). Heck, Piazza blows them all out of the water. But Cochrane was perhaps the single best pure hitter behind the plate in history. He was a career .320 hitter and had an OBP of .419... both highest among HOF catchers (and Piazza and I-rod to boot). Bench and Berra don't even approach those numbers; adjust for era and ballpark, and factor in their superior slugging and everything, and their OPS+'s break surprisingly even (128 for Cochrane; 126; 125).

Cochrane could also handle his business defensively; so much so that a few students of the game who saw him play proclaim him equal if not superior to Bench. Of course, you hear the same argument from supporters of everyone from Ivan Rodriguez to Wally Schang. In any case, if Cochrane played at the same time as Bench, there's a good chance he'd be gobbling up AL GG's at nearly the same rate.

Now, for those who noticed, yes I put a catcher down here who only played one more meaningful year than Munson. But Cochrane's career was complete; he broke down in a normal fashion for a 33 year old catcher, and his career can be looked at as a whole. That career, despite all the accolades Munson meant to the Yankees and all the hardware he got, was simply much more above the mean.

While I'm on the topic of the other great catchers, I'll rattle off the names of Bill Dickey, Gabby Hartnett, and Roy Campanella. While there isn't much separation at the top, there is a big dropoff in my mind after these elite catchers (and I suppose Piazza, or maybe Buck Ewing but that's a special case). Joe Torre was good offensively, Ted Simmons was a complete catcher, Gene Tenace had a terrific peak, and you had defensive whizzes like Bill Freehan, but... those guys aren't there with the rest of them.

Next up: First base. Whenever I get to it. :p

Thank you for sticking up for Cochrane; he's egregiously underrated these days.

[four tool]

Wins alone do not make for a great career. Some 300 game winners (Early Winn) are not considered best ever and deservedly so. Basically Spahn was very good, sometimes great, for many years--do we rate Ricky Henderson the same way by the same logic? Do we rate Clarkson just below below him because of win totals?

I say no on both counts. Spahn deserves the Hall of Fame, but he's not one of the all time first tier best ever. ERA+ is one reason why.

[J W]

Well, even the venerable Bill James ranks Spahn FIFTH all-time among pitchers... or at least did as of several years ago. His WS/season may be a "measley" 29.23, but that's not far behind Seaver, Mathewson, Gibson, Koufax, Young... and it's ahead of Feller. And his total WS (411), thanks to his longevity, eclipses every other post-deadball pitcher in history--even Lefty Grove.

OK, so his ERA+ is a shockingly low 118... well, the reason for that is because he just played so many darn years. His last two seasons posted ERAs of 5.29 and 4.01. But what do you expect from a 43 year old? At 39, when most pitchers are left for dead, he scored an ERA+ of 98; but then he followed that up with an ERA title.

Next you counter with, "there's also the fact that he only had two truly dominating seasons". OK... in '47 and '53 he posted ERAs of 2.33 (168) and 2.10 (188). But he also lead his league in '61 with an ERA of 3.02. That's leading the league, with a 124 ERA+, only slightly above his average. Spahn finished in the top five in his league six other times, with ERA+s of 123, 115, 125, 130, 114, and 120.

My point is, the forgotten 50's were a time when a pitcher could do that. His Gray Ink score you would expect (371, 3rd all-time), but he also had an unbelievable Black Ink score (101, 4th all-time). He led his league one time or another in almost every stat.

I think another thing about Spahn is that his greatest seasons were spattered throughout his lengthy career, which may make it seem harder to look at his career progression. If you strung his five best seasons together, you may see a darn good peak (probably not the best ever, but really good among HOF-caliber pitchers).

All in all, I would rate Spahn as the second greatest lefty of all time, behind Lefty. If Randy Johnson keeps pushing, who knows--but he's gotta keep pitching well into his forties for me to consider that.

And just to let you anti-geeks out there know, I used sabermetrics in my argument against four tool.

[four tool]

Win Shares do not impress me because they leave players like Sisler out of the top. I can't see using a system that is that skewed.

In the original Historical Abstract James rates Spahn #2 career for lefties and not in top 10 for peak. So Spahn gets points for a long career--which was a major part of the point of my post. For me a long career BY ITSELF does not mean top anything,(look at most of the leaders in career consecutive games for instance--Everett Scott, Ripken, etc.) your analysis confirms my point. Some great years sure, and of course some years early or late are not going to be good but that applies to anyone, not just Spahn late in his career--look at Carlton, Guidry, etc. (No I don't think Guidry is anywhere near as good as Warren).

[leecemark]

--With or without Win Shares I don't see Sisler as an all time great. For a few years he was great, but more Mattingly great than Ruth/Gehrig/Williams/Cobb great. For fully half his career (post eye problem) he was a below average hitter for a firstbaseman. Not top ten at his position in my book.
--I also disagree that the consective games leaderboard proves anything about anything. Spahn didn't just show up for work everyday, he won 20 or nearly so every year. His best is clearly a notch below the Groves and Johnsons of the world, but he stayed at that second level of greatness longer than anyone but CY Young .
--I see him as the pitching counterpart to his longtime teamamte Hank Aaron. Only a few seasons where you might call him the best and none that were all time best. However, amoung the best for 2 decades is greatness as well.

[WillieKamm]

Thanks.

Your post implies that you saw Robinson play. If so, share some of your recollections with us. In message boards and in life honesty is generally the best policy. I started following the game of baseball in 1957, the year after Robinson retired. I was all of 6 1/2 years old when that season started. My father taught me the game and how to read a box score which is a little different today than it was back then. He grew up Pittsburgh and used to go to Forbes Field as often as possible to see his beloved Pirates play. From 1947 -1953 he saw Robinson in Pittsburgh on a number of occasions and was a big fan of his. When we moved to Chicago he continued to follow Robinson for the rest of his career. Growing up in Chicago WGN televised every Cub home game and many White Sox games as well. They were leaders in sports broadcasting, and often showed highlights from their archives. Robinson was featured more than once. It is very sad and unfortunate but most of the old play by plays and features that WGN did from the 50's to the 70's are now lost forever. In any case, my fathers recollections, lots of old film reels courtesy of mainly WGN, my own personal readings and lots of conversations with baseball old timers, of which there were many around me when I was a kid, helped form my opinion of Robinson. I almost forgot. My next door neighbors were transplants from Brooklyn and die hard Dodger fans. They had two boys, one was my age and the other about 3 years older. One of his favorite stories was about Jackie Robinson stealing home in game 1 of the 1955 WS. Ironically they moved to LA after the 1958 baseball season.

[shlevine42]

In message boards and in life honesty is generally the best policy. I started following the game of baseball in 1957, the year after Robinson retired. I was all of 6 1/2 years old when that season started. My father taught me the game and how to read a box score which is a little different today than it was back then. He grew up Pittsburgh and used to go to Forbes Field as often as possible to see his beloved Pirates play. From 1947 -1953 he saw Robinson in Pittsburgh on a number of occasions and was a big fan of his. When we moved to Chicago he continued to follow Robinson for the rest of his career. Growing up in Chicago WGN televised every Cub home game and many White Sox games as well. They were leaders in sports broadcasting, and often showed highlights from their archives. Robinson was featured more than once. It is very sad and unfortunate but most of the old play by plays and features that WGN did from the 50's to the 70's are now lost forever. In any case, my fathers recollections, lots of old film reels courtesy of mainly WGN, my own personal readings and lots of conversations with baseball old timers, of which there were many around me when I was a kid, helped form my opinion of Robinson. I almost forgot. My next door neighbors were transplants from Brooklyn and die hard Dodger fans. They had two boys, one was my age and the other about 3 years older. One of his favorite stories was about Jackie Robinson stealing home in game 1 of the 1955 WS. Ironically they moved to LA after the 1958 baseball season.

Your dad obviously left you a great legacy.

If you haven't already done so, consider this a personal invitation to drop in to our Brooklyn Dodgers Forum for some first-hand recollections of Jackie and his Dodger teammates.

It's a feast for Robinson fans, and you might even find some stories you haven't heard yet.

Either way, I know from the above post that you'll enjoy it.

[west coast orange and black]

O.K. I'll defend myself.
First-Pedro
1.Pedro has had the good fortune to pitch in strikeout or homerun era. Especially in the AL with the blasted DH, hitters are all or nothing now.
2.The division he pitches in is the epitome of all or nothing so facing these teams all the time, he is going to have success.
3.As you have noted, his stamina is next to nothing. Where is the "greatness" when it's needed in the eighth and ninth?
Second-Nomar
1.Two time batting champ, and he's a righty-in the AL.
2.The last mentioned in the "trinity" and sometimes supplanted by Tejada.
3.For being one of Boston's most productive players over the last seven years and always playing second fiddle to someone.

Oh, and as far as Teddy Ballgame goes, if Bonds had one one hundredth of the respect for the game as he had, he might be half the overall player he was.

musial was a gentleman both on and off the field, absolutely true, and honorable. but to say that bonds is not half the ballplayer as stan the man is looking at the situation with both eyes closed.

i have easily accepted criticism of bonds in a few areas over the years, but the criticisms must be from the critical mind, not the doured heart.

that said, of the players i have seen, marichal the most underrated, ozzie smith the most overrated.

[Bushrod]

"Oh, and as far as Teddy Ballgame goes, if Bonds had one one hundredth of the respect for the game as he had, he might be half the overall player he was."

musial was a gentleman both on and off the field, absolutely true, and honorable. but to say that bonds is not half the ballplayer as stan the man is looking at the situation with both eyes closed. [/B].


The post before yours said Bonds wasn't half the player Teddy Ballgame was. Did you mean to say Williams instead of Musial? No sweat. If so, I do that stuff too. I just wondered.

[Bump11]

The most overrated player in the game today:Sammy Sosa

Everybody thinks he is like the second-greatest hitter in baseball behind Bonds. But I've seen alot of Cubs games and highlight films and he can be pitched to with breaking balls down and away. He strikes out alot too. :mad:
Sure, he is a pretty damn good power hitter, but he always posts averages in the .270s and .280s-- unlike the .320s to .340s putup by Bonds, Pujols, A Rod, and Manny.

By the way, here is a list of all the people in baseball that I suspect are currently doing steroids:

Jason Giambi (probably contributes to all his recent health problems)
Gary Sheffield
Sammy Sosa
Barry Bonds
Jeff Bagwell
Pudge Rodriguez
Brad Fullmer
Eric Gagne

Pujols, A Rod, Griffey, Helton, Manny, and Oriz are not on roids.

[four tool]

Don't know where you get everybody thinks Sosa'sthe second greatest. I've yet to run into anyone on the net or in person who says so.

[RuthMayBond]

By the way, here is a list of all the people in baseball that I suspect are currently doing steroids:

Jason Giambi (probably contributes to all his recent health problems)
Gary Sheffield
Sammy Sosa
Barry Bonds
Jeff Bagwell
Pudge Rodriguez
Brad Fullmer
Eric Gagne

Pujols, A Rod, Griffey, Helton, Manny, and Oriz are not on roids.Great, that'll save us testing, genius, and the 'roids ain't helping Fullmer :laugh

[Spahn and Sain]

Overrated:
C - Gary Carter
1B - Keith Hernandez
2B - Bid McPhee
3B - Brooks Robinson
SS - Ozzie Smith
LF - Lou Brock
CF - Ty Cobb
RF - Roberto Clemente
SP - Fergie Jenkins
RP - John Franco

Underrated:
C - Bill Dickey
1B - Dan Brouthers
2B - Charlie Gehringer
3B - Al Rosen
SS - George Davis
LF - Ed Delahanty
CF - Duke Snider
RF - Larry Walker
SP - Mike Mussina
RP - Trevor Hoffman

[RuthMayBond]

Overrated:
C - Gary Carter
2B - Bid McPhee
CF - Ty Cobb
SP - Fergie Jenkins

Underrated:

RF - Larry WalkerI don't know why about Carter, people are constantly saying he doesn't belong in the Hall when he's gotta be in the top ten of all time if not higher. Who even RATES McPhee? Cobb, huh? (you listening, Burgess?) Jenkins did all right, with lousy teams.
People keep talking about Walker's arm, I thought I'd see how many Gold Gloves he deserved. After checking the numbers, I don't even see that he deserves ONE, and Coors has made his batting look better than it is.

[dgarza]

Overrated:
C - Gary Carter
1B - Keith Hernandez
2B - Bid McPhee
3B - Brooks Robinson
SS - Ozzie Smith
LF - Lou Brock
CF - Ty Cobb
RF - Roberto Clemente
SP - Fergie Jenkins
RP - John Franco


Seems like defense is overrated ... ? Is this a correct assumption?

[julusnc]

Ty Cobb deserves much more press than he gets with todays historians.

Bill James does not like Cobb and his flunkies seem to follow this ideal.

Cobb was the one of the Elite and should be admired for his play.

[four tool]

How can Cobb possibly be considered overrated when most people don't rank him with Ruth, Williams Bonds etc.?

[leecemark]

--Lets not get carried away with talk of how underappreciated Mr Cobb is. I know his fans are outraged that most people don't have him #1, but I can't recall any here who has him out of their top five. Even arch villian Bill James has him 5th (4th amoung major leaguers). Not only does he rank with Williams and Bonds, but virtually everyone (including James) has him ahead of them.
--Everybody not having you #1 doesn't make you underrated. That said, the gentleman who put him on his OVERRATED team must not understand the term. Cobb was great enough that it is almost impossible to overrate him - although some here make a valiant effort to do so.

[CyNotSoYoung]

I'm new here so forgive me if I have missed some of the prior discussion. I won't add too much to the overrated debate - current players always tend to be overrated because it takes time for perspective to settle things down a bit. The only thing I'll say about a group that is generally overrated is pitchers from the 1960's. Not to say that Koufax, Gibson and Marichal aren't truly great - they are and would have been dominant in any era, but their numbers are inflated by higher mounds, bigger strike zones and bigger parks. Many pitchers in that era had better numbers than their ability would account for - Drysdale, Chance and McClain come to mind.

As for underrated - I think the opposite holds for position players from the 60's - especially guys who would have been at their peak from between 1963 - and 1970. The guy who, IMO, is the most underrated player fits right into this time period. Carl Yastrzemski was an excellent defensive outfielder in one of the trickiest left fields in baseball. His offensive statistics are hurt because he played in an era that heavily favored pitchers - he was at his physical peak right during the toughest years in modern baseball history for hitters. He also suffers from the fact that he followed Ted Williams as the Red Sox left fielder and he hung on way too long at the end of his career. Again, IMO, his 1967 season was one of the greatest all around seasons ever and he personally carried the Red Sox to the seventh game of the World Series. Without him, they would have finished no higher than fourth place in the AL. He was the last player to win a triple crown and he did it without as much talent as most, if not all, of the other triple crown winners. His greatest asset was an immense dedication to hard work and a stubborn will to succeed.

As for an all underrated team - well here's my list:
C - Bill Frehan or Ted Simmons
1st - Johnny Mize or Willie McCovey
2nd - Tony Lazzeri or Jackie Robinson
3rd - Stan Hack or Frank Baker
SS - Pee Wee Reese or Arky Vaughan
OF - much has already been said about Musial and I agree. Here's my all Polish underrated OF:
Musial, Yaz and Al Simmons (but Curt Flood is a sentimental favorite)
Pitchers - Maddux (despite what I said above about current players), Tony Mullane, and Babe Ruth (Remember this is as a pitcher - obviously he's not underrated as a hitter. He's never mentioned among the great pitchers but he'd have made the HOF as a pitcher even if he had never hit a home run)

[torez77]

I don't know why about Carter, people are constantly saying he doesn't belong in the Hall when he's gotta be in the top ten of all time if not higher. Who even RATES McPhee? Cobb, huh? (you listening, Burgess?) Jenkins did all right, with lousy teams.
People keep talking about Walker's arm, I thought I'd see how many Gold Gloves he deserved. After checking the numbers, I don't even see that he deserves ONE, and Coors has made his batting look better than it is.

I still have to think Walker tends to be underrated. 3 straight seasons over .360 just doesn't happen nowadays. He had Gehrig-like hitting seasons. Now I will admit when I look at his stats that his numbers shot up when he moved to Colorado. Still, I think he's rather unappreciated as a hitter today and should be ranked as one of the best current hitters.

[csh19792001]

I still have to think Walker tends to be underrated. 3 straight seasons over .360 just doesn't happen nowadays. He had Gehrig-like hitting seasons. Now I will admit when I look at his stats that his numbers shot up when he moved to Colorado. Still, I think he's rather unappreciated as a hitter today and should be ranked as one of the best current hitters.

