Top 50 position players

[Sockeye]

Just out of curiosity, could you list who you think are the say 50 greatest players ever (don't worry about exact order)?

I'll do the top 50 position players in history. In alphabetical order

Hank Aaron
Cap Anson
Harold Baines
Ernie Banks
Craig Biggio
Barry Bonds
George Brett
Roberto Clemente
Ty Cobb
Eddie Collins
Sam Crawford
Andre Dawson
Jimmie Foxx
Lou Gehrig
Goose Goslin
Ken Griffey Jr
Tony Gwynn
Rickey Henderson
Rogers Hornsby
Reggie Jackson
Al Kaline
Nap Lajoie
Mickey Mantle
Eddie Mathews
Willie Mays
Fred McGriff
Paul Molitor
Eddie Murray
Stan Musial
Mel Ott
Rafael Palmeiro
Dave Perker
Tony Perez
Vada Pinson
Cal Ripken
Brooks Robinson
Frank Robinson
Pete Rose
Babe Ruth
Mike Schmidt
Al Simmons
Sammy Sosa
Tris Speaker
Honus Wagner
Paul Waner
Billy Williams
Ted Williams
Dave Winfield
Carl Yastrzemski
Robin Yount

[oscargamblesfro]

interesting list, i find baines and pinson to be your most questionable selections...

[RuthMayBond]

I'll do the top 50 position players in history. In alphabetical order

Harold Baines
Fred McGriff
Tony Perez
Vada Pinson
Brooks Robinson
Sammy Sosa
Let's just say these are iffy

[oscargamblesfro]

also, strangely, there are no true catchers on this list... no bench, berra, etc? and how about joe morgan?

[iPod]

Let's just say these are iffy

Add Andre Dawson to that list.

Dawson > Yogi Berra?

[RuthMayBond]

Add Andre Dawson to that list.I was strongly considering him for the list too. I gotta admit, Sockeye keeps getting off the ground and back onto the horse

[DoubleX]

Al Kaline's on your list. He's on mine too, but I didn't think you thought much of Kaline (or maybe it's the opposite and it's that you think that much of Beltre).

Not a bad list though, there are some players that that stick out a bit. I don't think these players would make my top 50, but to each their own:

Harold Baines - He's probably in my top 250, maybe even top 200.

Craig Biggio - I don't begrudge this too much. Bill James seems to think Biggio is the greatest thing since sliced bread. He's in my top 100.

Andre Dawson - This is almost certainly too high for him. I could see arguments for him in the top 100, he's certainly no worse than top 150, IMO (but I'm sure there are many here who might put him even lower).

Goose Goslin - I like this pick because Goslin is too often overlooked, but it still seems a bit high. He's in my top 100.

Fred McGriff - Solid player for a long time, but not top 50. Top 150 is probably more appropriate.

Paul Molitor - Maybe top 100, if so it's borderline top 100. Being a DH really depressed his value, IMO.

Rafael Palmeiro - No way, especially after the steroids revelation.

Dave Parker - Ask someone in 1978 about Dave Parker and they might say he is well on his way to be a top 50 talent. Didn't play out that way though. I can see him in top 150.

Tony Perez - You're really liking these 1Bman compilers, aren't you? Perez is top 150 probably for me. I don't understand how Palmeiro, McGriff, and Perez can be on this list, but not McCovey, Killebrew, Allen, McGwire, and Terry.

Vada Pinson - He was well on his way and then just dropped off by 28. Might be top 200 for me.

Brooks Robinson - Great defense, but not enough offense to get into top 50. Top 100 probably.

Sammy Sosa - Nope. Totally one-dimensional player, his HR totals are not so much of a symbol of his talent as his era and likely using certain illegal supplements.

Billy Williams - Probably a little high for him. Top 100.

Dave Winfield - Ditto.

[leecemark]

--I only got 3 players into your list before seeing enough to convince me that going further would be a waste of time. Harold freaking Baines one of the top 50 players of all time? He isn't even close to being one of the 50 best players of my lifetime. Baines was a fairly good hitter for a long time, but never a great one. Most of his career he had zero defensive value and was a below average to poor baserunner.

[Brad Harris]

Abstractly, the top 5 at each position would make for 40 players. Add ten at-large position players and there's your top 50.

Where do you rank Harold Baines among right fielders? Surely not in the top 5?

[Dudeman]

Hank Aaron
Cap Anson
Jeff Bagwell
Ernie Banks
Johnny Bench
Yogi Berra
Barry Bonds
Wade Boggs
George Brett
Rod Carew
Oscar Charleston
Roberto Clemente
Ty Cobb
Eddie Collins
Sam Crawford
Ed Delahanty
Joe DiMaggio
Jimmie Foxx
Loh Gehrig
Josh Gibson
Ken Griffey Jr
Tony Gwynn
Rickey Henderson
Rogers Hornsby
Joe Jackson
Al Kaline
Nap Lajoie
John Henry Lloyd
Mickey Mantle
Eddie Mathews
Willie Mays
Willie McCovey
Joe Morgan
Stan Musial
Mike Piazza
Tim Raines
Cal Ripken Jr
Frank Robinson
Jackie Robinson
Alex Rodriguez
Ivan Rodriguez
Babe Ruth
Mike Schmidt
Tris Speaker
Frank Thomas
Arky Vaughan
Honus Wagner
Ted Williams
Carl Yastrzemski
Robin Yount

[digglahhh]

Sockeye,

The no catcher thing has already been mentioned.

No A-Rod?

[digglahhh]

General question here:

We see Frank Thomas appear on a lot of these top 50 lists. But rarely do we see Manny Ramirez.

Both of these guys are pushing for spots solely with their bats. Thomas is a crappy defensive 1B who has DHed for the second half of his career.

Manny is an awful defensive LF.

Now, Thomas has the peak edge on Manny and he's still played more games with a higher OPS+, though a lower raw OPS. Thomas does have the OBP edge, which is considered the more important component of the metric.

But hasn't Manny's consistency offset Frank's peak at this point?

Some people bring up the MVP thing. But truthfully Manny's lack of an MVP is a function of the fact that he is always splitting the vote with teammates.

Also it seems pretty clear that Manny has some more productive years ahead of him, while Frank is playing out the string.

[DoubleX]

General question here:

We see Frank Thomas appear on a lot of these top 50 lists. But rarely do we see Manny Ramirez.

Both of these guys are pushing for spots solely with their bats. Thomas is a crappy defensive 1B who has DHed for the second half of his career.

Manny is an awful defensive LF.

Now, Thomas has the peak edge on Manny and he's still played more games with a higher OPS+, though a lower raw OPS. Thomas does have the OBP edge, which is considered the more important component of the metric.

But hasn't Manny's consistency offset Frank's peak at this point?

Some people bring up the MVP thing. But truthfully Manny's lack of an MVP is a function of the fact that he is always splitting the vote with teammates.

Also it seems pretty clear that Manny has some more productive years ahead of him, while Frank is playing out the string.

I agree. I think Manny's career is generally underrated. Thomas' OPS+ is 161 while Manny's is 156. And Manny, while a bad fielder, has played field his entire career. So I think you definitely have a good point.

A few things that might cause Thomas to be further ahead are...

- The MVPs, as you mentioned. Two for Thomas, none for Manny.

- Thomas was putting Ted Williams like numbers just before explosion in the mid and late 90s. Manny came during that time, so there might be a subconscious bias against his numbers, whereas Thomas' numbers in the early 90s were especially mind-boggling given the levels of offense we had been accustomed to in the 60s-80s.

- Manny's been extremely consistent, but his peak is not quite as impressive as Thomas' (which also factors in the above point of Thomas being at his best before the explosion in the mid 90s).