He might be underappreciated, but I don't see how. I see his great numbers as mostly a result of his park.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/players/4181/career_by_all_batting_splits.html#home_and_away_

I think the park effect for Coors is so much higher than any other park in history it's almost ridiculous.

[torez77]

He might be underappreciated, but I don't see how. I see his great numbers as mostly a result of his park.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/players/4181/career_by_all_batting_splits.html#home_and_away_

I think the park effect for Coors is so much higher than any other park in history it's almost ridiculous.

Point taken. I still think he needs to be mentioned with the best active hitters, but not THE best.

[pretorius]

I think all Coors stats are bogus. Its funny all of the sudden Vinny Castilla is a 35/120 man again. This is a guy who probably didnt have 35 HR and 120 RBI's combined in his last two full years with Atlanta.

[westsidegrounds]

--I don't see Sisler as an all time great. For a few years he was great, but more Mattingly great than Ruth/Gehrig/Williams/Cobb great. For fully half his career (post eye problem) he was a below average hitter for a firstbaseman. Not top ten at his position in my book.
.

Over on the Browns forum, the "Today in Browns History" thread describes Sisler's contribution to a Browns win on September 3, 1920: three hits, bringing his season total to 257 (BA: 407); three stolen bases; and a scoreless one-inning relief pitching appearance.

At his peak he really was something special.

And he knew it, too. Later in his career, when he was battling eye/sinus problems, somebody complimented him on his BA (.320 or so at the time).

"That ain't hitting," Sisler replied ruefully.

[csh19792001]

Point taken. I still think he needs to be mentioned with the best active hitters, but not THE best.

Would you consider a .279/.372/.496 to be one of the best? I dunno, I guess you could make that claim. Anyway, those stats represent his effectiveness away from Coors, in reasonable baseball stadiums.

How about Helton?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/players/5870/career_by_all_batting_splits.html#home_and_away_

For his career-
home-
.375/.465/.701
road-
.298/.392/.527

The point remains that you have to look at the road figures of the guys who play at Coors (that goes for pitchers, to an extent, too)- the home figures are almost totally bogus.

[torez77]

Would you consider a .279/.372/.496 to be one of the best? I dunno, I guess you could make that claim. Anyway, those stats represent his effectiveness away from Coors, in reasonable baseball stadiums.

How about Helton?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/players/5870/career_by_all_batting_splits.html#home_and_away_

For his career-
home-
.375/.465/.701
road-
.298/.392/.527

The point remains that you have to look at the road figures of the guys who play at Coors (that goes for pitchers, to an extent, too)- the home figures are almost totally bogus.

As I said before, point taken. I did look at the road figures and considered everything. I just think Walker and Helton's overall numbers are too good to call them mediocre hitters. Walker's numbers were no doubt helped by Coors, which is why I don't consider him to be the #1 hitter in the past 10 years or so. I just don't hear his name mentioned enough, and seasons like .379, .366 and .363 with 40+ HRs certainly deserve recognition, Coors or no Coors. Is he as good a hitter as Bonds, A-Rod, or Ramirez? Not even I will say that. But I will say he's not as far off as most people think.

[burger eater]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bump11
By the way, here is a list of all the people in baseball that I suspect are currently doing steroids:

Jason Giambi (probably contributes to all his recent health problems)
Gary Sheffield
Sammy Sosa
Barry Bonds
Jeff Bagwell
Pudge Rodriguez
Brad Fullmer
Eric Gagne

Pujols, A Rod, Griffey, Helton, Manny, and Oriz are not on roids.

Reply from RuthMayBond:
Great, that'll save us testing, genius, and the 'roids ain't helping Fullmer
That's friggin' hilarious :laugh

[burger eater]

The most overrated player in the game today:Sammy Sosa

Everybody thinks he is like the second-greatest hitter in baseball behind Bonds. But I've seen alot of Cubs games and highlight films and he can be pitched to with breaking balls down and away. He strikes out alot too.
Sure, he is a pretty damn good power hitter, but he always posts averages in the .270s and .280s-- unlike the .320s to .340s putup by Bonds, Pujols, A Rod, and Manny.

Manny's a great player, but you can't even put him in the same class as Sosa. Sosa's hit 60+ homers 3 times and will have well over 600 career HR's next year. He's one of the greatest sluggers ever... Manny has a long way to go before being in that class. Manny could be a mediocre player in 2-3 years and not even end up anywhere close to Sammy's stats. It's not likely, but if it does happen, he'll be just another Albert Belle. Sammy's career is set in stone to be far superior to that.
I think Chipper Jones is one of the most underrated current players. He's played consistently great for the past 10 years and is doing the same this year.

[ElHalo]

Manny's a great player, but you can't even put him in the same class as Sosa. Sosa's hit 60+ homers 3 times and will have well over 600 career HR's next year. He's one of the greatest sluggers ever... Manny has a long way to go before being in that class. Manny could be a mediocre player in 2-3 years and not even end up anywhere close to Sammy's stats. It's not likely, but if it does happen, he'll be just another Albert Belle. Sammy's career is set in stone to be far superior to that.
I think Chipper Jones is one of the most underrated current players. He's played consistently great for the past 10 years and is doing the same this year.

Wow. It's not too common to find somebody who believes Sosa is more valuable than Manny. Gotta be an NL fan.

Yes, Sosa hit a lot more homers. So did Mark McGwire, but nobody's putting him on all time greatest lists. Look at the BA's and, especially, OBP's. Manny's a much, much greater all around hitter than Sosa. And while Manny's continuing to put up all time great numbers, Sosa's sliding.

[burger eater]

Look at the BA's and, especially, OBP's. Manny's a much, much greater all around hitter than Sosa.

That's simply not true... Manny is in his prime NOW. Sammy was in his prime a few years ago. When Sammy was in his prime, he was at least as good as Manny, if not better.

Wow. It's not too common to find somebody who believes Sosa is more valuable than Manny. Gotta be an NL fan.

I didn't say anything of the sort concerning value... Manny is currently a superior hitter to Sosa. What the post was about is that Sammy's legacy is set in stone, Manny still has quite a ways to go to be in the same class of sluggers that Sammy is in. It's not about HR's. If we take bets, you'd be wise to say that in 20-30 years from now, Sosa will be a more remembered and talked about player than Manny... and Sammy will definitely be remembered as one of the greatest power hitters ever. Sosa and McGwire added as much to the game with their mythical home run race of 1998 as anything that's happened in the past 10 years.
And i'm an NL fan, where they don't use the ridiculous minor league DH rule.

Again Chipper Jones is underrated, his stats over the past 10 years are almost (not quite, but very close) on par with Manny's. I guess if Chipper played for the Yankees, he'd be on ESPN every night and everyone would hear about him all the time.

[Gbemi24]

That said, the gentleman who put him on his OVERRATED team must not understand the term. Cobb was great enough that it is almost impossible to overrate him - although some here make a valiant effort to do so.

ALL great players that played before integration are grossly overrated.

[ElHalo]

That's simply not true... Manny is in his prime NOW. Sammy was in his prime a few years ago. When Sammy was in his prime, he was at least as good as Manny, if not better.

I didn't say anything of the sort concerning value... Manny is currently a superior hitter to Sosa. What the post was about is that Sammy's legacy is set in stone, Manny still has quite a ways to go to be in the same class of sluggers that Sammy is in. It's not about HR's. If we take bets, you'd be wise to say that in 20-30 years from now, Sosa will be a more remembered and talked about player than Manny... and Sammy will definitely be remembered as one of the greatest power hitters ever. Sosa and McGwire added as much to the game with their mythical home run race of 1998 as anything that's happened in the past 10 years.
And i'm an NL fan, where they don't use the ridiculous minor league DH rule.

Again Chipper Jones is underrated, his stats over the past 10 years are almost (not quite, but very close) on par with Manny's. I guess if Chipper played for the Yankees, he'd be on ESPN every night and everyone would hear about him all the time.

Ok, why not:

Sosa's five best OPS+ seasons:
201, 169, 160, 160, 141.

Manny's five best OPS+ seasons:
190, 185, 174, 162, 160.

Manny's going to have another top season this year... Sosa's not.

Sosa's 201 season came in 2001. Heck of a season he had that year.

But for their careers... look at this (this is through the end of last season, with Sosa really only having had one year of decline, 2003, and more years of peak than Manny):

BA: Sosa, .278. Manny, .317
OBP: Sosa, .349. Manny, .413
SLG: Sosa, .546. Manny, .598
OPS+: Sosa, 133. Manny, 157
BB/162: Sosa, 64. Manny, 93.
H/162: Sosa, 169. Manny, 186
OPS: Sosa, .895. Manny, 1.010

Even the one area where Sosa has an edge...

HR/162: Sosa, 43. Manny, 41.

It isn't that big of an edge.

There's really no aspect of hitting that, over the course of their careers, Manny hasn't just bludgeoned Sosa senseless with. The 98 home run chase was awesome, sure. But even that year, Sosa's OBP couldn't top .380.

As for Chipper Jones... I've personally always rated him about equal with Trot Nixon as an outfielder, and considered him one of the most horrifically overrated players in baseball. Let's look at the numbers:

OPS+: 143
BA: .309
OBP: .404
SLG: .541
HR/162: 32

Very good numbers for a 3B... once he moved to LF, they're entirely ordinary.

[leecemark]

--I never understood the logic behind moving Jones to LF. He wasn't a GG at 3B by any means, but he wasn't horrible either. As a thirdbaseman he was a great hitter and had a very good chance of endign up in the Hall of Fame. As a LF, he is still very good but not great. His value both to the team and in history was reduced significantly by the move.
--Sosa is not as good a hitter as Rameriz, but he is (or was anyway) a much better fielder and baserunner. As overall players I think their career value is pretty similar, although Manny is likely to widen the gap enough offensively before they're done to establish himself as the greater player.

[ElHalo]

--I never understood the logic behind moving Jones to LF. He wasn't a GG at 3B by any means, but he wasn't horrible either. As a thirdbaseman he was a great hitter and had a very good chance of endign up in the Hall of Fame. As a LF, he is still very good but not great. His value both to the team and in history was reduced significantly by the move.
--Sosa is not as good a hitter as Rameriz, but he is (or was anyway) a much better fielder and baserunner. As overall players I think their career value is pretty similar, although Manny is likely to widen the gap enough offensively before they're done to establish himself as the greater player.

Agree with these points. As a 3B, he had stellar numbers... but they're just not compelling from a corner outfielder.

As for Manny... Sosa was a much, much better fielder, but that's not saying much. He was no great shakes himself, but Manny is HORRIBLE. Better baserunner, sure.

[toopier]

Yes, I am an old man.
I saw many of his games.
He is not overated as one suggested earlier. He was one of the best that I have seen. There was one oddity about him, though, and players knew it. When there were runners on base, he was possessed. We didn't fixate on numbers like you guys do today, so I don't know the actual stats, but he was "just" great with the bases empty, untouchable with runners on. There was something about him that gave the hitters confidence to know that if they scored 3-4, they would win. And it was mutual, he didn't feel like he needed to shutout every team.

I will throw out a surprise for you here, though. The most UNDER rated player of the era that I am familiar with is Ted Williams. Have any of you math guys interprolated his career numbers if he didnt miss the war years? (both wars!)

does 680/2300 sound about right?
Unless he is in your top 2, you've got him underrated (yes, behind Bonds, I still pay attention)

Musial is often forgotten, and belongs in the top 7 as well.

[four tool]

Most of us don't rate Ted on what he could have accomplished, but on what he did accomplish--and this from a lifetime Red Sox fan, born and bred and still living in New England. He's not underrated by placing him 2nd (behind Ruth) or even third in some categories as Bonds moves up. Granted the lost years may have put him into the #1 alltime in BI, runs created, and heaven knows what else, but he did fine without those years. It's the averages, not the counting numbers that make the hitter.

No one dominated two whole decades like Ted: lead the league and the majors in BA, SL and OB (so obviously also in OPS) for the 40s and the 50s!
Unbeleiveable, but Ruth still comes out ahead in some categories.
Bonds will not catch him lifetime OB even with a few more .600 years and has no chance of catching him in SL or BA.

Bonds is the most feared hitter of his time maybe the best--certainly the best of the last few years, but that doesn't make him the best ever, just one of the best, tho still behind Ruth, Ted and maybe some others.

[csh19792001]

--Lets not get carried away with talk of how underappreciated Mr Cobb is. I know his fans are outraged that most people don't have him #1, but I can't recall any here who has him out of their top five. Even arch villian Bill James has him 5th (4th amoung major leaguers). Not only does he rank with Williams and Bonds, but virtually everyone (including James) has him ahead of them.
--Everybody not having you #1 doesn't make you underrated. That said, the gentleman who put him on his OVERRATED team must not understand the term. Cobb was great enough that it is almost impossible to overrate him - although some here make a valiant effort to do so.

Mark,
Valiant efforts to overrate Cobb? Have you read Bill's files yet? I really doubt you'll be saying these things once you get the full historical perspective. Instead of relying solely on statistics, which tell only a part of the story, you might end up with a more wholistic approach. At least that's my hope.

[ElHalo]

ALL great players that played before integration are grossly overrated.

Uh... you got any reasoning behind this, other than the "They didn't play the toughest competition" argument, which about three dozen people already probably have pre-written responses to?

[csh19792001]

Wow. It's not too common to find somebody who believes Sosa is more valuable than Manny. Gotta be an NL fan.

Yes, Sosa hit a lot more homers. So did Mark McGwire, but nobody's putting him on all time greatest lists. Look at the BA's and, especially, OBP's. Manny's a much, much greater all around hitter than Sosa. And while Manny's continuing to put up all time great numbers, Sosa's sliding.

Well, as to McGwire being one of the greatest ever... McGwire's "OPS+" is 163 for his career, very close to Ty Cobb's 167. And we all know that OPS+ is the most reliable, valid, and important stat in baseball, so....... :)

[csh19792001]

Agree with these points. As a 3B, he had stellar numbers... but they're just not compelling from a corner outfielder.

As for Manny... Sosa was a much, much better fielder, but that's not saying much. He was no great shakes himself, but Manny is HORRIBLE. Better baserunner, sure.

Man, I'll agree on Manny's fielding- I see him play quite a lot, and he seems to either slip, misplay the ball, or figure out some other way to screw up on balls hit to him with GREAT FREQUENCY, and many times in key situations. Do stats show this? No. He looks like an average fielder- his "range factor" and FP are roughly equivalent to the league. Thankfully, we've seen the guy quite a bit, and we know he's godawful in the field.

[leecemark]

--Chris, I haven't made it my life's work, but I've read plenty of baseball history - including volumes of material on Cobb. I'm well aware of how he was regarded by baseball men of his generation. He was probably the best deadball player, although I think Honus gives him a run for his money. Nearly 80 years after his last game he is still one of the top five players of all time in my book. To me that is high enough praise for anyone to be satisfied with.
--I've said before, and you seemed to appreciate it at the time, that my preference for Ruth over Cobb is as much the fact that Ruth dominated a game which I recognise as modern baseball, while Cobb dominated a game much different that makes me prefer him as it is his statistics. Reading another million words by men who long for the old days of "scientific baseball" is unlikely to alter that. I think the choice of Cobb over Ruth or vice versa are choosing a style as much as a player. Switching to Cobb would require me to change the entire way I think about what wins ball games. Good luck with that.

[burger eater]

But for their careers... look at this (this is through the end of last season, with Sosa really only having had one year of decline, 2003, and more years of peak than Manny):

BA: Sosa, .278. Manny, .317
OBP: Sosa, .349. Manny, .413
SLG: Sosa, .546. Manny, .598
OPS+: Sosa, 133. Manny, 157
BB/162: Sosa, 64. Manny, 93.
H/162: Sosa, 169. Manny, 186
OPS: Sosa, .895. Manny, 1.010

Even the one area where Sosa has an edge...

HR/162: Sosa, 43. Manny, 41.

It isn't that big of an edge.

There's really no aspect of hitting that, over the course of their careers, Manny hasn't just bludgeoned Sosa senseless with. The 98 home run chase was awesome, sure. But even that year, Sosa's OBP couldn't top .380.

As for Chipper Jones... I've personally always rated him about equal with Trot Nixon as an outfielder, and considered him one of the most horrifically overrated players in baseball. Let's look at the numbers:

OPS+: 143
BA: .309
OBP: .404
SLG: .541
HR/162: 32

Very good numbers for a 3B... once he moved to LF, they're entirely ordinary.

There's really no aspect of hitting that, over the course of their careers, Manny hasn't just bludgeoned Sosa senseless with.
??????

Manny is a superior overall hitter, but the point is, he still has a long way to go before being grouped with power hitters the likes of Sammy and McGwire. Saying he has "bludgeoned him senseless" is quite a stretch.

Chipper's numbers compare pretty favorably with Manny's... that and he's been the offensive cornerstone of the Braves offense AND he's helped his team to 10 consecutive division titles.

Chipper's played 3rd, then left field, now 3rd again.

Chipper's stats vs. Jeter's... Chipper wins hands down. Is Jeter overrated?

[csh19792001]

--Chris, I haven't made it my life's work, but I've read plenty of baseball history - including volumes of material on Cobb. I'm well aware of how he was regarded by baseball men of his generation. He was probably the best deadball player, although I think Honus gives him a run for his money. Nearly 80 years after his last game he is still one of the top five players of all time in my book. To me that is high enough praise for anyone to be satisfied with.
--I've said before, and you seemed to appreciate it at the time, that my preference for Ruth over Cobb is as much the fact that Ruth dominated a game which I recognise as modern baseball, while Cobb dominated a game much different that makes me prefer him as it is his statistics. Reading another million words by men who long for the old days of "scientific baseball" is unlikely to alter that. I think the choice of Cobb over Ruth or vice versa are choosing a style as much as a player. Switching to Cobb would require me to change the entire way I think about what wins ball games. Good luck with that.

Mark,
I can't see how you judge the files when you haven't even looked at them. But, fair enough, you wouldn't change or even consider the possibility no matter WHAT. As I said before, with this approach, you'll simply continue to see part of the picture. To each their own.

[leecemark]

--Enough of the data has been copied into the "Ty Cobb General Thread" that I certainly know the TYPE of info. Is reading a thousand testimonials more compelling than 100? Most of them say pretty much the same thing.
--I agree that many people from Cobb's day thought he was a miracle worker. Not enough of a miracle worker to actually lead his team to a single championship, but whatever.

[torez77]

I will throw out a surprise for you here, though. The most UNDER rated player of the era that I am familiar with is Ted Williams. Have any of you math guys interprolated his career numbers if he didnt miss the war years? (both wars!)

does 680/2300 sound about right?
Unless he is in your top 2, you've got him underrated (yes, behind Bonds, I still pay attention)

Musial is often forgotten, and belongs in the top 7 as well.


If Teddy was a great fielder and baserunner, heck I may well have ranked him #1 ahead of Babe. Fact is, Teddy was only an average fielder and a slug on the bases, despite being in much better condition than Ruth. Still, he is the 2nd best offensive force ever IMO! I have him ranked #5 on my all-time players for one reason - what he could do at the plate. He is very close to Gehrig on my list at #4 - but Gehrig gets the tiebreaker cuz he fielded his position much better and has many titles, whereas Ted has none. I don't hold this against Teddy too much however, cuz his BoSox teams didn't have the greatest pitching, though Teddy could have hit better in the '46 World Series which the Sox lost 4-3.

I agree Musial is a strong top 10 candidate. He is very comparable to DiMaggio in my mind, some say better.

[csh19792001]

--Enough of the data has been copied into the "Ty Cobb General Thread" that I certainly know the TYPE of info. Is reading a thousand testimonials more compelling than 100? Most of them say pretty much the same thing.
--I agree that many people from Cobb's day thought he was a miracle worker. Not enough of a miracle worker to actually lead his team to a single championship, but whatever.

Mark,

I'd say Bonds has worked lots of magic with your style of baseball, winning 6 MVP's (soon to be 7). His teams haven't won a WS, and they've had the Wild Card (for the last 10 years) and the LCS (for 10 years before that) to help them at least get to the WS! Ted Williams' teams never won a WS, and he might have been the greatest hitter ever. You're way too smart to use this argument.

In any case, you mind is made up forever, and we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't want things to get uncivil or personal, because a)I like you, and b)this isn't that important in the realm of things. I was frustrated, and it probably came off as too intense. Apologies for that.

Chris

[csh19792001]

If Teddy was a great fielder and baserunner, heck I may well have ranked him #1 ahead of Babe. Fact is, Teddy was only an average fielder and a slug on the bases, despite being in much better condition than Ruth. Still, he is the 2nd best offensive force ever IMO! I have him ranked #5 on my all-time players for one reason - what he could do at the plate. He is very close to Gehrig on my list at #4 - but Gehrig gets the tiebreaker cuz he fielded his position much better and has many titles, whereas Ted has none. I don't hold this against Teddy too much however, cuz his BoSox teams didn't have the greatest pitching, though Teddy could have hit better in the '46 World Series which the Sox lost 4-3.

I agree Musial is a strong top 10 candidate. He is very comparable to DiMaggio in my mind, some say better.

You could make a strong case that Musial was more valuable than Dimag.

Could you make a case for Musial against Williams?

[leecemark]

--Chris, I was getting a little frustrated with the tone of the discussion myself. It wasn't my best arguement, but you've heard all them already. For the record I don't rate either Bonds or Williams ahead of Cobb. They are #5 and #6 on my list. Ruth as you know is #1. I go back and forth between Wagner, Cobb and Mays for 2-4.
--I think you can make a case for Musial being a more valuable player than Williams. Its a tough sell since Williams was clearly the better hitter. Musial was a much better outfielder and baserunner, but not tremendously good at either. Mays and Wagner weren't as good as hitters as Williams (and Cobb probably wasn't either for that matter), but they were great defensive players at key positons and terrific baserunners. Its not difficult to boost them ahead of Willams due to those factors.
--With Musial its good versus adequete in those areas and that doesn't resound as loudly. I used to also give Musial credit for being a better guy in the clubhouse than Williams and did rank him ahead of Teddy. I've since decided that Williams was a pretty good clubhouse guy. He had a hostile relationship with the press and fans, but his teammates liked him and he was always eager to help anybody with their hitting. Since Musial needs all the intangibles you can give him to beat Williams, I've since moved Williams back ahead of him.

[DoubleX]

This may have been talked about already in this thread, but I don't feel like going back and reading every post.

I think Hank Aaron can be both very overrated and underrated. To the casual baseball fan, Aaron is the homerun king - the man who topped Ruth. To the casual fan, this probably puts Aaron way up there, past a ton of other players who were arguably a lot better than Aaron (such as Hornsby, Gehrig, Wagner, and perhaps even Williams and Mays). So much weight is placed on homeruns, especially in today's game, that I believe the casual fan can't help but give Aaron an overabundance of credit and praise for being the homerun king.

But then to the more informed fan, they know that Aaron hit those 41 additional homeruns in almost 4,000 extra at-bats, meaning Aaron is the homerun king in accumulation only, not by ability. The informed fan will also note Aaron's OPS as being only 38th best all-time. The informed fan also knows that Aaron wasn't even the best player of his time, as Mays and many would argue Mantle were better, and some would argue by great margins. So in reaction to the overrating Aaron can receive by the casual fan, I think the informed fan can tend to underrate Aaron and forget that Aaron's tremendous accumulation of homeruns, hits, rbis, runs, and all-around skill at the game, reflect why Aaron is so great - Aaron, unlike anyone else ever, was able to play at a very high level for a very long time; there is a reason why Aaron has those gaudy statistics and no one else does, because no one could play like Aaron did for as long as he did.

So while I think it's an overestimate to rank Aaron among the best 3 or 4 all-time based on his homerun total (as the casual fan might be apt to do), I also think it's a stretch to underestimate Aaron and leave him outside the top 10 all-time (as an informed fan trying to go against the grain might be apt to do).

[leecemark]

......perhap even Mays and Williams. I'd say especially Mays and Williams over Gehrig and Hornsby. Mays was possibly the best all around ballplayer ever and Williams the second best hitter - by the narrowest of margins behind Ruth. Both were better than either Gehrig or Hornsby. I might be willing to argue Aaron vs the latter two, but never against Mays or Williams. Except for that, I agree with your assessment of Aaron.

[Imapotato]

Well, as to McGwire being one of the greatest ever... McGwire's "OPS+" is 163 for his career, very close to Ty Cobb's 167. And we all know that OPS+ is the most reliable, valid, and important stat in baseball, so....... :)


You got me spitting coffee out my nose on this one!

You didn't realize Gavvy Gravath was the best player in the deadball era?
Despite his 2 best seasons when there were 3 leagues...
and all his hrs were at Baker HR Bowl

[DoubleX]

......perhap even Mays and Williams. I'd say especially Mays and Williams over Gehrig and Hornsby. Mays was possibly the best all around ballplayer ever and Williams the second best hitter - by the narrowest of margins behind Ruth. Both were better than either Gehrig or Hornsby. I might be willing to argue Aaron vs the latter two, but never against Mays or Williams. Except for that, I agree with your assessment of Aaron.

Heck, I'm not arguing that Aaron was better than Mays or Williams. Just saying that Aaron's status as the homerun king can loom so large for many casual fans, that they overrate Aaron's greatness above Mays and Williams, and even Ty Cobb now that I think about it. Fans, especially today's fans, put a lot of stock in homeruns.

I think the All-Century Team voting results evidences how the casual fan overrates Aaron because of his homerun total. Aaron received the third highest vote total (behind Lou Gehrig and Babe Ruth who Aaron lost to by only less than 1,300 votes), and was followed by Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Joe DiMaggio, Johnny Bench and Mike Schmidt as the only players to come within 300,000 votes of Aaron. Aaron was miles ahead of the likes of Ty Cobb, Rogers Hornsby, Honus Wagner, Jimmie Foxx, Stan Musial, and Tris Speaker, among other notables. Aaron came within 1300 votes of topping Babe Ruth for being voted the best OF ever - now that's definitely overrating by the casual fan (1,156,782 of which voted for Aaron compared to just 777,056 for Ty Cobb, 630,761 for Rogers Hornsby, 571,279 for Stan Musial, 526,740 for Honus Wagner, 351,488 for Jimmie Foxx, and only 84,461 for Tris Speaker).

So my initial point was that while the casual fan easily overrates Aaron to the point of being one of the top 3 or 4 ever based on homeruns, I think the informed responds by underrating Aaron in order to highlight deserving players underrated and overlooked by the casual fan.

[toopier]

There are so many ways to look at it.


Most Feared :Bonds-Williams-Ruth-Cobb
Overall :Ruth-nobody*-Mays-Hornsby-Cobb
Best hitter :Williams-Cobb-Hornsby-Ruth
Power :Bonds-Ruth-Aaron-Williams

the beauty of it? I can change my mind 3 times before dinner


*Ruth would have made the HOF as a pitcher if he never hit a Home Run

[Windy City Fan]

Hornsby over Cobb as an overall player? Whatever you're smoking, please pass the pipe.

Hornsby MAY have been better with the bat, and I'm really just giving that one to you because I don't feel like looking up all the data. Cobb however, was a far superior baserunner and defensive player, plus he wasn't a clubhouse cancer like Hornsby. Hornsby gets a few bonus points for playing a more demanding defensive position, but he wasn't exactly great at it - not horrible either.

Look at it like this, there are some legitimate arguments to put Eddie Collins and Joe Morgan ahead of Hornsby. There legitimate arguments to put Hornsby ahead of them, but its a toss up.

In my mind, there is no legitimate argument to put anyone ahead of Cobb at CF. I know some might rank Mays ahead of him, but I just don't see it. Cobb has a legitimate argument for the greatest player ever - most people don't rank him below 4th, and I've never seen Hornsby ranked that high.

[toopier]

actually, you are correct.
Hornsby is a better hitter than Cobb.
I had Hornsby ahead of Cobb on overall based on player/managing, but thats not fair, so lets just move Hornsby ahead in hitting and overall.

See, you DID change my mind!

[leecemark]

--XX, I wasn't under the impression you thought Aaron was better than Mays or Williams. You post seemed to imply that you thought Gehrig and Hornsby were better than Mays and Williams. That was my disagreement. Apparently, we're having a little miscommunication on this one. To me Mays is clearly the best of the 4 due to his all around skills. The other three derive almost all their value from their hitting and, as great as the others were, Williams was better than either Gehrig or Hornsby. I have Aaron behind the four men mentioned here, plus Ruth, Cobb, Wagner and Bonds. That would make him #9 on my list. He ended up 10 on our poll with Speaker also ahead, which I can certainly see the arguement for. For that matter, I can see the arguement for Musial and Mantle cracking the top 10. Everything after top 5 isn't exactly set in stone for me.

[torez77]

Hornsby over Cobb as an overall player? Whatever you're smoking, please pass the pipe.

Hornsby MAY have been better with the bat, and I'm really just giving that one to you because I don't feel like looking up all the data. Cobb however, was a far superior baserunner and defensive player, plus he wasn't a clubhouse cancer like Hornsby. Hornsby gets a few bonus points for playing a more demanding defensive position, but he wasn't exactly great at it - not horrible either.

Look at it like this, there are some legitimate arguments to put Eddie Collins and Joe Morgan ahead of Hornsby. There legitimate arguments to put Hornsby ahead of them, but its a toss up.

In my mind, there is no legitimate argument to put anyone ahead of Cobb at CF. I know some might rank Mays ahead of him, but I just don't see it. Cobb has a legitimate argument for the greatest player ever - most people don't rank him below 4th, and I've never seen Hornsby ranked that high.

Very close comparison as hitters. Hornsby beats Cobb narrowly in Adjusted Production - 176-167. Like you said, Cobb is a far better baserunner (arguably best ever) and better fielder. Plus, Hornsby didn't dominate his respective era the way Cobb dominated his. Hornsby disappeared after the 1929 season - not sure if this was due to injury or what. I personally give the nod to Cobb. However, some things to consider in Hornsby's favor - he hit far more homers than Cobb hitting off the deadball style in the NL, probably cuz he saw what the other power hitters were doing. Nonetheless, it worked like a charm! Hornsby's best single seasons were actually better than Cobb's best. He hit .400 while hitting over 25 homers a year. That's phenomenal! The issue of whether Cobb could have adjusted but was too stubborn is up for debate. The age excuse doesn't wash with me cuz he was only 32 when the lively ball started. Tris Speaker was also 32 and he didn't miss a beat - his doubles and HRs jumped. 32 is not old for a baseball player, and many players have proven this. To Cobb's credit, he maintained his high average and continued to be the hitter he'd always been, but no longer a league leader. Sorry, I didn't wanna bring up this issue again and am not trying to stir another debate - I just had to address it when bringing up the issue of adjusting to the lively ball era. Maybe I'm still not getting it - give me time! :o However, I'm going to try and leave this alone and not use it when comparing Cobb to other players, cuz it's gotten me in trouble before. :D I'll just focus on what Cobb accomplished with his specialty - the deadball.

All in all, I see it this way - Cobb was far and away the #1 hitter of the deadball era. Hornsby was #2 behind Ruth in the lively ball era of the 20s. Cobb was a much better baserunner and fielder. I'll take Cobb.

[DoubleX]

Leecemark,

Yeah, I realized we were diverging after I posted and then re-read your post. I can see how the language of my first post was somewhat confusing. I totally agree with you, Mays and Williams are ahead of Gehrig and Hornsby; I meant to imply this in my initial post but I guess it came across wrong. What I was trying to say was that the casual fan will easily place Aaron ahead of the likes of Gehrig, Hornsby, Wagner, and a few others with arguments more compelling than Aaron, and that many casual fans will actually go as far to place Aaron ahead of Mays and Williams - an unthinkinable and ridiculous designation to most more informed fans.

From our past discussions in the best positional player thread, I think we're pretty much in agreement over around where Aaron (and most everyone else) falls. I don't think Aaron is a top 5 player, but he is certainly a top 10 in my book.

[ElHalo]

......perhap even Mays and Williams. I'd say especially Mays and Williams over Gehrig and Hornsby. Mays was possibly the best all around ballplayer ever and Williams the second best hitter - by the narrowest of margins behind Ruth. Both were better than either Gehrig or Hornsby. I might be willing to argue Aaron vs the latter two, but never against Mays or Williams. Except for that, I agree with your assessment of Aaron.

I used to rank Mays and Williams 2-3 behind Ruth, but I've changed my ways on that one.

Mays still sits pretty behind Ruth and Cobb, but Williams... especially with position factors thrown in, you can't put Williams ahead of Wagner and Hornsby. And Gehrig, for that matter, because he was better in the other aspects of the game than Ted.

[csh19792001]

You got me spitting coffee out my nose on this one!