[leecemark]

--Thomas is ahead of Ramirez even though he has played longer and experienced some decline. Manny has some good years left in him, but does anybody think he is going to improve his rates over the rest of his career? I suppose its possible he'll end up with a better career than Thomas, but I wouldn't bet on it and I surely wouldn't rank him ahead now.

[Edgartohof]

I personally have Frank Thomas as my 4th best 1Bman all-time, good for 38th for position players, Manny, I do have in my top 100, at 86th, as my 10th best Left-fielder, very good, but still a far cry from Thomas. Now if he was a decent fielder, I could see it closer, but he certainly is not, he is just as much of a defensive liablility as Thomas is/was, so no help for him there.

Top 10 LF'ers:

1. Ted Williams
2. Stan Musial
3. Barry Bonds
4. Ed Delahanty
5. Rickey Henderson
6. Joe Jackson
7. Carl Yastrzemski
8. Al Simmons
9. Billy Williams
10. Manny Ramirez

[Sockeye]

I knew Harold Baines wouldn't be a popular pick or a few others on the list for that matter. But I've never once given into public pressure or shyed away from controversy. I'll go out on a limb and say if you have 50 different people put together their top 50 list that no two list would be the same. The fact of the matter is the Harold Baines overall numbers are just too good to be ignored.

16th in games
26th in at-bats
38th in hits
29th in total bases
51st in doubles
49th in home runs
23rd in RBI's
78th in bases on balls
52nd in singles
44th in runs created
41st in extra base hits
41st in times on base
27th in sacrifice flies
17th in intentional walks

And his averages weren't all that bad either

.289 AVG
.356 OBP
.465 SLG
.820 OPS
120 OPS+

[leecemark]

--A 120 OPS+ is nothing special for a corner OF/DH. Most of Baines other rankings are at least as much the result of him hanging around a long time as due to his quality. Without the DH his career would have been over 10 years earlier and so he has an unfair advantage over earlier players in the counting stats department.
--I agree that few if any of us would have the same 50 players on our top 50 list, but I suspect yours would be the only one with HFB on it. There is a difference between defending an unpopular position and staking out a ridiculous one. Your Beltre and Baines campaigns fit into the latter category.

[Sockeye]

--A 120 OPS+ is nothing special for a corner OF/DH. Most of Baines other rankings are at least as much the result of him hanging around a long time as due to his quality. Without the DH his career would have been over 10 years earlier and so he has an unfair advantage over earlier players in the counting stats department.
--I agree that few if any of us would have the same 50 players on our top 50 list, but I suspect yours would be the only one with HFB on it. There is a difference between defending an unpopular position and staking out a ridiculous one. Your Beltre and Baines campaigns fit into the latter category.

Well we all know what opinions are like..

[leecemark]

--Indeed we do. But some of them smell worse than others:) .
--Really I don't mean to rip on you personally. Your early postings seem pretty misguided to me, but you put a nice effort into supporting them. You have remained pretty civil in the face of some heavy pounding in the Beltre thread too. If I haven't already welcomed you to BBF, its nice to have you with us. Hopefully well find some common ground along the way, but if not you won't be the first good member that I seldom agree with:laugh .

[538280]

Where on earth is Joe Morgan?

[538280]

For comparison's sake, my top 50 (in order though, I don't do the alphabetical thing):

1.Willie Mays
2.Babe Ruth
3.Barry Bonds
4.Hank Aaron
5.Mike Schmidt
6.Oscar Charleston
7.Honus Wagner
8.Mickey Mantle
9.Ted Williams
10.Ty Cobb
11.Joe Morgan
12.Lou Gehrig
13.Josh Gibson
14.Rickey Henderson
15.Tris Speaker
16.Eddie Collins
17.Stan Musial
18.Frank Robinson
19.Johnny Bench
20.Pop Lloyd
21.Rogers Hornsby
22.Arky Vaughan
23.Christobal Torriente
24.Eddie Mathews
25.Alex Rodriguez
26.Reggie Jackson
27.Joe DiMaggio
28.Jimmie Foxx
29.Frank Thomas
30.Jeff Bagwell
31.Jackie Robinson
32.George Brett
33.Turkey Stearnes
34.Mel Ott
35.Pete Rose
36.Yogi Berra
37.Nap Lajoie
38.Tony Gwynn
39.Tim Raines
40.Ron Santo
41.Willie McCovey
42.Robin Yount
43.Charlie Gehringer
44.Sam Crawford
45.Gary Sheffield
46.Mike Piazza
47.Carl Yastrzemski
48.Wade Boggs
49.Mickey Cochrane
50.Willie Stargell

[DoubleX]

I knew Harold Baines wouldn't be a popular pick or a few others on the list for that matter. But I've never once given into public pressure or shyed away from controversy. I'll go out on a limb and say if you have 50 different people put together their top 50 list that no two list would be the same. The fact of the matter is the Harold Baines overall numbers are just too good to be ignored.

That's very true, but I'd be shocked to see Baines on anyone else's top 50 list (or top 100), unless that person is a huge White Sox homer or something.

[Taco De Muerte]

For comparison's sake, my top 50 (in order though, I don't do the alphabetical thing):

1.Willie Mays
2.Babe Ruth
3.Barry Bonds
4.Hank Aaron
5.Mike Schmidt
6.Oscar Charleston
7.Honus Wagner
8.Mickey Mantle
9.Ted Williams
10.Ty Cobb
11.Joe Morgan
12.Lou Gehrig
13.Josh Gibson
14.Rickey Henderson
15.Tris Speaker
16.Eddie Collins
17.Stan Musial
18.Frank Robinson
19.Johnny Bench
20.Pop Lloyd
21.Rogers Hornsby
22.Arky Vaughan
23.Christobal Torriente
24.Eddie Mathews
25.Alex Rodriguez
26.Reggie Jackson
27.Joe DiMaggio
28.Jimmie Foxx
29.Frank Thomas
30.Jeff Bagwell
31.Jackie Robinson
32.George Brett
33.Turkey Stearnes
34.Mel Ott
35.Pete Rose
36.Yogi Berra
37.Nap Lajoie
38.Tony Gwynn
39.Tim Raines
40.Ron Santo
41.Willie McCovey
42.Robin Yount
43.Charlie Gehringer
44.Sam Crawford
45.Gary Sheffield
46.Mike Piazza
47.Carl Yastrzemski
48.Wade Boggs
49.Mickey Cochrane
50.Willie Stargell

I'm surprised to see that you have cobb ranked so low - He seems a bit overrated by many on this site. Also, I'm glad you recognize how truly great of a player Gary Sheffield is. Probably the most underrated player of his generation.

[DoubleX]

--Indeed we do. But some of them smell worse than others:) .
--Really I don't mean to rip on you personally. Your early postings seem pretty misguided to me, but you put a nice effort into supporting them. You have remained pretty civil in the face of some heavy pounding in the Beltre thread too. If I haven't already welcomed you to BBF, its nice to have you with us. Hopefully well find some common ground along the way, but if not you won't be the first good member that I seldom agree with:laugh .

I echo these sentiment. Sockeye, some of your opinions seem pretty illogical to some of us, but I admire your persistence and your civility.

[Sockeye]

--Indeed we do. But some of them smell worse than others:) .
--Really I don't mean to rip on you personally. Your early postings seem pretty misguided to me, but you put a nice effort into supporting them. You have remained pretty civil in the face of some heavy pounding in the Beltre thread too. If I haven't already welcomed you to BBF, its nice to have you with us. Hopefully well find some common ground along the way, but if not you won't be the first good member that I seldom agree with:laugh .