You didn't realize Gavvy Gravath was the best player in the deadball era?
Despite his 2 best seasons when there were 3 leagues...
and all his hrs were at Baker HR Bowl

Glad I got a rise out of ya. :)

Hey, but stats are infallible, and represent EXACTLY what happened, with utter, complete inclusion. Didn't you know that? I had to speak out for OPS+- it just isn't espoused as gospel nearly enough these days!

[csh19792001]

Hornsby over Cobb as an overall player? Whatever you're smoking, please pass the pipe.

Hornsby MAY have been better with the bat, and I'm really just giving that one to you because I don't feel like looking up all the data. Cobb however, was a far superior baserunner and defensive player, plus he wasn't a clubhouse cancer like Hornsby. Hornsby gets a few bonus points for playing a more demanding defensive position, but he wasn't exactly great at it - not horrible either.

Look at it like this, there are some legitimate arguments to put Eddie Collins and Joe Morgan ahead of Hornsby. There legitimate arguments to put Hornsby ahead of them, but its a toss up.

In my mind, there is no legitimate argument to put anyone ahead of Cobb at CF. I know some might rank Mays ahead of him, but I just don't see it. Cobb has a legitimate argument for the greatest player ever - most people don't rank him below 4th, and I've never seen Hornsby ranked that high.

Yeah, give me a hit of that good s*** when you're done.... :crazy

[csh19792001]

Very close comparison as hitters. Hornsby beats Cobb narrowly in Adjusted Production - 176-167. Like you said, Cobb is a far better baserunner (arguably best ever) and better fielder. Plus, Hornsby didn't dominate his respective era the way Cobb dominated his. Hornsby disappeared after the 1929 season - not sure if this was due to injury or what. I personally give the nod to Cobb. However, some things to consider in Hornsby's favor - he hit far more homers than Cobb hitting off the deadball style in the NL, probably cuz he saw what the other power hitters were doing. Nonetheless, it worked like a charm! Hornsby's best single seasons were actually better than Cobb's best. He hit .400 while hitting over 25 homers a year. That's phenomenal! The issue of whether Cobb could have adjusted but was too stubborn is up for debate. The age excuse doesn't wash with me cuz he was only 32 when the lively ball started. Tris Speaker was also 32 and he didn't miss a beat - his doubles and HRs jumped. 32 is not old for a baseball player, and many players have proven this. To Cobb's credit, he maintained his high average and continued to be the hitter he'd always been, but no longer a league leader. Sorry, I didn't wanna bring up this issue again and am not trying to stir another debate - I just had to address it when bringing up the issue of adjusting to the lively ball era. Maybe I'm still not getting it - give me time! :o However, I'm going to try and leave this alone and not use it when comparing Cobb to other players, cuz it's gotten me in trouble before. :D I'll just focus on what Cobb accomplished with his specialty - the deadball.

All in all, I see it this way - Cobb was far and away the #1 hitter of the deadball era. Hornsby was #2 behind Ruth in the lively ball era of the 20s. Cobb was a much better baserunner and fielder. I'll take Cobb.

Torez-
A good post- I'm glad you're interested and thinking about these things. But honestly, I don't see how you can say the two are even close as to warrant a debate/discussion. Cobb leads Rogers in every statistically based system of career value, he set 90 ML records (still holds 30), and was almost universally regarded as the greatest player ever, even by people like Connie Mack, who saw everyone from Anson to Wagner to Ruth to Mays.

[ElHalo]

In my mind, there is no legitimate argument to put anyone ahead of Cobb at CF. I know some might rank Mays ahead of him, but I just don't see it. Cobb has a legitimate argument for the greatest player ever - most people don't rank him below 4th, and I've never seen Hornsby ranked that high.

Agree with you on Cobb, disagree on Hornsby.

Cobb is everything you said, sure. Hornsby is, depending on how I'm feeling at the moment, either the fourth or fifth greatest player in the history of baseball. Other than by Bill James (who really does have a personal vendetta against Rogers) or people influenced by him, I've never seen Hornsby ranked lower than 6th.

[torez77]

Torez-
A good post- I'm glad you're interested and thinking about these things. But honestly, I don't see how you can say the two are even close as to warrant a debate/discussion. Cobb leads Rogers in every statistically based system of career value, he set 90 ML records (still holds 30), and was almost universally regarded as the greatest player ever, even by people like Connie Mack, who saw everyone from Anson to Wagner to Ruth to Mays.

Oh, I think it's worthy of a debate/discussion. Isn't that what this baseball forum is for? :) According to Adjusted Production (or OPS+), Hornsby was a more productive hitter than Cobb. But it's by a narrow margin, and Cobb has Rogers beat everywhere else. When you compare their bats, that's definitely worthy of a debate, IMO.

[Imapotato]

Underrated?

Jackie Robinson.

A superb fielder, able to play several positions.
A dangerous hitter with decent power, who was at his best in the clutch.
A dazzling base runner.
Capable of using any or all of those skills to completely dominate a game.
A ferocious competitor who simply would not let his team lose.

It's sad -- and wrong -- that he's almost never mentioned among the all-time greats because his role as a pioneer has obscured his extraordinary talents as a player.

exactly...I think he is the #3 2b of all time...and top 15 player...yet everyone brings up this argument

"Yea but so and so have said he wasn't even the BEST player in the Negro Leagues"

What does THAT have to do with anything?
That's like saying Joe DiMaggio wasn't the best in the PCL...so how could he be a great MLB player?
OR...that pitcher was 6-12 5.10 ERA in AAA...he shouldn't win the Cy Young for a 22-8 2.80 rookie year

I got two

underrated ---George Cutshaw...just because no one ever heard of him...but in the 1920 sporting news, he was called the greatest defensive 2B from 1901-1920...ahead of Lajoie, and Collins

overrated--Hornsby...see his deadball stats, see his 20 stats, see his 8 years of PT or PH play that cause his % stats look phenominial...he may be the second highest career BA but he couldn't compete with Ruth, Cobb Williams over their amount of PA's. Hornsby also came in when the game was changing...the Federal League brought competition...and yes Gavvy Cravath and Frank Baker to an extent were pioneers...more players, Ruth notably...began swinging for the fences...especially when the FL ended and ONE FORGETS...the FL had smaller parks! Thus...those triple shits were clearing the fence...after that...the NL and AL began shortening their fences...look at ballpark.com for details of the MASSIVE changes in ballpark dimensions from 1916-1928. The Rajah was in the right place at the right time

Here's one that will get jaws dropped

overrated---Honus Wagner
The more I look into AL jumping...and how it affected the NL from 1901-1907...I see Honus may not be as great as one thought...he was great YES...but maybe not a top 3 guy like everyone thinks...right now Mays and Williams have passed him in my eyes...simply because of their very level era

[csh19792001]

Oh, I think it's worthy of a debate/discussion. Isn't that what this baseball forum is for? :) According to Adjusted Production (or OPS+), Hornsby was a more productive hitter than Cobb. But it's by a narrow margin, and Cobb has Rogers beat everywhere else. When you compare their bats, that's definitely worthy of a debate, IMO.

I don't see any debate with regards to their hitting, even- I think you may be looking at raw numbers too much. Numbers are only important when viewed in light of the context that produced them. This is why we don't judge Bill Lange and Tony Oliva's offensive numbers as if they have equal raw merit.

Hornsby had a huge era advantage on Ty- more runs were being scored and BA much higher (overall) during their careers. Despite that, Cobb contributed far more overall, because he kept himself in great shape, and played a long, long time with sustained quality.

This is evinced by these numbers-
Runs Created- Cobb 2810, Hornsby 2074

Runs Produced- Cobb 4067, Hornsby 2862

Cobb also buries Hornsby in black ink, grey ink, win shares, and total player rating.

Here is Cobb, had he played the majority of his career in an offensive era similar to Hornsby's.. The stats are indexed, reflecting how much a player outperformed his peers. http://www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/1921_TC.html

[csh19792001]

Agree with you on Cobb, disagree on Hornsby.

Cobb is everything you said, sure. Hornsby is, depending on how I'm feeling at the moment, either the fourth or fifth greatest player in the history of baseball. Other than by Bill James (who really does have a personal vendetta against Rogers) or people influenced by him, I've never seen Hornsby ranked lower than 6th.

Which authors are you denoting?

[ElHalo]

I don't see any debate with regards to their hitting, even- I think you may be looking at raw numbers too much. Numbers are only important when viewed in light of the context that produced them. This is why we don't judge Bill Lange and Tony Oliva's offensive numbers as if they have equal raw merit.

Hornsby had a huge era advantage on Ty- more runs were being scored and BA much higher (overall) during their careers. Despite that, Cobb contributed far more overall, because he kept himself in great shape, and played a long, long time with sustained quality.

This is evinced by these numbers-
Runs Created- Cobb 2810, Hornsby 2074

Runs Produced- Cobb 4067, Hornsby 2862

Cobb also buries Hornsby in black ink, grey ink, win shares, and total player rating.

Here is Cobb, had he played the majority of his career in an offensive era similar to Hornsby's.. The stats are indexed, reflecting how much a player outperformed his peers. http://www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/1921_TC.html

Well, a large part of the difference in counting stats can be explained by Hornsby suffering a pretty much career ending injury in 1930... while Cobb had great longevity.

If such things matter to you, Cobb gets a huge advantage there, but I'm not entirely certain that they should. Cobb still comes out ahead easily overall.

[torez77]

I don't see any debate with regards to their hitting, even- I think you may be looking at raw numbers too much. Numbers are only important when viewed in light of the context that produced them. This is why we don't judge Bill Lange and Tony Oliva's offensive numbers as if they have equal raw merit.

Hornsby had a huge era advantage on Ty- more runs were being scored and BA much higher (overall) during their careers. Despite that, Cobb contributed far more overall, because he kept himself in great shape, and played a long, long time with sustained quality.

This is evinced by these numbers-
Runs Created- Cobb 2810, Hornsby 2074

Runs Produced- Cobb 4067, Hornsby 2862

Cobb also buries Hornsby in black ink, grey ink, win shares, and total player rating.

Here is Cobb, had he played the majority of his career in an offensive era similar to Hornsby's.. The stats are indexed, reflecting how much a player outperformed his peers. http://www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/1921_TC.html

I've seen those indexed stats before, and I think you already know my feeling about those - they're not even close to being supported by what Cobb actually did in that era in real-life. I've explained myself as much I can on this matter. Again, maybe I'm just not getting it. :noidea

[torez77]

Please don't think I'm totally disregarding those indexed stats - I'm not. I just think they're overrated, that's all.

[leecemark]

--Basically the indexed stats show what Cobb would have done if his best years had been in the 20s rather than the teens and he had performed at the same relationship to the league. Of course, in real life Cobb couldn't or wouldn't adjust his style of play to the live ball. Personnally, I believe if he had started later he would have been a very good power hitter. As you've said before, he was only 32 in 1920 and could have adjusted. However, when you have been the best in the business doing things one way for a dozen years it is difficult to change that mind set.
-- I do hold it against Cobb that he failed to take full advantage of the live ball and prove he could be the best at any style of play (although he did remain an excellent hitter in the 20s). I don't hold it against him too much though, becasue I can easily understand why he choose (and I do believe it was a choice not a lack of ability) to stick with what had made him the king of baseball. Especially, since most of the baseball establishment still favored his style of play over Ruth's to the end of Cobb's career. I think the baseball establishment was wrong and behind the times in this (as they usually are on every change in the game) , but what Cobb's supporter say about the opinion of knowlegable baseball men preferring Cobb is true enough.

[torez77]

--Basically the indexed stats show what Cobb would have done if his best years had been in the 20s rather than the teens and he had performed at the same relationship to the league. Of course, in real life Cobb couldn't or wouldn't adjust his style of play to the live ball. Personnally, I believe if he had started later he would have been a very good power hitter. As you've said before, he was only 32 in 1920 and could have adjusted. However, when you have been the best in the business doing things one way for a dozen years it is difficult to change that mind set.
-- I do hold it against Cobb that he failed to take full advantage of the live ball and prove he could be the best at any style of play (although he did remain an excellent hitter in the 20s). I don't hold it against him too much though, becasue I can easily understand why he choose (and I do believe it was a choice not a lack of ability) to stick with what had made him the king of baseball. Especially, since most of the baseball establishment still favored his style of play over Ruth's to the end of Cobb's career. I think the baseball establishment was wrong and behind the times in this (as they usually are on every change in the game) , but what Cobb's supporter say about the opinion of knowlegable baseball men preferring Cobb is true enough.

You bring up good points to consider. It may very well have been Cobb's choice not to adjust, not a lack of ability. He hit 5 homers in 2 games trying to prove the reporter wrong - which makes you wonder. I have another opinion, however - I don't think Cobb was a total moron. He saw what other players were doing and what it took to win games in the new era, and he also saw Ruth was passing him as the greatest offensive player ever. Don't you think he tried at least sometimes to keep up, other than those 2 games? Don't you think it bothered him to see Ruth winning championships while he wasn't? Don't you think his numbers in real-life should have in some ways resembled those indexed stats? Cobb had his pride, and I think he made more effort than you think to show he could put up stats similar to the new league leaders of the lively ball. This is just my opinion - Cobb was a very stubborn man, but IMO he made more of an effort than he let on to still be king in the lively ball - though you'd never hear him admit it.

[csh19792001]

Of course, in real life Cobb couldn't or wouldn't adjust his style of play to the live ball.


Mark,
It isn't a matter of adjusting his style. The numbers are based on his hitting numbers in relation to the league, and it assumes he'd perform exactly the same way, without adjusting anything.

Anyway, Had he played with the liveball exclusively, and performed in the same way in relation to the league (for his entire career), these are the figures that result.

Torrez,

This explanation might help. http://www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/stat-definitions.html

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/adjusting_statistics/

[csh19792001]

You bring up good points to consider. It may very well have been Cobb's choice not to adjust, not a lack of ability. He hit 5 homers in 2 games trying to prove the reporter wrong - which makes you wonder. I have another opinion, however - I don't think Cobb was a total moron. He saw what other players were doing and what it took to win games in the new era, and he also saw Ruth was passing him as the greatest offensive player ever. Don't you think he tried at least sometimes to keep up, other than those 2 games? Don't you think it bothered him to see Ruth winning championships while he wasn't? Don't you think his numbers in real-life should have in some ways resembled those indexed stats? Cobb had his pride, and I think he made more effort than you think to show he could put up stats similar to the new league leaders of the lively ball. This is just my opinion - Cobb was a very stubborn man, but IMO he made more of an effort than he let on to still be king in the lively ball - though you'd never hear him admit it.

Cobb wasn't a moron- he was totally the opposite; he was brillant baseball wise, and shrewd/bright in other areas of life, such as investments and world history. He was named investor of the century by Money Magazine. Cobb was stubborn as hell, though, and he wasn't going to change his style completely when he had already come to be known as the greatest ever using a style he perfected. And, by the same token, almost all of the deadballers that were in their decline phase refused to start swinging from the heels, also- Collins, Speaker, Wheat, etc.

[leecemark]

Chris, I understand what the indexed numbers mean. Torez's point was that when Cobb played in the live ball era his numbers didn't jump to the levels suggested by his indexed numbers for the pre-live ball years. I was tryign to explain why that might be. I have no doubt Cobb would have been an entirely different player had his entire career been played in the live ball era. Exactly what kind of player is purely speculation, of course, but almost certainly one with more of an upper cut swing and more home runs. Cobb was a very large and strong man for his time and one of, if not the, best power hitters of the deadball era. It seems likely that would have still be true in another period.

[torez77]

Cobb wasn't a moron- he was totally the opposite; he was brillant baseball wise, and shrewd/bright in other areas of life, such as investments and world history. He was named investor of the century by Money Magazine. Cobb was stubborn as hell, though, and he wasn't going to change his style completely when he had already come to be known as the greatest ever using a style he perfected. And, by the same token, almost all of the deadballers that were in their decline phase refused to start swinging from the heels, also- Collins, Speaker, Wheat, etc.

OK, you don't think I said I thought Cobb was a moron, did you? I said I don't think Cobb was a moron. I'm not saying you thought this - it's just that you started your post with "Cobb wasn't a moron". Just wanna make sure.

[csh19792001]

Well, a large part of the difference in counting stats can be explained by Hornsby suffering a pretty much career ending injury in 1930... while Cobb had great longevity.

If such things matter to you, Cobb gets a huge advantage there, but I'm not entirely certain that they should. Cobb still comes out ahead easily overall.



I can't imagine over 1000 hits, 600 RBI, 600 Runs, etc NOT mattering (this is what he produced after age 34). These things should matter to you, too.