Thank you for the welcome. I'm sure we'll find common ground in the future as I plan to post more players to discuss their possible HOF future. A few of which may even agree with, most of which you probably won't.

[Brad Harris]

I echo these sentiment. Sockeye, some of your opinions seem pretty illogical to some of us, but I admire your persistence and your civility.
Ditto.

By the way, Mark, I believe it's Harold D. Baines. (But I know what you meant. ;))


And his averages weren't all that bad either

.289 AVG
.356 OBP
.465 SLG
.820 OPS
120 OPS+
Edit/Delete Message

Averages obtained (and surpassed) by at least 117 players - from Ellis Burks and John Olerud to Ripper Collins and Jeff Heath. Not that these aren't good averages, just that they're far from rare.

[RuthMayBond]

Where on earth is Joe Morgan?Something ElHalo has never asked ;)

[RuthMayBond]

For comparison's sake, my top 50 (in order though, I don't do the alphabetical thing):

5.Mike Schmidt
7.Honus Wagner
8.Mickey Mantle
9.Ted Williams
Schmidt above these guys (and others), wow

<10.Ty Cobb>

Cobb scored 2246 and knocked in with the benefit of a grand total of 117 HR

<11.Joe Morgan
12.Lou Gehrig>

That's some positional adjustment . . .

<42.Robin Yount
44.Sam Crawford>

. . . and era adjustment

[Sockeye]

That's very true, but I'd be shocked to see Baines on anyone else's top 50 list (or top 100), unless that person is a huge White Sox homer or something.

I like to look at the players career as a whole, not just a 5 year peak. Now if you want a list of the top 50 most "productive" players of all time then the list would be somewhat different. But looking at a player career as a whole then Baines deserves to be on the list.

I don't think anyone can argue against Baines "counting" stats. If you throw the rate statistics out the window and just go in terms of counting stats Baines is arguably in the top 30 players in history. Of course rate stats do play into the equasion to an extent so lets examine his rate stats and see how he compare to some similar players.

OPS
Dave Winfield 827
Bobby Bonds 824
Harold Baines 820
Johnny Bench 817
Dale Murphy 815
Dave Parker 810
Andre Dawson 806
Matt Williams 805
Tony Perez 804
Carlton Fisk 797
Cal Ripken 788
Greg Nettles 750

OPS+
Earle Combs 126
Monte Irvin 126
Ed Roush 126
Kiki Cuyler 125
Kirby Puckett 124
Enos Slaughter 123
Hugh Duffy 122
George Davis 121
Heinie Manush 121
Harold Baines 120
Robin Yount 115
Harry Hooper 114
Sam Rice 112
Richie Ashburn 111
Freddie Lindstrom 110
Lou Brock 109
Max Carey 107
Tommy McCarthy 106
Lloyd Waner 99

As the stats show Harold Baines holds his own in terms of productivity when his OPS is compared to other popular players with overlapping careers and his OPS+ when compared to other HOF outfielders

[leecemark]

--The Hall of Fame outfielders you show are either; a) the worst selections or b) outstanding defensive CFers or c) both. Plus Baines barely qualifies as an outfielder. Which is the big problem with Harold in comparing him with the contemporary players you mention. The ones who were outfielders played most of their careers there and were good/great defenders. The others played key defensive positons. It isn't that impessive for an OF/DH to slightly edge out a C in OPS.
--Harold Baines was never the best player on his team (or usually even close to the best) except maybe a couple years early on with the White Sox. He was a nice guy to have around, but if he was your best player you didn't have a very good team. I just don't see that as a Hall of Fame profile.

[digglahhh]

16th in games
26th in at-bats
38th in hits
29th in total bases
51st in doubles
49th in home runs
23rd in RBI's
78th in bases on balls
52nd in singles
44th in runs created
41st in extra base hits
41st in times on base
27th in sacrifice flies
17th in intentional walks

Notice that although he is 16th in G and 26th in AB respectively, he does not surpass those rankings in any meaningful offensive stat.

That is a tell-tale sign of a compiler.

[digglahhh]

--Thomas is ahead of Ramirez even though he has played longer and experienced some decline. Manny has some good years left in him, but does anybody think he is going to improve his rates over the rest of his career? I suppose its possible he'll end up with a better career than Thomas, but I wouldn't bet on it and I surely wouldn't rank him ahead now.

To each his own Mark, but IMO, barring Manny getting run over by a bus or something I don't see how Manny doesn't finish with a better career than Thomas.

If he did get hit by a speeding bus though, that would just be "Manny being Manny."



I personally have Frank Thomas as my 4th best 1Bman all-time, good for 38th for position players, Manny, I do have in my top 100, at 86th, as my 10th best Left-fielder, very good, but still a far cry from Thomas.

4th best 1b vs 10th best LF doesn't really mean much to me. If after my due dilligence I concluded that my top 15 players were all CFs it wouldn't bother me a bit.

[DodgerBlue81]

:laugh This is funny stuff
Harold Baines and Vada Pinson top 50 position players
McGriff, Dawson, Billy Williams, Biggio, Tony Perez, Palmeiro and maybe a few others shouldn't be in the top 50 either.

[Brad Harris]

...if you want a list of the top 50 most "productive" players of all time then the list would be somewhat different.

I was under the impression that production had a great deal to do with who the "top 50 position players" were. :confused:

And while you're right about Baines' having comparable production to a number of Hall-of-Famers and Hall-of-Fame caliber players, hardly any of those players on the list you showed are going to be making many "top 50" lists, given that you only have to be among the top 150 or so position players in history to make the Hall of Fame. "Top 50" is much more restrictive than just Hall-of-Famers.

[leecemark]

--For that matter there are some Hall of Famers who wouldn't make my top 150 and players list. Baines is never going to be a Hall of Famer, but he also wouldn't make my top 150.

[Windy City Fan]

Harold Baines? Yikes, talk about going out on a limb. Baines has some fairly impressive counting stats, but even there he falls short of any "magic" numbers. There are a few things you have to look at in the career of Mr. Baines that will tell you he's not HOF material.

Black Ink: His total black ink comes from one year where he lead the league in slugging. It was the only time he ever cracked the top ten.

Grey Ink: Black ink isn't a rereq to the hall. You can be one of the best for a long time instead of being THE best. However, Baines doesn't have a lot to sing about here either.

Top 10 Appearances in ....
Batting Average 3 (never in the top 5)
On Base Percentage 1 (never in the top 5)
Slugging 1
OPS 3 (never in the top 5)
Hits 1
Total Bases 2 (never in the top 5)
Homeruns 1 (never in the top 5)
RBI 2
OPS+ 4

You'd be hard pressed to say Harold Baines was ever a top ten player in his league, especially when you consider he added nothing in the field (when he did take the field) and on the basepaths.

Now, let's compare Baines to a few people you left off.

Joe Morgan has a better OPS+ (132 vs. 120), triple the grey ink, and he was a stellar fielder and base runner, plus he played a far more difficult position (2B vs OF/DH)

Johnny Bench also has a better career OPS+ (126 vs 120), better ink scores (including two homerun championships), and he was a catcher! And a very good defensive one at that.

Alex Rodriguez already has more HR than Baines, and he's still going! He blows Baines out of the water in ink scores (and again he's still adding to his numbers). He has a pair of MVPs and 2 other second place finishes (Baines never did better than 9th). He's a gold glove SS/3B. If you like career rate stats, how do these look?

.307 BA
.385 OBP
.577 SLG
145 OPS+

And for good measure he has 226 stolen bases and a 80% success rate!

Baines was a solid player and by all accounts a classy gentleman, but he's not a HOFer and certainly not a top 50 player.