Ok, let's say he had a horrific injury that ended his career at 34.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/scomp.cgi?I=cobbty01:Ty+Cobb&st=int&age=34&compage=19

As you can see, (even if one totally eschews cumulative stats), Cobb's OPS+ was 179 at that point. His career figures were .371/.434/.517. So even when you take his away his "advantage"? :noidea of playing longer, he still has tremendous rate stats. I'd shudder to think what his relative BA/OBP/SLG were at that point....

[csh19792001]

OK, you don't think I said I thought Cobb was a moron, did you? I said I don't think Cobb was a moron. I'm not saying you thought this - it's just that you started your post with "Cobb wasn't a moron". Just wanna make sure.

No. See, this is the problem of the online thing. If you and I were talking, this would be plain and easy. I know you didn't say the guy was stupid, but I wanted to reinforce how bright he was.

The member of this message board "Freakshow" has a quote underneath all of his posts-

"Eschew osfuscation, apotheosize disambiguation!" Pretty clever, and it works here, mi amigo. :)

I hope we can see eye to eye/communicate better in the future. We're getting there.

Chris

[torez77]

Mark,
It isn't a matter of adjusting his style. The numbers are based on his hitting numbers in relation to the league, and it assumes he'd perform exactly the same way, without adjusting anything.

Anyway, Had he played with the liveball exclusively, and performed in the same way in relation to the league (for his entire career), these are the figures that result.

Torrez,

This explanation might help. http://www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/stat-definitions.html

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/adjusting_statistics/

Holy cow! Ruth would get 80 or 90 homers in a season with the normalized HR totals? Well, now that I think about that - being as how McGwire and Bonds hit over 70, Ruth might well have hit 100 nowadays! Of course, I never pretend to know what would happen if Ruth played today, and vice versa. I can only go by what they accomplished in their time. Comparing 20's to 30's is much more reasonable!
Interesting stats, btw!

[csh19792001]

Holy cow! Ruth would get 80 or 90 homers in a season with the normalized HR totals? Well, now that I think about that - being as how McGwire and Bonds hit over 70, Ruth might well have hit 100 nowadays! Of course, I never pretend to know what would happen if Ruth played today, and vice versa. I can only go by what they accomplished in their time. Comparing 20's to 30's is much more reasonable!
Interesting stats, btw!

I'm glad you're getting/enjoying it!!! :dance

With the poor expansion pitching and tiny parks of today, The Babe might very well hit 80-90 a year. I have every reason to believe that Babe was every bit the HR hitter of a McGwire, if not better.

[torez77]

I'm glad you're getting/enjoying it!!! :dance

With the poor expansion pitching and tiny parks of today, The Babe might very well hit 80-90 a year. I have every reason to believe that Babe was every bit the HR hitter of a McGwire, if not better.

Oh, I definitely believe he was a better HR hitter than Big Mac, for his time! Like I said, I don't pretend to know what would happen. It's my personal belief that if we put today's players in a time machine back into the 20's, with their much better conditioning, enhancers, etc. - they would rule the league! However, saying this isn't fair to all the greats of the past. That's why I ignore this - cuz this is the biggest what-if you can think of in sports - and just compare what the players accomplished in their era. Ruth dominated his era like no other, FAR more than Big Mac, so Big Mac will never touch Ruth IMO.

[csh19792001]

Chris, I understand what the indexed numbers mean. Torez's point was that when Cobb played in the live ball era his numbers didn't jump to the levels suggested by his indexed numbers for the pre-live ball years. I was tryign to explain why that might be. I have no doubt Cobb would have been an entirely different player had his entire career been played in the live ball era. Exactly what kind of player is purely speculation, of course, but almost certainly one with more of an upper cut swing and more home runs. Cobb was a very large and strong man for his time and one of, if not the, best power hitters of the deadball era. It seems likely that would have still be true in another period.

Mark,
Thanks for the clarification- I'm glad we're seeing eye to eye here. True, we have no idea what exactly would have happened, but I think it's a very fair assumption, (given how much the game changed to one favoring offense after 1919), that Cobb's overall (and rate) numbers would have better, whether he hit many more homers or not. And that's really the only point I've been trying to make.

I just saw your profile- I always thought you were a Tigers fan, was shocked to see you're an M's fan! I started an Ichiro appreciation thread over on current events- you might be interested. He's my favorite player right now- one of those truly rare guys who could succeed in ANY era.

[csh19792001]

Oh, I definitely believe he was a better HR hitter than Big Mac, for his time! Like I said, I don't pretend to know what would happen. It's my personal belief that if we put today's players in a time machine back into the 20's, with their much better conditioning, enhancers, etc. - they would rule the league! However, saying this isn't fair to all the greats of the past. That's why I ignore this - cuz this is the biggest what-if you can think of in sports - and just compare what the players accomplished in their era. Ruth dominated his era like no other, FAR more than Big Mac, so Big Mac will never touch Ruth IMO.

Torrez,
I made a post on this thread http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=20025&page=5 (#112) that you might enjoy. For some reason, neither Mark nor anyone else responded to it, which I expected. But it's directly germane to what you are talking about.

[leecemark]

--Chris, I grew up a Tigers fan and from a historical perspective remain one. I've lived in Washington for 10 years now though and having an exciting, competitive (until this year) team on TV every night and just up the road graduadly shifted my current loyalty to the Mariners. It is hard to maintain a long distance loyalty to a team that as been as awfull as long as the Tigers have been - although they are better than the M's this year.
--I have mixed feeling about Ichiro. He is certainly the only thing worth following with the Mariners this season, but he isn't my ideal corner OF. I'd like more power and it wouldn't kill him to take the occasional walk. The bigger problem I have with him is he is not a team player. Twice in the last week he has bunted with a man on second and two out. A teams best hitter should be driving that run home, not leaving it for the next guy. That is pretty common for him. His stated goal coming in to each season is getting his 200 hits and he is willing to forgo the greater good of the team to get them. With the single season hit record in reach he has taken that selfish approach to new hieghts - although with the team going nowhere his lack of dedication to team goals is more understandable than it was the last two years when another couple wins would have meant the playoffs. He is exciting and excellent defensively (I'd like him much better as a CF), but not a guy I'd like to build a team around.

[csh19792001]

--Chris, I grew up a Tigers fan and from a historical perspective remain one. I've lived in Washington for 10 years now though and having an exciting, competitive (until this year) team on TV every night and just up the road graduadly shifted my current loyalty to the Mariners. It is hard to maintain a long distance loyalty to a team that as been as awfull as long as the Tigers have been - although they are better than the M's this year.
--I have mixed feeling about Ichiro. He is certainly the only thing worth following with the Mariners this season, but he isn't my ideal corner OF. I'd like more power and it wouldn't kill him to take the occasional walk. The bigger problem I have with him is he is not a team player. Twice in the last week he has bunted with a man on second and two out. A teams best hitter should be driving that run home, not leaving it for the next guy. That is pretty common for him. His stated goal coming in to each season is getting his 200 hits and he is willing to forgo the greater good of the team to get them. With the single season hit record in reach he has taken that selfish approach to new hieghts - although with the team going nowhere his lack of dedication to team goals is more understandable than it was the last two years when another couple wins would have meant the playoffs. He is exciting and excellent defensively (I'd like him much better as a CF), but not a guy I'd like to build a team around.

Agreed. I really don't know why he isn't in CF.

Did you ever read in James new abstract how Steve Garvey had a "formula" for getting 200 hits a year? It included a certain number of bunts, and what you said just made me think of it...

Hey, how about Garvey?? NEVER mentioned as a HOF candidate, and he was probably better than many of the guys who get a ton of attention. Must've been that he was the male "martha stewart"; too perfect to be liked, instead engendering hate and envy among people in the baseball community. Besides that, didn't walk- but it isn't like the HOF ballot constituents ever cared that much about relative OBP....

Who do you guys believe to be the top 2 most overrated and underrated players ever?

Why don't they have a chatroom here? This is frequently just like instant messaging, and I'm tired of posting like this. it would be SO MUCH faster. Maybe I'll look into it (finding a room/group, maybe on Yahoo or MSN), if people are interested. Let me know.

[leecemark]

--Chris, I thought I'd made my position on timelines pretty clear in numerous posts. I do think the quality of play improved at a pretty steady pace for the first 100 years or so of major league history. When its close between an old timer and a modern player I go with the modern guy every time. Which is not to say there weren't great players in every era.
--In spite of my views on the weaker quality of play in earlier times most of my top 10 players played before I was born. It may be that my timelines should more severely discount the older greats to balance their greater dominance of their peers. However, I'm not ready to throw Ruth, Cobb and Wagner out of my top 5, inconsistent as that may be.

[leecemark]

--Overrated: George Sisler and Pie Traynor, as well as a dozen other players from the 20s.
--Underrated: Joe Gordon and Arky Vaughan. Although since Vaughan wa sjust elected to the BBF Hall and has also made the real Hall, maybe Minnie Minoso would be a better choice.

[four tool]

By 1920, cobb had already played 15 years. Without the offensive jump of the 20s he and Rajah and everyone else would have had lower BAs. Bthrough 1919, cobb had gone 11 consecutive years hitting above his lifetime average--no one else of any era ever came close to that! He won so many titles in his prime that he blows almost everyone else away with black ink. Ruth exceeds him but Ruth was primarily SL and HR Cobb was everywhere on the charts. Hornsby doesn't come close either in raw or indexed numbers.

[csh19792001]

By 1920, cobb had already played 15 years. Without the offensive jump of the 20s he and Rajah and everyone else would have had lower BAs. But through 1919, cobb had gone 11 consecutive years hitting above his lifetime average--no one else of any era ever came close to that! He won so many titles in his prime that he blows almost everyone else away with black ink. Ruth exceeds him but Ruth was primarily SL and HR Cobb was everywhere on the charts. Hornsby doesn't come close either in raw or indexed numbers.

That was my point- no matter how you slice it, he was just better. Thanks, fourtool. :waving

[Williamsburg2599]

Who is the most overrated player in the league today,and ever?Who is the most underated player today and ever?
my choices would have to be
overated ever:Cy Young he had the most wins ever ill give him that, but he also had the most career loses too.A great, but not as great as everyone thinks he is,
now:hmm... not really sure.Im a soxs fan, so by law I have to say A-rod,Jeter, and Damon :D
underated ever:Jimmie Fox. 534 homeruns,2646 hits,1922RBIs,only 193 errors in 20 years(9.65errors a year) i just dont think he gets the attention he deserves.
now:Ichiro.He's finnaly getting the respect he derserves.1,130 hits in 5 seasons? thats amazing, too bad he came to the mlb when he was 27:ughh
source:
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/
but thats just my opinion

[Sultan_1895-1948]

To clarify; Cy is over-rated because he lost so many games?

I'd say Frank Robinson is underrated by far too many. Not really by people on this board though, which is nice to see (most have him in the 17-20 range I think :confused: ).

[538280]

Most underrated-Jimmy Wynn
Most overrated-Traynor or Sisler probably

Cy Young overrated? Yeah, whatever. He lost the most games because he was so great really.

Jimmie Foxx I think is overrated quite a bit. He's normally rated top 25 or so, but his offensive numbers are inflated by his era/position, and his home/road split is ridiculous.

[Williamsburg2599]

the reason i said cy young is over-rated is because ive seen him on peoples top pitchers list as number one,where i would pick ryan or the rocket over him any day. im not saying he wasnt a great

[Sultan_1895-1948]

the reason i said cy young is over-rated is because ive seen him on peoples top pitchers list as number one,where i would pick ryan or the rocket over him any day. im not saying he wasnt a great

Has he been number one on this websites polls, or just other lists you've seen in general?

Not being a big numbers guy, I would say that for Clemens, a good case could be made. Most of which revolves around his era, some positives for him, and some negative. For Nolan though, not sure a logical case could be made for him over Cy Young or a number of other greats.

Wins aren't a very telling stat for the greatness of a pitcher, and neither are losses. Cy started an ungodly number of games, so he's gonna have high totals in both wins and losses.

[KCGHOST]

No case can be made for Ryan that isn't artificial.

I have always felt that while Frank Robinson is respected he just hasn't been recognized for the great player he was.

Pete Rose maybe overrated to some extent, but he is vastly overhyped.

Foxx is a first tier guy and deservedly so. In his day (1920 - 1940) he trailed only to Ruth and Gehrig in productivity. That's great production in a phone booth.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Top Five Overrated:
1. George Sisler
2. Bill Terry
3. Rogers Hornsby
4. Christy Matthewson
5. John McGraw

Top Five Underrated:
1. Richie Asburn
2. Johnny Mize
3. Joe Morgan
4. Eddie Collins
5. Joe McCarthy

[Williamsburg2599]

Has he been number one on this websites polls, or just other lists you've seen in general?

Not being a big numbers guy, I would say that for Clemens, a good case could be made. Most of which revolves around his era, some positives for him, and some negative. For Nolan though, not sure a logical case could be made for him over Cy Young or a number of other greats.

Wins aren't a very telling stat for the greatness of a pitcher, and neither are losses. Cy started an ungodly number of games, so he's gonna have high totals in both wins and losses.

Ive seen on list in general,but maybe a few website polls too. I was just saying that alot of people just see the wins, without noticing he had the most losses too

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Ive seen on list in general,but maybe a few website polls too. I was just saying that alot of people just see the wins, without noticing he had the most losses too

Gotcha.

For guys that are overlooked because they lack longevity, how bout Babe Herman being under-rated. Second best "Babe" with a career high .393 BA. :clapping

[baseballPAP]

Top Five Overrated:
1. George Sisler
2. Bill Terry
3. Rogers Hornsby
4. Christy Matthewson
5. John McGraw

Top Five Underrated:
1. Richie Asburn
2. Johnny Mize
3. Joe Morgan
4. Eddie Collins
5. Joe McCarthy
I'm not sure how a guy who i sthe best hitting secondbaseman by a large marigin can be overrated. Doesn't the term "overrated" come with an assertion that many rate him too high? And John McGraw, who many don't even know had a playing career...he's a HOFer BEFORE he managed. I can't argue with your underrated guys much, except to say there is no way Morgan is underrated around this neck of the woods. In other circles maybe, but we got some good folks 'round here!

[STLCards2]

Cy Young may have lost more games than anybody else, but his career winning % in almost .620 for goodness sake!!!!!!!!!! That is higher than Walter Johnson, Warren Spahn, definately higher than Ryan (speaking of overrated), Carlton, Seaver, and a slew of other Hall of Famers.

Young pitched almost 7500 innings. Are you joking? Yet his ERA+ is still like 138 or something. To put that in perspective, Roger Clemens' ERA+ is similar, but pitched 3,000 fewer innings. That is more innings than Curt Schilling's entire career! Any list in which does not include Young in the top 5 should be discounted. I think walter Johnson is the only pitcher in which a case could not be made for Young being greater than.

In fact, since most have Cy Young ranked 4th or 5th, I would contend that Cy Young is underrated!

[Dontworry]

Babe Ruth as a pitcher was VASTLY overrated, fantastic when he pitched, but not like some of his supporters make him out to be. He had the advantage of pitching in the deadball Era.

The most Overrated pitcher of alltime besides ruth is Nolan ryan, I think everyone knows this. He was rarely the best pitcher on his own team for godsakes.

The most Overrated Player of alltime IMO, is Roberto Clemente. Many seem to think careerwise he's at the same level of mays, ruth, etc, when he's nowhere near that level. Hell, You could make a case that Tim Raines was a better overall player than clemente was.

The most Underrated pitcher ever is Bert Blyleven, He was certainly a better pitcher than ryan, infact a better pitcher than many HOF pitchers. The fact that a loser like sutter got inducted before bert speaks volumes. Very pathetic.

The most underrated player of alltime is frank robinson, very few realize how devastating he was at the plate. Hank aaron is pretty underrated too, I was looking at a few " fans " lists of alltime great players on this forum, many didnt have aaron in the top 10, and some not in the top 20, ridiculous.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Babe Ruth as a pitcher was VASTLY overrated, fantastic when he pitched, but not like some of his supporters make him out to be. He had the advantage of pitching in the deadball Era.



lol, along with the disadvantage of hitting in Fenway with the deadball. By the way, wasn't everyone else also pitching with the "deadball" (which wasn't "dead" it had cork in it by then). I respect your opinion, but he's got many all time pitchers and hitters that will testify to his greatness as a pitcher, and he hadn't come close to entering into his prime on the mound. Bill's signature speaks quite loudly.

btw: Agree with your Clemente and Aaron assessments.