[Pghfan987]

For comparison's sake, my top 50 (in order though, I don't do the alphabetical thing):

1.Willie Mays
2.Babe Ruth
3.Barry Bonds
4.Hank Aaron
5.Mike Schmidt
6.Oscar Charleston
7.Honus Wagner
8.Mickey Mantle
9.Ted Williams
10.Ty Cobb
11.Joe Morgan
12.Lou Gehrig
13.Josh Gibson
14.Rickey Henderson
15.Tris Speaker
16.Eddie Collins
17.Stan Musial
18.Frank Robinson
19.Johnny Bench
20.Pop Lloyd
21.Rogers Hornsby
22.Arky Vaughan
23.Christobal Torriente
24.Eddie Mathews
25.Alex Rodriguez
26.Reggie Jackson
27.Joe DiMaggio
28.Jimmie Foxx
29.Frank Thomas
30.Jeff Bagwell
31.Jackie Robinson
32.George Brett
33.Turkey Stearnes
34.Mel Ott
35.Pete Rose
36.Yogi Berra
37.Nap Lajoie
38.Tony Gwynn
39.Tim Raines
40.Ron Santo
41.Willie McCovey
42.Robin Yount
43.Charlie Gehringer
44.Sam Crawford
45.Gary Sheffield
46.Mike Piazza
47.Carl Yastrzemski
48.Wade Boggs
49.Mickey Cochrane
50.Willie Stargell

A few comments:

1) Mike Schmidt, IMO, is ludicrously overrated in BF. Ahead of Cobb, Wagner, and Mantle??

2) Reggie Jackson ahead of Joltin Joe? Not sure about that one either...

3) It looks like you put no emphasis on batting average.

4) I like Johnny Mize more than McCovey/Stargell, but can see the other case.

5) I like where Josh Gibson is. At least in my crazy mind, there is no doubt he was better significantly better than Bench.

6) Speaker ahead of Henderson? Speaker has the advantage everywhere except baserunning, and Tris was no slouch in that department. Exactly how much emphasis did you put on base stealing?

[538280]

A few comments:

1) Mike Schmidt, IMO, is ludicrously overrated in BF. Ahead of Cobb, Wagner, and Mantle??

I have Schmidt as the best player in his league 8 times. That's more than Ruth and Cobb and Aaron and a ton of players who everyone has in their top 10. The fact he didn't dominate as much tells me more about the quality of the league he played in than that he wasn't that good. The common perception the 70s and 80s had few all time greats is ludicrous to me.


2) Reggie Jackson ahead of Joltin Joe? Not sure about that one either...

Reggie in '69 was just as good as Joe was in his best seasons, after that I would agree Joe has the better peak, but even if we give war credit he's a while back in longevity and consistency. Also, my basic thoughts 70s/80s players are vastly underrated comes in here.


3) It looks like you put no emphasis on batting average.

I put some, just in the total offensive picture. I do think slugging is much more important than BA, and OBP is as well. I do like some high BA contact hitters though, like Tony Gwynn.


4) I like Johnny Mize more than McCovey/Stargell, but can see the other case.

McCovey/Stargell were both hurt by their home parks by quite a bit, Mize was really helped. Both had very good longevity while Mize is only okay. McCovey had a better peak and Stargell's is about the same.


5) I like where Josh Gibson is. At least in my crazy mind, there is no doubt he was better significantly better than Bench.

So do I.


6) Speaker ahead of Henderson? Speaker has the advantage everywhere except baserunning, and Tris was no slouch in that department. Exactly how much emphasis did you put on base stealing?

Rickey is a MUCH better offensive player than people realize, much like a lot of great leadoff hitters. Speaker was a great hitter, certainly, but Rickey lasted longer and I'm pretty sure he was better in 1990 than Speaker ever was.

I don't care TOO much for basestealing, but I give it some credit. Speaker was a horrible percentage basestealer.

I'm not sure about Speaker/Henderson, I'll go back and look at it closer.

[Sockeye]

Notice that although he is 16th in G and 26th in AB respectively, he does not surpass those rankings in any meaningful offensive stat.

That is a tell-tale sign of a compiler.

23rd in RBI's?

[Brad Harris]

1,628 RBI in 22 years is an average of 74 RBI per season. An average hitter for average teams can do that easily so long as he stays healthy throughout his career. Baines was remarkably healthy, but not remarkably productive.

[Captain Cold Nose]

23rd in RBI's?
Baines appeared in the top 10 in RBI twice his entire career, never greater than fourth. A very good compiler, but a compiler nonetheless.
Looking at a player's numbers alone without the context behind them can obviously be misleading.

[Sockeye]

I was under the impression that production had a great deal to do with who the "top 50 position players" were. :confused:

And while you're right about Baines' having comparable production to a number of Hall-of-Famers and Hall-of-Fame caliber players, hardly any of those players on the list you showed are going to be making many "top 50" lists, given that you only have to be among the top 150 or so position players in history to make the Hall of Fame. "Top 50" is much more restrictive than just Hall-of-Famers.

But when you "combine" the production of HOF players (granted not elite HOFers) with his counting stats that is what makes him deserving of this list.

So to you production = greatness? Longevity means nothing? Okay I can do that. The players that were the most productive throughout the course of their career no matter if they were out out of the game by age 30. The Top 50 position players

Hank Aaron
Bobby Abreu
Earl Averill
Jeff Bagwell
Albert Belle
Lance Berkman
Barry Bonds
Dan Brouthers
Ty Cobb
Carlos Delgado
Joe Dimaggio
Jim Edmonds
Jimmie Foxx
Lou Gehrig
Jason Giambi
Brian Giles
Hank Greenburg
Ken Griffey Jr
Vladimir Guerrero
Harry Heilmann
Todd Helton
Rogers Hornsby
Joe Jackson
Chipper Jones
Charlie Keller
Ralph Kiner
Chuck Klein
Mickey Mantle
Edgar Martinez
Willie Mays
Mark McGwire
Johnny Mize
Stan Musial
Lefty O'Doul
Mel Ott
Mike Piazza
Albert Pujols
Manny Ramirez
Frank Robinson
Alex Rodriguez
Babe Ruth
Gary Sheffield
Duke Snider
Tris Speaker
Frank Thomas
Jim Thome
Larry Walker
Ken Williams
Ted Williams
Hack Wilson

[RuthMayBond]

I have Schmidt as the best player in his league 8 times. That's more than Ruth and Cobb.Please illuminate us with the years

[iPod]

But when you "combine" the production of HOF players (granted not elite HOFers) with his counting stats that is what makes him deserving of this list.

So to you production = greatness? Longevity means nothing? Okay I can do that. The players that were the most productive throughout the course of their career no matter if they were out out of the game by age 30. The Top 50 position players

Hank Aaron
Bobby Abreu
Earl Averill
Jeff Bagwell
Albert Belle
Lance Berkman
Barry Bonds
Dan Brouthers
Ty Cobb
Carlos Delgado
Joe Dimaggio
Jim Edmonds
Jimmie Foxx
Lou Gehrig
Jason Giambi
Brian Giles
Hank Greenburg
Ken Griffey Jr
Vladimir Guerrero
Harry Heilmann
Todd Helton
Rogers Hornsby
Joe Jackson
Chipper Jones
Charlie Keller
Ralph Kiner
Chuck Klein
Mickey Mantle
Edgar Martinez
Willie Mays
Mark McGwire
Johnny Mize
Stan Musial
Lefty O'Doul
Mel Ott
Mike Piazza
Albert Pujols
Manny Ramirez
Frank Robinson
Alex Rodriguez
Babe Ruth
Gary Sheffield
Duke Snider
Tris Speaker
Frank Thomas
Jim Thome
Larry Walker
Ken Williams
Ted Williams
Hack Wilson

Again... no one said longetivity is not important. However, the collective opinion here is that you're putting far, far too much emphasis on it. The top 50 players in baseball history are people that, you would think at least, aren't just pretty good players who stuck around forever; they are guys who blew us all away for at least a little while, long enough to leave some sort of lasting legacy.

[Sockeye]

Again... no one said longetivity is not important. However, the collective opinion here is that you're putting far, far too much emphasis on it. The top 50 players in baseball history are people that, you would think at least, aren't just pretty good players who stuck around forever; they are guys who blew us all away for at least a little while, long enough to leave some sort of lasting legacy.

Well there you go then. There is my list. Every player on it were as productive as productive can be and played at least 10 seasons with the exception of a few active players.

[john1972]

I firmly believe that much of baseball history concerning who actually were the greatest players is very suspect since most of the opinion is rendered by a few who focus on narrowed criteria and then somehow convince the masses of the legitimacy of these views.

CRAIG BIGGIO WAS NOT A BETTER SECONBASEMAN THAN ROBERTO ALOMAR!

[The Dude]

CRAIG BIGGIO WAS NOT A BETTER SECONBASEMAN THAN ROBERTO ALOMAR!


Why is Biggio not a better 2B than Alomar?

[leecemark]

--Alomar was a better secondbaseman, but Biggio was a better player. They are pretty close though and it comes down mostly to Biggio aging better. Why that comparison would be the key to deciiphering the legitimacy of bets player lists is the better question.

[john1972]

Frankly, I don't care how Biggio has aged better though I am more than upset that Alomar was unable to continue to reach 3000 hits (something a few years ago people projected to be a 90% certainty) which would have quelled this uprising trend of opinion lately. In my mind, and I know you'll all claim it's only subjective opinion, but Alomar used all fields with the bat better, had better range and arm on defense, was a better baserunner, and produced in the "clutch" better. If you don't merely focus on statistics the conclusion must be reached that Alomar was better in nearly every aspect of the game. In fact, the majority of managers and coaches and players who have witnessed both throughout the years would probably agree. It's just that real-world comparisons somehow get lost in the diluted task of analysing numbers.

Let me state my opinion once and for all: Alomar may be the most underrated player of all-time. His numbers don't do him justice and there is a belief of mine that a few years he simply didn't care enough which affected his totals.

[DodgerBlue81]

So to you production = greatness? Longevity means nothing? Okay I can do that. The players that were the most productive throughout the course of their career no matter if they were out out of the game by age 30. The Top 50 position players

Hank Aaron
Bobby Abreu
Earl Averill
Jeff Bagwell
Albert Belle
Lance Berkman
Barry Bonds
Dan Brouthers
Ty Cobb
Carlos Delgado
Joe Dimaggio
Jim Edmonds
Jimmie Foxx
Lou Gehrig
Jason Giambi
Brian Giles
Hank Greenburg
Ken Griffey Jr
Vladimir Guerrero
Harry Heilmann
Todd Helton
Rogers Hornsby
Joe Jackson
Chipper Jones
Charlie Keller
Ralph Kiner
Chuck Klein
Mickey Mantle
Edgar Martinez
Willie Mays
Mark McGwire
Johnny Mize
Stan Musial
Lefty O'Doul
Mel Ott
Mike Piazza
Albert Pujols
Manny Ramirez
Frank Robinson
Alex Rodriguez
Babe Ruth
Gary Sheffield
Duke Snider
Tris Speaker
Frank Thomas
Jim Thome
Larry Walker
Ken Williams
Ted Williams
Hack Wilson

LOL, again, where the hell is Honus Wagner? Johnny Bench? Mike Schmidt? Pete Rose? Nap Lajoie? Ed Delahanty? Bill Terry? George Sisler? Al Simmons? Eddie Collins?

Yet you have Brian Giles, Ken Williams, Lefty O'Doul, Charlie Keller, Giambi, Abreu, Berkman, Edmonds, Delgado, Albert Belle, Edgar Martinez, and a few others who don't belong anywhere near the Top 50 of all-time.

[STLCards2]

LOL, again, where the hell is Honus Wagner? Johnny Bench? Mike Schmidt? Pete Rose? Nap Lajoie? Ed Delahanty? Bill Terry? George Sisler? Al Simmons? Eddie Collins?

Yet you have Brian Giles, Ken Williams, Lefty O'Doul, Charlie Keller, Giambi, Abreu, Berkman, Edmonds, Delgado, Albert Belle, Edgar Martinez, and a few others who don't belong anywhere near the Top 50 of all-time.

I believe Sockeye was being sarcastic. He is trying to make the point that if longevity wasn't important, then our top 50 lists would be filled with current players and guys who fizzled out early in their careers.

[DodgerBlue81]

Reggie in '69 was just as good as Joe was in his best seasons

No.

:crazy


Reggie never touches DiMaggio's best seasons.

[DodgerBlue81]

I believe Sockeye was being sarcastic. He is trying to make the point that if longevity wasn't important, then our top 50 lists would be filled with current players and guys who fizzled out early in their careers.

Oh ok, I hope so. But how can he not see that Baines doesn't belong anywhere near the top 50? And everyone jumped on Baines, but Vada Pinson in the top 50 is even more of a joke.

[STLCards2]

Oh ok, I hope so. But how can he not see that Baines doesn't belong anywhere near the top 50? And everyone jumped on Baines, but Vada Pinson in the top 50 is even more of a joke.

Well, I obviously wouldn't rank Baines or Pinson nearly that high, but I do agree with Sockeye that longevity is underrated by many around here. Maybe not to the degree that he thinks, but definately underrated. I have gone around and around in circles on that issue to little avail. But Baines? Come on.

[The Dude]

Baines longevity isn't enough to make him better than Pinson. I'm not saying either is anywhere near the top 50, but I have pinson ranked much higher than baines.

[DodgerBlue81]

but I have pinson ranked much higher than baines.

Much higher? Maybe higher, but not by a mile.

[Sockeye]

LOL, again, where the hell is Honus Wagner? Johnny Bench? Mike Schmidt? Pete Rose? Nap Lajoie? Ed Delahanty? Bill Terry? George Sisler? Al Simmons? Eddie Collins?

Yet you have Brian Giles, Ken Williams, Lefty O'Doul, Charlie Keller, Giambi, Abreu, Berkman, Edmonds, Delgado, Albert Belle, Edgar Martinez, and a few others who don't belong anywhere near the Top 50 of all-time.

Well lets see

Berkman: .302 AVG .416 OBP .557 SLG
Giles: .299 AVG .413 OBP .542 SLG
Giambi: .295 AVG .413 OBP .539 SLG
Delgado: .284 AVG .393 OBP .559 SLG
O'Doul: .349 AVG .413 OBP .532 SLG
Belle: .295 AVG .369 OBP .564 SLG
Martinez: .312 AVG .418 OBP .515 SLG
Keller: .286 AVG .410 OBP .518 SLG
Edmonds: .291 AVG .384 OBP .543 SLG
K.Williams: .319 AVG .393 OBP .530 SLG
Abreu: .303 AVG .411 OBP .512 SLG

Wagner: .327 AVG .391 OBP .466 SLG
Bench: .267 AVG .342 OBP .476 SLG
Schmidt: .267 AVG .380 OBP .527 SLG
Rose: .303 AVG .375 OBP .409 SLG
Lajoie: .338 AVG .380 OBP .467 SLG
Delahanty: .346 AVG .411 OBP .505 SLG
Terry: .341 AVG .393 OBP .506 SLG
Sisler: .340 AVG .379 OBP .468 SLG
Simmons: .334 AVG .380 OBP .535 SLG
Collins: .333 AVG .424 OBP .429 SLG

Now if each of your 10 players would have retired 5 years sooner then they might have had a chance.