[Williamsburg2599]

Gotcha.

For guys that are overlooked because they lack longevity, how bout Babe Herman being under-rated. Second best "Babe" with a career high .393 BA. :clapping
does this count :-\?
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/greatest/careerrecords.html

[Williamsburg2599]

No case can be made for Ryan that isn't artificial.

I have always felt that while Frank Robinson is respected he just hasn't been recognized for the great player he was.

Pete Rose maybe overrated to some extent, but he is vastly overhyped.

Foxx is a first tier guy and deservedly so. In his day (1920 - 1940) he trailed only to Ruth and Gehrig in productivity. That's great production in a phone booth.
great KCs think alike. I sorta take the Ryan thing back after looking at his stats compared to others,but no one can beat his fastball.

[DoubleX]

I like the Frank Robinson pick for underrated. I think he tends to go underrated because he gets overshadowed by both Mays and Aaron, and he didn't quite reach the 3000 hits level. I have Robinson in my top 15.

It's tough to say who is overrated and underrated, because there are really two kinds. There is the casual/average baseball fan that couldn't even vote for Honus Wagner on the All-Century team, and then there are the intelligent baseball fans that sometimes overrate certain players, and I think it's often to over compensate in order to bring attention to these players that are overlooked by the average fan.

For me, a good example of this is Rogers Hornsby. The average/casual fan tends to grossly underrate Hornsby, and that is if they have even ever heard of him. While many intelligent baseball fans, including many members here, tend to put him firmly in the Top 10 all-time. I think Top 10 for Hornsby overrates him a tad, as his numbers are helped by his era and he was not a good defender. I have Hornsby just outside the Top 10, in the Top 10-15 range. But for the people that have Hornsby inside the Top 10, I wonder where they rank Mike Piazza, since Piazza, like Hornsby provided unparalleled offense at a defensive position, without contributing much in the way of defense. Hornsby was probably the better defender in comparison to his position, but Piazza's offense as a catcher makes him pretty darn valuable, plus he gets an era adjustment. Not saying that I put Piazza ahead of Hornsby (I actually put Piazza in the 25-30 range), I just think it's interesting that the people who are quick to put Hornsby in the Top 10 because of his offense at a defense position, often don't give the same consideration to Piazza.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

does this count :-\?
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/greatest/careerrecords.html

Count for what? Nolan has some amazing records, for sure. I wasn't knocking him, I've actually got him rated higher than most probably do. But on the bus of all time greats, Nolan is back by the side exit doors, while Cy is sitting within a whispers noise of the driver named Walter :D

Funny how Cobb's BA isn't on the fans' list at all, but on the website's list he's #1. Shows how biased and uninformed the average Joe is out there.

[digglahhh]

Lemme just throw some names out there:

Underrated:

Brian Giles
Keith Hernandez
Bert Blyleven
Craig Biggio
Todd Helton (I think he is legitimately great, without Coors plus possibly the best 1B glove out there)
Tom Glavine
Abreu
Tim Raines
90's Bonds
Larkin
F. Robinson
Dennis Martinez
Bobby Bonds
Joe Morgan (not here)
Matt Williams
Kent Hrbek

Overrated:

Steve Garvey
Nolan Ryan
Alfonso Soriano



Ichiro and Adam Dunn can go on eithe list depending on who you're talking to.

[csh19792001]

Cy Young may have lost more games than anybody else, but his career winning % in almost .620 for goodness sake!!!!!!!!!! That is higher than Walter Johnson, Warren Spahn, definately higher than Ryan (speaking of overrated), Carlton, Seaver, and a slew of other Hall of Famers.

Young pitched almost 7500 innings. Are you joking? Yet his ERA+ is still like 138 or something. To put that in perspective, Roger Clemens' ERA+ is similar, but pitched 3,000 fewer innings. That is more innings than Curt Schilling's entire career! Any list in which does not include Young in the top 5 should be discounted. I think walter Johnson is the only pitcher in which a case could not be made for Young being greater than.

In fact, since most have Cy Young ranked 4th or 5th, I would contend that Cy Young is underrated!

Excellent post!!! I put Clemens and Johnson ahead, but a claim can still be made that Young was, if not greater than either, at least as great as both.

As to the notion that Cy Young is overated, that's unsubstantiated, especially here, where he's generally underrated. Just the fact that people place him outside the top 5 greatest of all time proves how underrated and uninformed so many are on the guy.

For some perspective, everyone should read this (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=191153&postcount=12) post.

[torez77]

Thanks for the post, Chris. I guess I neglected the fact that he did pitch half of his career in the 1890's, hence the higher ERAs. I've always thought of Young as a compiler, meaning he pitched alot of seasons hence the high career numbers. I currently have him ranked 10th on my pitcher rankings, but he could just as easily move up. I just don't think Young was as dominant as the other 3 of the Big 4 of that time: Johnson, Alexander and Mathewson. And I still will rank him below them. We have to remember that Johnson's and Alexander's ERAs were also affected - by the '20s.

I just realized that Matty DIDN'T pitch in the '20s, therefore his ERA wasn't negatively affected (I keep thinking he DID pitch in the '20s for some reason *head slap*). Hmmm....a good reason to perhaps rank Matty lower.

I can see the case for Young over Matty perhaps, but not over Johnson and Alexander.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Lemme just throw some names out there:

Underrated:


Todd Helton (I think he is legitimately great, without Coors plus possibly the best 1B glove out there)

:clapping

Can you throw up his splits?

[SeaverGooden]

Greg Maddux is the most underrated pitcher ever. Everyone realizes how good Maddux is and they always will give him his due when he is mentioned. Yet, he never arises in these great pitchers of all-time list. He won 15 plus games 17 years in a row in the steroid era! During that time his ERA was only over 3.50 three times, and most of the years he never came close to 3.50.

One of the most overrated players ever was Cal Ripken Jr. I'm not saying Cal wasn't a great player he was just overrated. His Career peaked when he was 26. Sure he had a few season after he turned 26 that were solid, but not like they should have been entering his prime. He will be remembered for the streak which is an amazing feat, but it can also be looked at a bit selfishly. I don't think of it that way but some do, he may have kept himself in a lineup to preserve the streak when a day off may have been more warranted. I think Cal will be remembered for his streak and rightfully so, as well as his revitalization of the shortstop position, but I think statistically he is a bit overrated. I mean Ripken only drove in over 100 runs four times, Only twice after 1987 did he hit 25+ homeruns, only four time did he hit over .300, only seven times out of his 21 year career did he hit above .280. Ripken was never known for his speed, but he was caught stealing more times (39) than actual bases he stole (36). He was a very solid defensive infielder, combine that with the streak and his amassing 3,000 hits he is a surefire hall of famer, however he is an overrated surefire hall of famer.

[torez77]

The positional player who I feel is most underrated here at BBF is Shoeless Joe Jackson. He is only a step below Ty Cobb as a hitter. A truly great talent, and it's a shame he didn't get to showcase his talent in the '20s.

The pitcher who is most underrated IMO - Rube Waddell. Look at his K totals from the 1900s! One of the greatest lefties ever and the greatest lefty of his time. Better than Plank. I don't care. If only he was more stable.....

[torez77]

Yet, Maddux never arises in these great pitchers of all-time list.

He doesn't?

[SeaverGooden]

Todd Helton (2003-2005)

Away
.313 avg 28 Hrs 108 RBI .433 OBP .505 SLG .938 OPS

Home
.372 avg 57 Hrs 184 RBI .481 OBP .686 SLG 1.167 OPS

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Todd Helton (2003-2005)

Away
.313 avg 28 Hrs 108 RBI .433 OBP .505 SLG .938 OPS

Home
.372 avg 57 Hrs 184 RBI .481 OBP .686 SLG 1.167 OPS

Ok that doesn't look very good. Why did you only do '03-'05? Coulda swore it was much more even than that.

[SeaverGooden]

These were the only splits available at ESPN.com, so I got them pretty fast. That's all.

[SeaverGooden]

Home

.374 avg 168 Hr 565 RBI .468 OBP .693 SLG 1.161 OPS

Away

.297 avg 103 Hr 350 RBI .397 OBP .518 SLG .915 OPS

Since 1997

[Victory Faust]

For the most overrated, I'd have to go with Joe DiMaggio. Sure, he was great, but if he had played for the St. Louis Browns or Philadelphia Phillies, he would still be a Hall of Famer, but nobody would ever consider him one of the best ever, the way some fans do now.

For most underrated, I'll go with two Tiger 2nd basemen: Charlie Gehringer and Lou Whitaker. Gehringer is among the best second sackers ever, for my money. And Whitaker gets nowhere near the credit he deserves.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

For the most overrated, I'd have to go with Joe DiMaggio. Sure, he was great, but if he had played for the St. Louis Browns or Philadelphia Phillies, he would still be a Hall of Famer, but nobody would ever consider him one of the best ever, the way some fans do now.

For most underrated, I'll go with two Tiger 2nd basemen: Charlie Gehringer and Lou Whitaker. Gehringer is among the best second sackers ever, for my money. And Whitaker gets nowhere near the credit he deserves.

Gotta say, I love that pic in your avatar. Maybe it's the coloring. Something creepy/intriguing about that pic. How did a guy who threw 2 innings in his whole career, with a 0-0 record become nicknamed "victory" though :confused:

I like the Mechanical Man case. He really only pops up during 2nd baseman polls or whatever. Solid player.

Can't agree with the DiMaggio thing, but that'll happen.

I'll nominate Heilmann for underrated. Haven't seen his name typed too often if at all on here. Maybe cause he's a right fielder who hit mainly for average and didn't have huge slugging numbers. Who knows.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Home

.374 avg 168 Hr 565 RBI .468 OBP .693 SLG 1.161 OPS

Away

.297 avg 103 Hr 350 RBI .397 OBP .518 SLG .915 OPS

Since 1997

:eek: :ughh Change of opinion :atthepc

[538280]

I'm not sure how a guy who i sthe best hitting secondbaseman by a large marigin can be overrated.

He's big time overrated. His raw numbers are the best of 2B, but you have to remember the spectrum jump, the era, and the park. He was a horrible fielder too.

[Tigerfan1974]

Michael Young of the Rangers is severely under-rated, in my opinion.

Jackie Robinson's life, if not his career, was significantly under-rated.
But people are starting to come around.

A-Rod is over-rated and especially over payed!

Rogers Hornsby is under-rated for his career and accomplishments.
As is Stan the Man, though not so much as Rogers.

Satchel Paige was over-rated, primarily by Satchel Paige.
Barry Bonds is over-rated in my opinion also.

[HOOTIE]

Most overated ever, Nolan Ryan
Most underrated ever, Tris Speaker

Most overrated now, Ichiro
Most underated now, Bay


Helton has a career road ops of .935

How is Arod overrated?

[digglahhh]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/players/5870/career_by_all_batting_splits.html#home_and_away_

This is his whole career.

His splits are drastic, but keep in mind that away from home he is still a .300/.400/.500 guy.

Plus players in general hit better at home, so you can bump him up a little bit. I referred to him as "great" and perhaps that is an overstatement. But this guy is not all Coors. This is no Dante Bichette. Helton can flat out hit, and he's also a vacuum at first, though nobody seems to care.

Maybe, I'm a little skewed because he still kills at Shea, at that is a pitcher's park. Everytime I see the Rockies, Helton is smacking balls around the yard, even when he makes outs.

[digglahhh]

If anything, the backlash and resentment of his salary leaves A-Rod underrated- he is all around the best player in the game today, and probably the best all around player since early Bonds. He seems a virtual lock in the top ten of all time.

[Imapotato]

the reason i said cy young is over-rated is because ive seen him on peoples top pitchers list as number one,where i would pick ryan or the rocket over him any day. im not saying he wasnt a great

RYAN??????????????

Look at Cy Young's win as part of team wins...no one comes close to Cy except The Big Train...and he is quite aways behind him

Cy Young pitched for some god awful teams

[csh19792001]

RYAN??????????????

Look at Cy Young's win as part of team wins...no one comes close to Cy except The Big Train...and he is quite aways behind him

Cy Young pitched for some god awful teams

I'm going to keep posting this until people begin to properly acknowledge Cy Young.

Since I can't get everyone to read the distinguished biopic Cy Young by Reed Browning, perhaps this is the best I can do for a moment.

I have not been voting in these polls and have no intention of doing so, however it seems to me as if many of you are selling Cy Young short. If you take Mathewson and Addie Joss and combine their careers, you essentially get Cy Young. Young's ERA is quite a bit higher since a good portion of his career was during the 1890's when offense was at a record high. His ERA+ is better than the combination of Mathewson and Joss although his W/L record is slightly worse.


Pitcher W L G GS CG SHO IP ER HR BB SO ERA ERA+
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cy Young 511 316 906 815 749 76 7354.7 2147 138 1217 2803 2.63 138

Christy Mathewson 373 188 635 551 434 79 4780.7 1133 91 844 2502 2.13 135
Addie Joss 160 97 286 260 234 45 2327.0 488 19 364 920 1.89 142
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mathewson/Joss Combined 533 285 921 811 668 124 7107.7 1621 110 1208 3422 2.05 137


That anyone puts Mathewson ahead of Young is a joke.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Just as a note about Young being overrated due to his amount of losses while saying Ryan was better, Young only lost 24 more games than Ryan while winning 187 more.
Win-loss is overrated itself, sure, but if that's what you're going to go on . . .

[Cubsfan97]

Lou Gerhig is underrated. I think Bonds is over rated. I mean baseball games dont even have him in the games since hes so legendary. Its stupid.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Lou Gerhig is underrated. I think Bonds is over rated. I mean baseball games dont even have him in the games since hes so legendary. Its stupid.

Who are you referring to not being in the games? Bonds or Gehrig. Bonds won't allow those games to use his "likeness", much the way Jordan and Shaq used to not be in NBA LIVE games. Bonds' character in MVP is named John Dowd.

[Dontworry]

lol, along with the disadvantage of hitting in Fenway with the deadball. By the way, wasn't everyone else also pitching with the "deadball" (which wasn't "dead" it had cork in it by then). I respect your opinion, but he's got many all time pitchers and hitters that will testify to his greatness as a pitcher, and he hadn't come close to entering into his prime on the mound. Bill's signature speaks quite loudly.

btw: Agree with your Clemente and Aaron assessments.

" lol, along with the disadvantage of hitting in Fenway with the deadball. By the way, wasn't everyone else also pitching with the "deadball" (which wasn't "dead" it had cork in it by then). I respect your opinion, but he's got many all time pitchers and hitters that will testify to his greatness as a pitcher, and he hadn't come close to entering into his prime on the mound. Bill's signature speaks quite loudly. "

Babe ruth's career ERA+ is 122, that's good, but not anything out of this world. His career high was 158, after that he never surpassed 128. He compiled 34 winshares in the years he pitched, which has to do with the amount of innings he pitched in 1916, and 1917. He was a good pitcher, those 34 WS helped him establish the alltime career record for winshares.

I agree that if he didnt stop pitching at the tender age of 23 he could of possibly went on to have a HOF career. Then again, he would of had to pitch in a great hitters ERA, so his career totals may have not been HOF material, IMO.

[Dontworry]

If anything, the backlash and resentment of his salary leaves A-Rod underrated- he is all around the best player in the game today, and probably the best all around player since early Bonds. He seems a virtual lock in the top ten of all time.

I dont know about allaround, maybe when he was a SS.

His defense at third is slightly above average, while pujols has improved GREATLY on defense at first. Pujols is also trying to become a speedster, he led his team in SB'S lastseason.

He's also a fantastic baserunner, and as a hitter he's God, certainly better than arod.

Statistically, Pujols has been superior to arod since 2003.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Then again, he would of had to pitch in a great hitters ERA, so his career totals may have not been HOF material, IMO.

If he remained just a pitcher though, the environment wouldn't have been so "offensive." The ball, ballpark sizes, others wouldn't have emulated his approach as much. The ramifications of him switching to the outfield was huge, and the offense as we know it wouldn't have been the same if he remained a pitcher. Not too mention how young he was and he most certainly would have gotten better in skill and knowledge.

[wamby]

[QUOTE=Sultan_1895-1948]Gotta say, I love that pic in your avatar. Maybe it's the coloring. Something creepy/intriguing about that pic. How did a guy who threw 2 innings in his whole career, with a 0-0 record become nicknamed "victory" though :confused:

QUOTE]

Victory was Charlie Faust's middle name.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Victory was Charlie Faust's middle name.