[Sockeye]

I believe Sockeye was being sarcastic. He is trying to make the point that if longevity wasn't important, then our top 50 lists would be filled with current players and guys who fizzled out early in their careers.

Precisely my point!

[538280]

Please illuminate us with the years

1974, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1986

[DodgerBlue81]

Well lets see

Berkman: .302 AVG .416 OBP .557 SLG
Giles: .299 AVG .413 OBP .542 SLG
Giambi: .295 AVG .413 OBP .539 SLG
Delgado: .284 AVG .393 OBP .559 SLG
O'Doul: .349 AVG .413 OBP .532 SLG
Belle: .295 AVG .369 OBP .564 SLG
Martinez: .312 AVG .418 OBP .515 SLG
Keller: .286 AVG .410 OBP .518 SLG
Edmonds: .291 AVG .384 OBP .543 SLG
K.Williams: .319 AVG .393 OBP .530 SLG
Abreu: .303 AVG .411 OBP .512 SLG

Wagner: .327 AVG .391 OBP .466 SLG
Bench: .267 AVG .342 OBP .476 SLG
Schmidt: .267 AVG .380 OBP .527 SLG
Rose: .303 AVG .375 OBP .409 SLG
Lajoie: .338 AVG .380 OBP .467 SLG
Delahanty: .346 AVG .411 OBP .505 SLG
Terry: .341 AVG .393 OBP .506 SLG
Sisler: .340 AVG .379 OBP .468 SLG
Simmons: .334 AVG .380 OBP .535 SLG
Collins: .333 AVG .424 OBP .429 SLG

Now if each of your 10 players would have retired 5 years sooner then they might have had a chance.

LOL, so you base everything on AVG/OBP/SLG? The players I mentioned that you left out are a thousand times better than those players I mentioned that don't belong anywhere near the top 50.

[538280]

No.

:crazy


Reggie never touches DiMaggio's best seasons.

If you don't think Reggie touches DiMaggio's best seasons, then fine, but how about instead of acting sarcastically and making blanket statements you give some reasons for your thinking?

DiMaggio's best years were probably 1939 and 1941. Let's compare, Reggie Jackson 1969 vs. Joe DiMaggio in 1941.

Offense:Let's start with the quick, easy measure, OPS+. Reggie had a 187 OPS+, Joe was at 184. Slight edge for Reggie. Not huge though. Reggie played in a stronger league. I would normally give a 1969 AL player a five point boost in OPS+, to make up for league quality. I would give a 1941 AL player a two point subtraction. So, with my adjusted system (which I would think everyone would agree is reasonable) would have Reggie at 192 and Joe at 182. 10 points.

Let's look at another thing-park effects. The Oakland Coliseum was death to batting averages, and was one of the worst hitter's parks in the league, no question.

DiMaggio was supposed to have been killed by Yankee Stadium, but that is largely a myth. Yankee Stadium, if you study the numbers, was actually a favorable HR park for RH hitters in DiMaggio's years there. Kevin Johnson studied the numbers, and these are the RH HR factors for Yankee Stadium in the DiMaggio years:


YEAR LEAGUE TEAM Team_ID PARK_ID Park HR_R
1936 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 80
1937 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 100
1938 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 142
1939 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 108
1940 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 110
1941 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 103
1942 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 124
1946 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 98
1947 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 94
1948 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 108
1949 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 130
1950 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 82
1951 AL NY New_Yan NYC16A Yankee Stadium I 87

Defense:I'm not going to deny Joe DiMaggio was a very good fielding CFer. The question is whether he's the defensive wonder he was made out to be or if he's just a good CFer. I'm more inclined towards the latter. Joe was a media darling, and those types in New York make a good combination. The NY press tried to get away with praising DiMaggio and making him into things he just wasn't, like calling him "the greatest living ballplayer" for years when such players as Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, and Ted Williams were still alive. IMO, the statistical systems, most of which have seen DiMag as a good but not great CFer, are probably closer to the truth.

The old Reggie Jackson was not a good fielder, but the young one was. In his youth, Reggie was a fantastic defensive outfielder, and he was actually reputed to be such, though in this day those reports of the New York/California Reggie seem to dominate. Reggie in his youth was an amazing athlete who could run really fast and had a great arm. He led his league in assists four times and putouts twice, and the PCA defensive analysis has shown him to be one of the top 20 defensive RFers of all time.

I still think Joe was a better fielder, simply because he was a CFer, but it's a lot closer than many realize. Reggie in '69 was a great fielding corner OFer.

The way I see it, Joe was a better fielder, but hitting is more important than fielding and Reggie has the edge there.

Also, DiMaggio only played about 140 games in his best seasons. In his four 170 OPS+ years, the most games he played was 139, which is in the focus year 1941. Reggie in '69 played 152 games, 13 more. When talking about a player's total value, that's a large difference.

Win Shares, in case you're wondering, has Joe and Reggie both at 41, but WS makes no LQ adjustment. With a proper one made, Reggie would certainly be ahead.

[digglahhh]

Sockeye,

How about posting the league averages during the careers of some of those guys...

[DodgerBlue81]

Reggie 1969: .275 47 HR 118 RBI .410 OB% .608 SLG 123 Runs 114 BB 151 Hits 36 doubles 3 triples 1.018 OPS

DiMaggio 1937: .346 46 HR 167 RBI .412 OB% .673 SLG 151 Runs 64 BB 215 Hits 35 doubles 15 triples 1.085 OPS

oh and Reggie struck out 142 times in 1969, DiMaggio only 37 times in 1937.

As great as Reggie's 1969 was, DiMaggio's 1937 was clearly better, as was his '39, '40, '41, and '48

Reggie was a good defensive player, but DiMaggio was a great outfielder.

Reggie .262 lifetime hitter, DiMaggio .325
Reggie .356 career OB%, DiMaggio .398
Reggie .490 career SLG, DiMaggio .579
Reggie .846 career OPS, DiMaggio .977

162 game average
Reggie 32 HR 98 RBI
DiMaggio 34 HR 143 RBI

Reggie once .300+ AVG, DiMaggio 11 times .300+ AVG

Reggie's highest AVG for a season was .300, DiMaggio .381

Both had 7 seasons 30+ HR

Reggie 6 times 100+ RBI
DiMaggio 9 times 100+ RBI

Reggie never sniffed 200 hits in a season, DiMaggio did it twice

Reggie once 100+ Runs
DiMaggio 8 times 100+ Runs

Most DiMaggio ever struck out was 39 times, Reggie once struck out 171 times

DiMaggio 2 batting titles, 7 times in the top 10; Reggie never

Reggie 1 MVP, DiMaggio 3 MVPs

Reggie top 10 in HRs 13 times, DiMaggio 11 times

Reggie 4 rings, DiMaggio 9 rings, although overall Mr. October was better than DiMaggio in the post-season


It's not even close; DiMaggio was clearly a better player

[RuthMayBond]

1974, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1986
I got Sandberg in '84 and haven't decided on '86.
Um, you also need to give Ruth's & Cobb's years.

[538280]

Reggie 1969: .275 47 HR 118 RBI .410 OB% .608 SLG 123 Runs 114 BB 151 Hits 36 doubles 3 triples 1.018 OPS

DiMaggio 1937: .346 46 HR 167 RBI .412 OB% .673 SLG 151 Runs 64 BB 215 Hits 35 doubles 15 triples 1.085 OPS

oh and Reggie struck out 142 times in 1969, DiMaggio only 37 times in 1937.

As great as Reggie's 1969 was, DiMaggio's 1937 was clearly better, as was his '39, '40, '41, and '48

Reggie was a good defensive player, but DiMaggio was a great outfielder.

Reggie .262 lifetime hitter, DiMaggio .325
Reggie .356 career OB%, DiMaggio .398
Reggie .490 career SLG, DiMaggio .579
Reggie .846 career OPS, DiMaggio .977

162 game average
Reggie 32 HR 98 RBI
DiMaggio 34 HR 143 RBI

Reggie once .300+ AVG, DiMaggio 11 times .300+ AVG

Reggie's highest AVG for a season was .300, DiMaggio .381

Both had 7 seasons 30+ HR

Reggie 6 times 100+ RBI
DiMaggio 9 times 100+ RBI

Reggie never sniffed 200 hits in a season, DiMaggio did it twice

Reggie once 100+ Runs
DiMaggio 8 times 100+ Runs

Most DiMaggio ever struck out was 39 times, Reggie once struck out 171 times

DiMaggio 2 batting titles, 7 times in the top 10; Reggie never

Reggie 1 MVP, DiMaggio 3 MVPs

Reggie top 10 in HRs 13 times, DiMaggio 11 times

Reggie 4 rings, DiMaggio 9 rings, although overall Mr. October was better than DiMaggio in the post-season


It's not even close; DiMaggio was clearly a better player

Yeah, DiMaggio has better raw numbers. Thanks for regurgitating them. :rolleyes:

Maybe try era adjustments, league quality adjustments, and fit longevity into the picture.

[538280]

I got Sandberg in '84 and haven't decided on '86.
Um, you also need to give Ruth's & Cobb's years.

Ruth-1919, 1920, 1921, 1923, 1924, 1926, 1928, 1929

Eight years, the same amount.

Cobb-1907, 1908, 1910, 1915, 1917

Five years. Speaker and Collins usually take the others.

[DodgerBlue81]

Yeah, DiMaggio has better raw numbers. Thanks for regurgitating them. :rolleyes:

Maybe try era adjustments, league quality adjustments, and fit longevity into the picture.

Listen, I'm sorry but there's absolutely no way around it; DiMaggio was simply a better player. There's no shame in Reggie Jackson who had a great career not being a better player than DiMaggio, who's one of the top 20 players of all-time.

[DoubleX]

Also, DiMaggio only played about 140 games in his best seasons. In his four 170 OPS+ years, the most games he played was 139, which is in the focus year 1941. Reggie in '69 played 152 games, 13 more. When talking about a player's total value, that's a large difference.

That's not that compelling of an argument. In the context of total games in the season, Jackson actually only played 5 more games that were available to him than DiMaggio did in this one year comparison (in that Jackson missed 10 of his teams games while DiMaggio missed 15; that's extremely scant). You are essentially faulting DiMaggio for missing 8 games when the fact that there was a 154 game schedule as opposed to the modern 162 game schedule, was completely out of his control.

Also, to say that their defensive ability is close is a joke. Perhaps DiMaggio was not as as good as his legend suggests (though even your hero Bill James believes DiMaggio would have won a number of Gold Gloves), but he was still a good defensive CFer, if not great for a period, while Jackson was at best a good RFer for a short period. That is a huge difference.

DiMaggio was also killed by his home park. Put him in another home stadium, and his numbers probably become even more impressive. You also have to keep in mind that DiMaggio lost three of his peak years to military service. Imagine what Jackson's career would look like if say he was serving for three years of his prime. Perhaps DiMaggio's best season would have come during that three year stretch. It's entirely possible given that it was his prime and was only 27. So you're comparing the prime of one player to the interrupted prime of another. Doesn't seem quite fair.

[RuthMayBond]

Ruth-1919, 1920, 1921, 1923, 1924, 1926, 1928, 1929

Eight years, the same amount.Who did you have in '27, '30 and '31?

[538280]

That's not that compelling of an argument. In the context of total games in the season, Jackson actually only played 5 more games that were available to him than DiMaggio did in this one year comparison (in that Jackson missed 10 of his teams games while DiMaggio missed 15; that's extremely scant). You are essentially faulting DiMaggio for missing 8 games when the fact that there was a 154 game schedule as opposed to the modern 162 game schedule, was completely out of his control.

Good point. That is true. He still played five more games, which is moderately significant, but not nearly as significant as 13.


Also, to say that their defensive ability is close is a joke. Perhaps DiMaggio was not as as good as his legend suggests (though even your hero Bill James believes DiMaggio would have won a number of Gold Gloves), but he was still a good defensive CFer, if not great for a period, while Jackson was at best a good RFer for a short period. That is a huge difference.

Bill James, my hero? I don't know, I like to read him, and I do tend to agree with him but my opinions aren't the same as his. He has DiMaggio at #13 all time and #12 amongst position players. I don't see how you come up with that.

Jackson, "at best a good RFer for a short period"? No way. Reggie was an outstading RFer for nine years, 1968-1976. Starting with his Yankee years his defense started to decline. DiMaggio was a good, but not great defensive CFer. I agree DiMag has more defensive value, but it's not a complete landslide.


DiMaggio was also killed by his home park. Put him in another home stadium, and his numbers probably become even more impressive.

That is a myth, completely. Did you see the Yankee Stadium HR factors?


You also have to keep in mind that DiMaggio lost three of his peak years to military service. Imagine what Jackson's career would look like if say he was serving for three years of his prime. Perhaps DiMaggio's best season would have come during that three year stretch. It's entirely possible given that it was his prime and was only 27. So you're comparing the prime of one player to the interrupted prime of another. Doesn't seem quite fair.

It is completely unreasonable to give DiMaggio credit for having his best seasons. IMO, the best way to do war credit is to assume he'd play at a similar level to the years before and after, and maybe dock it a little because it's all hypothetical. I don't give players any more than the probable performance during the war, and I never give them credit for having one of their best seasons.

[leecemark]

--While I give credit for longevity I don't give any credit for actual counting stats. I look at rate + PA. For the war generation guys I give them an extra 500 PA per season missed, which probably slightly shortchanges most of them but it does save me from guessing what their production might have been.

[538280]

Who did you have in '27, '30 and '31?

'27 I have Gehrig, '30 I have Gehrig again, and '31 I have Grove.

It's not like I'm cheating Ruth off seasons where he's real close, while not doing the same for Schmidt. Schmidt has a case in '77 (I have Dave Parker), '79 (I have Dave Winfield), and '85 (I have Tim Raines).

[DoubleX]

It is completely unreasonable to give DiMaggio credit for having his best seasons. IMO, the best way to do war credit is to assume he'd play at a similar level to the years before and after, and maybe dock it a little because it's all hypothetical. I don't give players any more than the probable performance during the war, and I never give them credit for having one of their best seasons.

But it is completely possible that DiMaggio could have had his best season during the three years he missed. He was only 27 when he left for the war. Again, imagine if Jackson had to sacrifice three years of his prime. It also can't be that easy to have a three year layoff and then come back and play at a high level, as DiMaggio and so many other players did. I'm in awe of these guys that they could go off like that, and come back and play like they never left.

As for DiMaggio being killed by Yankee Stadium...I don't have the splits in front of me, but I know plenty of people have posted them and it would appear that DiMaggio performed better on the road.

[DodgerBlue81]

DiMaggio was also killed by his home park. Put him in another home stadium, and his numbers probably become even more impressive. You also have to keep in mind that DiMaggio lost three of his peak years to military service. Imagine what Jackson's career would look like if say he was serving for three years of his prime. Perhaps DiMaggio's best season would have come during that three year stretch. It's entirely possible given that it was his prime and was only 27. So you're comparing the prime of one player to the interrupted prime of another. Doesn't seem quite fair.