Nice. Props to his parents :clapping

[Blackout]

For the most overrated, I'd have to go with Joe DiMaggio. Sure, he was great, but if he had played for the St. Louis Browns or Philadelphia Phillies, he would still be a Hall of Famer, but nobody would ever consider him one of the best ever, the way some fans do now..

Stan Musial played in St. Louis at the same time as Dimaggio, what are you talking about?

[Blackout]

Statistically, Pujols has been superior to arod since 2003.

he wasn't in 2005, A-rod still had overall better stats other than BA

[Cubsfan97]

Who are you referring to not being in the games? Bonds or Gehrig. Bonds won't allow those games to use his "likeness", much the way Jordan and Shaq used to not be in NBA LIVE games. Bonds' character in MVP is named John Dowd.
I was referring to Bonds. I dont think MVP has Gerhig in legends but Im not worried about that. that makes sense. I didnt know that. Thanks for sharing. I remember Jordan not being in NBA Jam. They had a guy named Roster Guard. lol.

[Blackout]

I thought Jordan wasn't in NBA jam because he retired

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Nah, it was NBA LIVE where Jordan was "roster guard" who just happened to be 6'6" and an all world shooting guard :rolleyes:

Bonds is that way on MVP, everything about his guy is him attribute and physical wise, except it's a big white dude named John Dowd.

[Dontworry]

If he remained just a pitcher though, the environment wouldn't have been so "offensive." The ball, ballpark sizes, others wouldn't have emulated his approach as much. The ramifications of him switching to the outfield was huge, and the offense as we know it wouldn't have been the same if he remained a pitcher. Not too mention how young he was and he most certainly would have gotten better in skill and knowledge.

It seems that I cant change your mind, and you cant change mine. We both have our opinions. Ruth could of possibly went on to have a HOF career as a pitcher, then again maybe not.

When he pitched he was fantastic, but not like you or others make him out to be.

Anyway, if he would of stayed pitching, he would of never had the most dominant offensive career ever.

[Dontworry]

he wasn't in 2005, A-rod still had overall better stats other than BA

Pujols was better, although not by much. Winshares favored pujols by 1, and OPS favored him by a little. BRAA favored pujols by a little too.

[Blackout]

Pujols was better, although not by much. Winshares favored pujols by 1, and OPS favored him by a little. BRAA favored pujols by a little too.

they both had a 167 OPS+, so they're the same when you adjust it out

and A-rod had more production with HRs, RBIs, stolen bases which makes him more valuable offensively

[rsuriyop]

All-time overrated:

Robin Yount (had only two very good seasons; got 3,000 hits just because he started young and stuck around for quite a while)


************************************************** *****************************************


All-time underrated:

Gabby Hartnett (doesn't even appear in either The Sporting News's or SABR's top 100 list!)

[Sultan_1895-1948]

It seems that I cant change your mind, and you cant change mine. We both have our opinions. Ruth could of possibly went on to have a HOF career as a pitcher, then again maybe not.

When he pitched he was fantastic, but not like you or others make him out to be.

Anyway, if he would of stayed pitching, he would of never had the most dominant offensive career ever.


I really don't make him out to be something he wasn't. Just looking at what he did, and considering his age, he would have gotten even better than he was. Barring health, we'd be talking about him with Randy Johnson and Grove, Plank, etc, for best lefties ever.

You're right about your last statement, but you could also alter it to make it true by removing the word "never" and adding "by a pitcher," after the word "career." ;)

[digglahhh]

I dont know about allaround, maybe when he was a SS.

His defense at third is slightly above average, while pujols has improved GREATLY on defense at first. Pujols is also trying to become a speedster, he led his team in SB'S lastseason.

He's also a fantastic baserunner, and as a hitter he's God, certainly better than arod.

Statistically, Pujols has been superior to arod since 2003.

Just b/c he plays 3B doesn't mean he's not the best SS in the game. Unfortunately for you Win Shares doesn't seem to consider this.

[ElHalo]

I just think it's interesting that the people who are quick to put Hornsby in the Top 10 because of his offense at a defense position, often don't give the same consideration to Piazza.

You know, I probably underrate Piazza, now that I think about it, because of his awful last few years (which were still pretty good for a catcher) and his abominable defense. I've really got to think more about the guy; I guess I've always kind of looked at the arm and stopped thinking about him.

That being said, there's a big difference between Piazza and Hornsby. Both were, by far, the best ever offensively at their positions. Piazza was a fantastic hitter, on a level with, say, Hack Wilson, which is unbelievably valuable from a catcher. Hornsby, in my view, is the fourth greatest hitter of all time (behind Ruth, Williams, and Gehrig). When you're the fourth greatest hitter of all time, and you're a middle infielder, it's pretty hard to overrate you, no matter what other extenuating circumstances there might be.

[DoubleX]

You know, I probably underrate Piazza, now that I think about it, because of his awful last few years (which were still pretty good for a catcher) and his abominable defense. I've really got to think more about the guy; I guess I've always kind of looked at the arm and stopped thinking about him.

That being said, there's a big difference between Piazza and Hornsby. Both were, by far, the best ever offensively at their positions. Piazza was a fantastic hitter, on a level with, say, Hack Wilson, which is unbelievably valuable from a catcher. Hornsby, in my view, is the fourth greatest hitter of all time (behind Ruth, Williams, and Gehrig). When you're the fourth greatest hitter of all time, and you're a middle infielder, it's pretty hard to overrate you, no matter what other extenuating circumstances there might be.

I agree, and that's why I have Hornsby much higher than Piazza in my rankings. I'm just saying that Piazza gets a big bump, because like Hornsby, he provided unparalleled offense at a defensive position.

[538280]

I agree, and that's why I have Hornsby much higher than Piazza in my rankings. I'm just saying that Piazza gets a big bump, because like Hornsby, he provided unparalleled offense at a defensive position.

Second base was an offensive position in Hornsby's era.

Average RC/Game, 1920-1929
Second Basemen-5.78
League Average-4.72

[ElHalo]

Second base was an offensive position in Hornsby's era.

Average RC/Game, 1920-1929
Second Basemen-5.78
League Average-4.72

Not to s*** in your cereal, but a lot of this was a result of Hornsby himself. Remember, there were only 16 teams, so one guy averaging 12.12 RC/game could have quite an impact. Take him out, and the other 15 guys averaged 5.36. Keep in mind that other all time great offensive 2B's like Eddie Collins, Frankie Frisch, and Tony Lazzeri were active for big chunks of the decade, and it was a pretty good time for the position (Lazzeri was one of the worst 2B defenders of all time, but he sure could swing a bat).

[538280]

Not to s*** in your cereal, but a lot of this was a result of Hornsby himself. Remember, there were only 16 teams, so one guy averaging 12.12 RC/game could have quite an impact. Take him out, and the other 15 guys averaged 5.36. Keep in mind that other all time great offensive 2B's like Eddie Collins, Frankie Frisch, and Tony Lazzeri were active for big chunks of the decade, and it was a pretty good time for the position (Lazzeri was one of the worst 2B defenders of all time, but he sure could swing a bat).

But that's the point, EH. There were tons of great offensive 2Bs, other than Hornsby himself. Who are the offensive equals today of Collins, Frisch, Lazzeri, and Hornsby? The great number of offensive stars from 2B does make it a better hitting position.

[yanks0714]

Originally Posted by ElHalo
Not to s*** in your cereal, but a lot of this was a result of Hornsby himself. Remember, there were only 16 teams, so one guy averaging 12.12 RC/game could have quite an impact. Take him out, and the other 15 guys averaged 5.36. Keep in mind that other all time great offensive 2B's like Eddie Collins, Frankie Frisch, and Tony Lazzeri were active for big chunks of the decade, and it was a pretty good time for the position (Lazzeri was one of the worst 2B defenders of all time, but he sure could swing a bat).

But that's the point, EH. There were tons of great offensive 2Bs, other than Hornsby himself. Who are the offensive equals today of Collins, Frisch, Lazzeri, and Hornsby? The great number of offensive stars from 2B does make it a better hitting position.

This is funny. In an effort to prove his point in disagreeing with you....he proved your point.

2B Was an offensive postion in that era...and not just because of Rogers. As ElHalo shows, when removing Hornsby's 12.12 the rest of the 2B had an RC of 5.36....still over the league average.

ElHalo is right about one thing....a large chunk of that RC for 2B was due to Hornsby...which shows how awesome Hornsby really was offensively.

[ElHalo]

But that's the point, EH. There were tons of great offensive 2Bs, other than Hornsby himself. Who are the offensive equals today of Collins, Frisch, Lazzeri, and Hornsby? The great number of offensive stars from 2B does make it a better hitting position.


I think it's more a disagreement in definitions here. Yes, there were a lot of good offensive guys playing the position at the time. No, I don't in any way think that that makes it an offensive position. Just as, today, there are a lot of great offensive players playing SS... but that's really just more a result of random chance. That doesn't mean that teams going out and looking for a SS are looking to get 30 HR and 100 RBI before they look to get defense. The mere fact that a lot of offensive guys play a particular position at a particular time doesn't mean that that's an offensive position.

Just to give an example... I think you'd agree with me that right now, today, Catcher is a primarily defensive position. Let's say that, five years from now, ten different guys come into the majors who all catch, and who all hit .330 with 40 homers a year... but none of the other catchers in the majors change their skill level at all.

This wouldn't make C an offensive position. GM's first inclination in going out and looking for a C would still be whether or not they could play defense there. The mere fact that, by random chance, a bunch of guys happen to play offense at a defensive position doesn't change the overall desire of what you're looking for in a player at that position. Over time, positional values can change... 3B is a lot more of an offensive position now than it was in, say, 1910. But just because you get offensive clusters at one time or another doesn't change the overall dynamic.

[leecemark]

--Thats true, but 2B was more of a hitters position in the 1900s and 1910s too. That is not just random chance. Teams were far more willing to sacrifice defense for offense at that position then than they are now. They were less likely to sacrifice defense for offense at 3B. Thus the 2Bs of this period are more accurately compared to modern 3B.

[ElHalo]

No polls on this one, just want to hear people's thoughts. And, me being the thread starter, I'm laying out some ground rules.

The following players are not eligible to be brought up in this discussion:

Joe Morgan
Mike Schmidt
Reggie Jackson
Jimmy Wynn
George Sisler
Pie Traynor
Joe Jackson
Rogers Hornsby

Discuss. Oh, and if there's anybody I've forgotten to put on the ineligible list, I reserve the right to amend it (you'll know who I'm talking about if they come up).

[julusnc]

underrated - Joe Medwick
Nap Lajoie
Keith Hernandez

overrated - Derek Jeter
Andruw Jones
Bobby Cox

[grey eagle]

Overrated: Ernie Banks, Harry Heilmann, Chuck Klein

Underrated: Darrell Evans, Will Clark, Lou Whitaker

[Murderers Row]

Over-rated- Jeter, Rizzuto, DiMaggio by some. I'm a Yankee fan just so you know.

Under-rated Joe Torre, Stan Hack, Hoyt Wilhem, Stan Musial at times.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Over-rated: Ripken Jr.

Under-rated: Al Simmons, F. Robinson (not necessarily by people on here)

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Overrated: Chick Hafey, Chuck Klein,

Underrated: Gary Carter, Robin Yount

[Sockeye]

Overrated: Barry Larkin, Buck Ewing, Jackie Robinson, Roy Campanella, Ron Santo, Dick Allen, Ray Schalk

Underrated: Andre Dawson, Darrell Evans, Dave Kingman, Jose Canseco, Juan Gonzalez, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa

[BaseballHistoryNut]

#1 Most Underrated---I'll agree with Bill James: Darrell Evans

#1 Most Overrated---You've taken away James' choice (Sisler), but that's fine, I have a #1 choice of my own: Roberto Clemente. Do you know that when James wrote his giant "historical abstract"--the one he published in 2001 or 2002--he said that of the major publications, other than his, which had done a "top 100 players of all time" list, the average ranking of the others for Roberto Clemente was #12???

I mean, how is that possible? It's debatable whether he's one of the 12 greatest RF's of all time. Yes, I think he is, but he's certainly on the bottom half of that list, and probably #10 or #11. To have him AVERAGE at #12.... It's mass hysteria. Yeah, the guy died the most heroic death in baseball history, as far as I know. But suppose a second-string third baseman had been on that plane, too. Would he be the 32nd best player in MLB history?

BHN

[baseballPAP]

Overrated: Barry Larkin, Buck Ewing, Jackie Robinson, Roy Campanella, Ron Santo, Dick Allen, Ray Schalk

Underrated: Andre Dawson, Darrell Evans, Dave Kingman, Jose Canseco, Juan Gonzalez, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa
OK.....did you get the over and under backwards?

I can only agree with Schalk on the first list.... and don't know if I have ever seen any of the other mentioned as overrated before. The second list... Dawson and Kingman are vastly overrated by many...Palmeiro and Sosa apparently didn't partake in the juice by your standards, and I can't believe you left off Harold Baines :)

[538280]

#1 Most Underrated---I'll agree with Bill James: Darrell Evans

#1 Most Overrated---You've taken away James' choice (Sisler), but that's fine, I have a #1 choice of my own: Roberto Clemente. Do you know that when James wrote his giant "historical abstract"--the one he published in 2001 or 2002--he said that of the major publications, other than his, which had done a "top 100 players of all time" list, the average ranking of the others for Roberto Clemente was #12???

I mean, how is that possible? It's debatable whether he's one of the 12 greatest RF's of all time. Yes, I think he is, but he's certainly on the bottom half of that list, and probably #10 or #11. To have him AVERAGE at #12.... It's mass hysteria. Yeah, the guy died the most heroic death in baseball history, as far as I know. But suppose a second-string third baseman had been on that plane, too. Would he be the 32nd best player in MLB history?

BHN

I agree, Clemente has benifited from, like James says the "halo effect" around his tragic death. He also was (and still is) wildly popular in Puerto Rico, and that also drives up his ranking. I'd like to see some of those other lists he was using as referece points, I know Total Baseball certainly didn't have Clemente anywhere near 12th, so that means someone had to have him quite a bit higher than that (top 10!!).

But, I only think Clemente is really overrated by the media and a few "baseball historians" who set down to make those lists. I don't really think he's overrated here on BBF. I think most people here have him right aroud 50th. I have him about 7 or 8 spots outside my top 50. That's where I think he belongs. Of course, we do have a few people (Bill) who rate him way too high, but you're going to have that with all players. I've seen quite a few lists that have him above Frank Robinson. I find that to be pure lunacy.

Anyway....My pick for the most overrated player of all time other than the ones disqualified is Ernie Banks. I've been over that a number of times already. He was similar to Sisler in many ways, had a very good (but also overrated IMO) peak, and then the 2nd half of his career was worth very little.

Most underrated outside of those listed (my pick would be Jimmy Wynn)...I don't know, there are so many to choose from. Maybe Dick Allen, Tim Raines or Sal Bando, Darrell Evans is a choice I can't argue with either.

[Yankwood]

Underrated-Hank Sauer, Roy Seivers, Joe Adcock, Luis Tiant
Overrated-Don Sutton, Eddie Murray, Carl Yastrzemski, Kirby Puckett

[Captain Cold Nose]

Underrated-Hank Sauer, Roy Seivers, Joe Adcock, Luis Tiant
Overrated-Don Sutton, Eddie Murray, Carl Yastrzemski, Kirby Puckett
What's your take on Mickey Vernon?

[yankillaz]

Why not Morgan and Jackson...c'mon????

Underrated (Deserving Hall of Famer who has been ignored): Ted Simmons

Overrated (Hall of Famer who is way overlooked): Nolan Ryan (Sure he struck out the tons, but being voted in with such a high percentage...now that's ludicrous). On the watch: Cal Ripken Jr.

[Brooklyn]

Overrated:


Blyleven - Overrated on this board, not as much in puiblic opinion
Jeter - Long conversation about him in a separate thread, I won't rehash
Pete Rose - Way overrated by the casual fan, he is one of those names that will come up by people who really don't know baseball, similar to Nolan Ryan. This board has a pretty good read on him, though

Underrated:


Keith Hernandez
Gary Carter
Dale Murphy
Andre Dawson

[Yankwood]

What's your take on Mickey Vernon?Never great. Good player. One of a few players to play in 4 different decades. Good first name for a baseball player. Good last name for ginger ale.

[Yankwood]

Overrated:

[LIST]
Blyleven - Overrated on this board, not as much in puiblic opinion
Boy, I'll say!

[Yankwood]

Why not Morgan and Jackson...c'mon????

.Is there anything left to be said about Joe Morgan?:noidea

[Captain Cold Nose]

Is there anything left to be said about Joe Morgan?:noidea
Or any of the players El Halo listed at the beginning? I call it the just once theory. As in "Just once, I'd like to go through a thread in this forum without it turning into a debate on (insert player on list in first post here).
I asked you about Vernon, Yankwood, because I think of him whe I also think of guys like Sievers and Adcock, fine players who were well overshadowed by the true greats of their era.
Standard baseball history overrates Brooks Robinson, a decent hitter and excellent defensive player. As classy a gentleman you'd ever want to meet. Not that much greater, if at all overall, as contemporary third basemen the writers all but ignored such as Santo, Boyer and Bando.

[yankillaz]

Or any of the players El Halo listed at the beginning? I call it the just once theory. As in "Just once, I'd like to go through a thread in this forum without it turning into a debate on (insert player on list in first post here).

So this has a long time going on? I thought it was recently...

[Captain Cold Nose]

So this has a long time going on? I thought it was recently...
Oh, no. The last couple years at least. Not to detract on the discussions about those players, which were all meaningful, but, there is so much more out there just as deserving of attention.
I have seen Stan Musial's name listed quite a few times as underrated. I don't understand that. I have never seen a legitimate list of all time greats that ignores The Man. He might be under regarded by a general public who, shockers, may actually have other interests beyond worrying about players who haven't suited up in over 40 years, but he did, and still does, receive his due.

[Sockeye]

OK.....did you get the over and under backwards?

I can only agree with Schalk on the first list.... and don't know if I have ever seen any of the other mentioned as overrated before. The second list... Dawson and Kingman are vastly overrated by many...Palmeiro and Sosa apparently didn't partake in the juice by your standards, and I can't believe you left off Harold Baines :)

Your post just goes to prove my point. Darrell Evans and Andre Dawson have appeared on other list in this thread as underrated players to apparently I'm not alone in my thinking there.

Dave Kingman's 442 home runs while playing in the 70's and 80's is is quite remarkable and overlooked due to his low average.

Juan Gonzalez doesn't get anywhere close to the respect he deserves for what he achieved. He was one of the top 5 best players in the 90's but is never mentioned on BBF

Canseco, Palmeiro, & Sosa. Just because they used or may have used steroids everything they did on the baseball field is totally discounted. That shouldn't be the case. Frankly as a baseball fan I really don't care if they used steroids or not. It made them better players (how much better is a big ?) and it made them more entertaining to watch. What is the purpose of baseball?? To "entertain the fans" And punishing players for doing something when there was no rule against at the time is quite unfair. I don't believe it should have any barring on the HOF discussion or consideration for these players. Now that it is against the rules and testing is in place. Let that police itself. If a player tests positive and are suspended for 50 games that is 50 games less than the player could have played during the course of his career.That is punishment enough. No need to have every player suspended for steroid use automatically blackballed by the baseball community or HOF voters.

[The Dude]

Under: Ted Simmons, Gary Carter
Over: Rickey Henderson, Christy Mathewson

[Murderers Row]

Your post just goes to prove my point. Darrell Evans and Andre Dawson have appeared on other list in this thread as underrated players to apparently I'm not alone in my thinking there.

Dave Kingman's 442 home runs while playing in the 70's and 80's is is quite remarkable and overlooked due to his low average.




Low average, low OBP, couldn't play defense. Never scored 100, knocked in 100 twice. No way is he under-rated.

[flash143817]

Kingman was a one-trick pony. Hell, Rob Deer was a better hitter than Kingman. At least he could draw walks to go with his horrific average.

[LetsGoMets]

Just as of guys that are considered "all-time greats" my overated list includes the undeserving ones: Cal Ripken Jr., Derek Jeter, Nolan Ryan, Mike Piazza

A few guys that have occasional talks of being all-time greats, but they should be considered deeper. Underrated: Pedro Martinez (easily a top 5 best intimidating pitcher ever and a .271 ERA should put him in the top 10 or top 5, ahead of the next pitcher on my list), Greg Maddux, Ivan Rodriguez.

[yankillaz]

Just as of guys that are considered "all-time greats" my overated list includes the undeserving ones: Cal Ripken Jr., Derek Jeter, Nolan Ryan, Mike Piazza

A few guys that have occasional talks of being all-time greats, but they should be considered deeper. Underrated: Pedro Martinez (easily a top 5 best intimidating pitcher ever and a .271 ERA should put him in the top 10 or top 5, ahead of the next pitcher on my list), Greg Maddux, Ivan Rodriguez.

I'm with you in the Pedro being underrated (at least around here anyway). And i'm no Met fan.

[Francoeurstein]

overrated: Jeter, Hack Wilson, Chuck Klein, and Bo Jackson


underrated: Dick Allen, Ron Santo, Darrell Evans, and Stan the Man.

[futurehalloffamer]

Overrated: Barry Larkin, Buck Ewing, Jackie Robinson, Roy Campanella, Ron Santo, Dick Allen, Ray Schalk

Underrated: Andre Dawson, Darrell Evans, Dave Kingman, Jose Canseco, Juan Gonzalez, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa

Freakin' Sockeye, why do you keep saying that Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro are underrated?! Sosa: corked bat, put on one of the dumbest spic shows ever in front of congress, and much suspicion about his much publicized high home run total. Palmeiro was underrated until the steroid scandal let everyone know just how amazing his stats had gotten. Jackie Robinson and Roy Campanella overrated?! If anything, they're both underrated since they get much more attention for their barrier-breakings then they do for their great playing. Sockeye, you actually make ElHalo seem sane by comparison (well, almost :rolleyes: ) and you absolutely need to stop with these ridiculous posts.

[538280]

Stan the Man.

I'll never understand at all why I always see Musial listed as being underrated. He gets all the recognition he deserves, he's usually rated at least in the top 15 all time, usually around 10th. I wouldn't consider him overrated or underrated at all, the consensus has him right about where he should be-one of the truly great players of all time.

[futurehalloffamer]

Underrated-Hank Sauer, Roy Seivers, Joe Adcock, Luis Tiant
Overrated-Don Sutton, Eddie Murray, Carl Yastrzemski, Kirby Puckett

I think it would be inaccurate to consider Don Sutton overrated, since he is almost always mentioned in debates of the least worthy Hall of Famers. The only people he fooled were the fools who voted him into the Hall.

[538280]

I think it would be inaccurate to consider Don Sutton overrated, since he is almost always mentioned in debates of the least worthy Hall of Famers. The only people he fooled were the fools who voted him into the Hall.

Sutton was a great pitcher for a few years, a good one for 20 years. He finished with over 300 wins, over 5000 IP, a lot of career milestones. That coupled with the fact he did have a few dominating seasons would make him a HOFer IMO. Not top tier, but a solid HOFer.

Another thing that gets overlooked about Sutton is that he pitched most of his career in a 5 man rotation while the rest of the league was still in a 4 man rotation. He had a disadvantage vs. the others in putting up seasons that look real great on paper. This makes his peak seasons underrated IMO.

[futurehalloffamer]

Your post just goes to prove my point. Darrell Evans and Andre Dawson have appeared on other list in this thread as underrated players to apparently I'm not alone in my thinking there.

Dave Kingman's 442 home runs while playing in the 70's and 80's is is quite remarkable and overlooked due to his low average.

Juan Gonzalez doesn't get anywhere close to the respect he deserves for what he achieved. He was one of the top 5 best players in the 90's but is never mentioned on BBF

Canseco, Palmeiro, & Sosa. Just because they used or may have used steroids everything they did on the baseball field is totally discounted. That shouldn't be the case. Frankly as a baseball fan I really don't care if they used steroids or not. It made them better players (how much better is a big ?) and it made them more entertaining to watch. What is the purpose of baseball?? To "entertain the fans" And punishing players for doing something when there was no rule against at the time is quite unfair. I don't believe it should have any barring on the HOF discussion or consideration for these players. Now that it is against the rules and testing is in place. Let that police itself. If a player tests positive and are suspended for 50 games that is 50 games less than the player could have played during the course of his career.That is punishment enough. No need to have every player suspended for steroid use automatically blackballed by the baseball community or HOF voters.

Idiot, man! This isn't Mark McGwire we're talking about here! OK, Canseco was using at a time when there was no rule. Palmeiro and Sosa would have both been using when it was illegal. Late 90's-2000's, steroids were illegal. McGwire and Canseco were juicing FAR before that time. I think maybe you should put a sock somewhere else, Sockeye. :cool:

[Sultan_1895-1948]

OK.....did you get the over and under backwards?

I can only agree with Schalk on the first list....

How is Schalk over-rated? He's one of the top 3 best defensive catchers of all-time. Most don't rank him very high even among catchers, because they penalize him for his hitting, even though he was scrappy, "clutch" by all accounts, and sacrificed by focusing on helping pitchers and saving runs on the defensive side.

In fact, go through the "Top 50 Catchers" thread on here. Take a look at where Schalk places. If anything, he's under-rated because hitting from catchers in his time needs to be put into context.

[538280]

How is Schalk over-rated? He's one of the top 3 best defensive catchers of all-time.

Defensive metrics have not supported that conclusion. A reason for calling him overrated right there.

Most don't rank him very high even among catchers, because they penalize him for his hitting, even though he was scrappy, "clutch" by all accounts, and sacrificed by focusing on helping pitchers and saving runs on the defensive side.

The clutch stuff is crap, that stuff is almost always attributed to great defensive players who can't hit. Most don't rate him high on their catchers list, but he still sneaks into a lot of top 25s, which makes him overrated right there, and many people consider him a worthy HOFer, another reason to call him overrated. He's a good pick for one of the most overrated of all time IMO. Certianly far, far, far better than Cal Ripken.

In fact, go through the "Top 50 Catchers" thread on here. Take a look at where Schalk places. If anything, he's under-rated because hitting from catchers in his time needs to be put into context

Relative to their time, catchers do not hit any better today than they did in the past. You're right about the whole league's offensive levels going up, but that doesn't mean catchers hit any better, because hitting value is all about context (the more runs are scored in the league, the less valuable each run becomes).

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Defensive metrics have not supported that conclusion. A reason for calling him overrated right there.



The clutch stuff is crap, that stuff is almost always attributed to great defensive players who can't hit. Most don't rate him high on their catchers list, but he still sneaks into a lot of top 25s, which makes him overrated right there, and many people consider him a worthy HOFer, another reason to call him overrated. He's a good pick for one of the most overrated of all time IMO. Certianly far, far, far better than Cal Ripken.

Not even close. What did Ripken really do that doesn't involve being a "good guy" or playing in one city, or the streak. He was mediocre for a long time and he showed up to work at a job any of us would give our left nut for. Yippee!

You're clueless about Schalk, just as you are with Jackson. Peer accounts Chris. You listen to them and take them as gospel with your boy Oscar...be consistent youngin'.

[STLCards2]

Here are some pitchers:

Remember, saying that Sam Leever in underrated and Steve carlton is overrated does not mean Leever is better than Carlton.

Overrated: Nolan Ryan, Sandy Koufax, Bob Feller (some give too much War credit), Steve Carlton (slightly...too many poor/mediocre seasons to be considered top 10 guy as many have him), Dizzy Dean, Dave Stewert, Jack Morris & Catfish Hunter (love those 104 ERA+'s), Vida Blue, Mickey Lolich, Mike Cuellar


Underrated:

Stan Coveleski, Mordecai Brown, Don Sutton ( not quite as mediocre year to year as people think), Carl Hubbell, Rube Waddell, Kid Nichols, Tim Keefe, John Clarkson, Tony Mullane, Charles Radbourn
Carl Mays, Sam Leever, Bert Blyleven, Eddie Plank, Jose Rijo, (injuries derailed him, but people forget how great he was in the early 90's. Nomody even mentions his name around here) Dave Steib, Tom Glavine (the best near 300 wins, 2-Cy Young, 4,000+ in. pitched, 121 ERA+, five- 20 win season, World Series MVP that many want out of Cooperstown.), Kevin Brown, Mike Mussina

[538280]

Not even close. What did Ripken really do that doesn't involve being a "good guy" or playing in one city, or the streak. He was mediocre for a long time and he showed up to work at a job any of us would give our left nut for. Yippee!

Might want to check on Ripken's 1983, 1984, and 1991 seasons. He was a shortstop who would hit 25+ home runs, field very well, and hit for a decent average. TPR shows his 1991 season being one of the best all time, Win Shares has him as the best player in the league those three seasons.

You like peer accounts? Well, he must have really been fooling someone to win two MVP awards.

You're clueless about Schalk, just as you are with Jackson. Peer accounts Chris. You listen to them and take them as gospel with your boy Oscar...be consistent youngin'.

I listen to them because I don't have stats for Oscar. They're all I can go on. When I have statistics to confirm things, it renders them useless for everything but fielding. And I do listen to what they have to say for fielding. But, I use them in conjunction with defensive metrics.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

You like peer accounts? Well, he must have really been fooling someone to win two MVP awards.


MVP awards, all-star appearances and gold gloves = over-rated.

[leecemark]

--Mvp awards, all star selection and gold gloves are the very same "peer accounts" you are asking us to boost Schalk on.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

--Mvp awards, all star selection and gold gloves are the very same "peer accounts" you are asking us to boost Schalk on.

They are? They had those things back then? Nah, I'm talking about what peers had to say about him, not how many "awards" he may have won on reputation alone.

[leecemark]

--Back up and read what you just wrote. What is reputation other than what people are saying about you? Winning those awards is merely a formalized version of "peer accounts".

[rugbyfreak]

Overrated: Freddy Lynn, Rabbit Maranville, Roberto Clemente, Dave Bancroft, George Kelly, Ross Youngs, Any closer

Underrated: Warren Spahn, Mickey Vernon, Gil McDougald, Bill White, Omar Visquel, Bill Madlock, Any lights-out set-up reliever

[Sultan_1895-1948]

--Back up and read what you just wrote. What is reputation other than what people are saying about you? Winning those awards is merely a formalized version of "peer accounts".

Reputation has much to do with what you've done in the past, and how those awards are generally dished out. Peer accounts, to me, are a more real time analysis. We have several quotes and comments from players and managers about Babe's great fielding play. Is that his reputation?

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Overrated: Freddy Lynn, Rabbit Maranville, Roberto Clemente, Dave Bancroft, George Kelly, Ross Youngs, Any closer

Underrated: Warren Spahn, Mickey Vernon, Gil McDougald, Bill White, Omar Visquel, Bill Madlock, Any lights-out set-up reliever

Just out of curiosity: As long as your most overrated list includes George Kelly (a rock-solid choice, whom Bill James calls the worst player in the Hall), why not also include George Kell? I think his credentials are pretty impeccable for this list, too....

BHN

[flash143817]

Sutton was a great pitcher for a few years, a good one for 20 years. He finished with over 300 wins, over 5000 IP, a lot of career milestones. That coupled with the fact he did have a few dominating seasons would make him a HOFer IMO. Not top tier, but a solid HOFer.

Another thing that gets overlooked about Sutton is that he pitched most of his career in a 5 man rotation while the rest of the league was still in a 4 man rotation. He had a disadvantage vs. the others in putting up seasons that look real great on paper. This makes his peak seasons underrated IMO.

Sutton's ERA+ was only 108. Very pedestrian. He was just a product of a decent pitcher staying around forever. He has hardly any peak value with only 1 20-win season and only 8 black ink despite pitching forever. The vast majority of the gray ink was accomplished at the back end of top 10 lists.

And he has decent career value with the 300+ wins. But once you look at only a 108 career ERA+ it really has to lower the value of him.

I don't like the 5-man rotation argument at all. If anything it made things easier on him because he was handling a far easier load. Also, it probably prolonged his career because he didn't wear out his arm at a younger age from the increased workload, which was huge to him because his long career was the only thing that got him into the HOF. To me it makes his peak seasons worse than the other top pitchers in the league because they were accomplished in fewer IP.

I just don't feel comfortable calling a guy who was never the best pitcher in his league a solid HOFer. He might be a HOFer, but it's definitely on the bottom end if he is.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I'll never understand at all why I always see Musial listed as being underrated. He gets all the recognition he deserves, he's usually rated at least in the top 15 all time, usually around 10th. I wouldn't consider him overrated or underrated at all, the consensus has him right about where he should be-one of the truly great players of all time.
When Chris is right, he's right.
futurehalloffamer, you seriously need to tone it down. I don't care how mch you disagree with someone, personal insults are not tolerated.
I'm curious, though, what exactly did you mean in reference to Sosa's testimony in front of congress. Please tell me that was a typo.