I forgot to mention the war. And it is not a myth about Yankee Stadium favoring left-handed hitters; it still does, and it did even more so back then.

Here are the outfield distances and it says that left-center was once called "Death Valley."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yankee_Stadium

Yankee Stadium 1937-1973
Straightaway LF, corner of main stand - 402 ft. - left of bullpen
Straightaway LF, corner of bleachers - 415 ft. - right of bullpen
Deep Left Center - 457 ft.
Center Field - 461 ft.
Right Center - 407 ft.
Straightaway RF, corner of bleachers - 367 ft. - left of bullpen
Straightaway RF, near corner of main stand - 344 ft. - right of bullpen

[DoubleX]

I'm bored, so here are the players in my top 50. I didn't feel like going through the rankings, so I just listed them by position. I also don't include 19th Century players and Negro Leaguers in my rankings.

Catcher (5)
Johnny Bench
Yogi Berra
Mike Piazza
Roy Campanella
Mickey Cochrane

First Base (5)
Lou Gehrig
Jimmie Foxx
Johnny Mize
Hank Greenberg
Frank Thomas
Eddie Murray

Second Base (7)
Rogers Hornsby
Joe Morgan
Eddie Collins
Napoleon Lajoie
Jackie Robinson
Ryne Sandberg
Charlie Gehringer

Shortstop (5)
Honus Wagner
Alex Rodriguez
Cal Ripken Jr
Arky Vaughan
Ernie Banks

Third Base (4)
Mike Schmidt
George Brett
Wade Boggs
Eddie Mathews

Left Field (7)
Ted Williams
Barry Bonds
Stan Musial
Rickey Henderson
Carl Yastrzemski
Pete Rose
Al Simmons

Center Field (6)
Willie Mays
Ty Cobb
Mickey Mantle
Tris Speaker
Joe DiMaggio
Ken Griffey Jr

Right Field (9)
Babe Ruth
Hank Aaron
Frank Robinson
Mel Ott
Tony Gwynn
Roberto Clemente
Al Kaline
Reggie Jackson
Sam Crawford

I've only listed 49, so the 50th is a toss-up between:
Ivan Rodriguez
Willie McCovey
Harmon Killebrew
Jeff Bagwell
Rod Carew
Robin Yount
Duke Snider

[SABR Matt]

I was asked to give PCA numbers for DiMaggio and Reggie Jackson...

Caveat #1 - Specifically when it comes to defense, there is some margin for error abd U gave a few theories about possible error sources.

Caveat #2 - I give no credit at all to players for missing time due to WWII...it's up to you whether you think that should be done...it significantly impacts ratings in the case of Joltin' Joe.

All PCA ratings are now normalized so both the league averages and the standard deviations of win scoring performance are factored in. League quality however, is not fully considered.

DECODER:

PBA: (PCA-Batting Average) A representation of the player's placement on the bell curve of performance where .270 is the average level of performance (determined by finding the distribution of batting averages for player/seasons with at least 100 AB). A good player is over .290 or .300 just like it is with batting averages.

GI: (Greatness Index) This is much discussed in the History forum...it's my method for combining longevity, peak dominance, efficiency, and the shape of a player's career into a metric designed to measure his overall greatness and balance those elements.

For more info on what the elements in the GI are and how they're calculated, see the explanation here: http://athomeplate.com/posadjust1.shtml

DiMaggio's offensive career:

Yr PA Wins PBA
1936 668 7.16 0.297
1937 692 13.30 0.350
1938 660 9.15 0.317
1939 524 11.77 0.369
1940 572 11.47 0.355
1941 621 13.95 0.370
1942 680 8.81 0.311
1946 567 6.81 0.305
1947 601 10.49 0.339
1948 669 11.84 0.340
1949 329 7.84 0.378
1950 606 10.17 0.335
1951 482 4.54 0.289

Career PBA: .333 (7671 PA)
Offensive GI Summary
First Last Ps Rank CAREER RATE PEAK RANGE TOTAL
Joe DiMaggio CF 36 127.30 142.05 33.36 14.27 316.98

Reggie Jackson's Offensive Career:

Yr PA Wins PBA
1967 135 0.39 0.249
1968 614 6.92 0.301
1969 677 15.85 0.375
1970 514 4.80 0.289
1971 642 8.82 0.316
1972 572 7.63 0.313
1973 629 14.47 0.373
1974 604 13.29 0.367
1975 669 9.17 0.316
1976 558 9.08 0.331
1977 606 11.73 0.350
1978 581 7.93 0.315
1979 537 7.99 0.323
1980 601 12.26 0.357
1981 382 2.56 0.272
1982 621 7.67 0.307
1983 458 0.86 0.243
1984 584 3.07 0.264
1985 541 5.67 0.296
1986 517 4.42 0.284
1987 374 1.66 0.259

Career PBA: .315 (11416)
Offensive GI Summary
First Last Ps Rank CAREER RATE PEAK RANGE TOTAL
Reggie Jackson RF 22 156.24 136.86 33.65 27.09 353.84

DiMaggio was clearly a "better" hitter, but Jackson outranks him by the GI on offense due to his much longer career. I agree with the sentiment that peak excellence is extremely important but there comes a point where you can't ignore the difference in playing time.

Joe DiMaggio's Defensive Career:

Yr Ps PRG Wins PBA
1936 CF 53 0.80 0.264
1936 LF 70 1.90 0.347
1936 RF 20 0.42 0.303
1937 CF 151 4.76 0.324
1938 CF 147 2.99 0.283
1939 CF 119 2.95 0.299
1940 CF 136 2.25 0.269
1941 CF 142 4.52 0.325
1942 CF 154 2.74 0.273
1946 CF 127 2.83 0.29
1947 CF 136 0.32 0.217
1948 CF 148 4.75 0.326
1949 CF 77 1.63 0.286
1950 1B 1 0.00 0.216
1950 CF 140 2.21 0.266
1951 CF 114 0.95 0.239

Career Defensive PBA: .286 (in 1735 PRGs)
Defensive GI summary
First Last Ps Rank CAREER RATE PEAK RANGE TOTAL
Joe DiMaggio CF 26 36.02 40.50 3.50 5.78 85.80

26th out of 210 CFers in defensive GI...for a guy with such a sterling defensive reputation I am finding it hard to think of him as an elite fielder. Caveat #1 applies here though...there are possible explanations for how he could have been a great fielder and had it not show up here.

Reggie Jackson's Defensive Career:

Yr Ps PRG Wins PBA
1967 CF 2 0.03 0.265
1967 LF 15 0.26 0.299
1967 RF 12 0.12 0.257
1968 CF 7 0.09 0.257
1968 RF 142 1.42 0.256
1969 CF 8 0.09 0.251
1969 RF 141 1.12 0.246
1970 CF 34 0.56 0.269
1970 RF 88 1.48 0.285
1971 CF 2 0.03 0.266
1971 RF 135 2.88 0.305
1972 CF 85 1.15 0.258
1972 RF 42 1.22 0.339
1973 RF 131 1.92 0.276
1974 CF 2 0.07 0.334
1974 RF 123 3.2 0.326
1975 RF 143 2.34 0.283
1976 CF 13 0.26 0.281
1976 RF 109 1.91 0.288
1977 RF 115 1.65 0.274
1978 RF 96 0.71 0.244
1979 RF 126 0.65 0.234
1980 RF 85 0.44 0.234
1981 RF 51 1.35 0.328
1982 RF 109 0.20 0.220
1983 RF 34 0.17 0.233
1984 RF 3 0.04 0.267
1985 RF 55 0.72 0.269
1986 RF 3 0.00 0.213
1987 RF 15 0.08 0.236

Career Defensive PBA: .270 (1926 PRGs)
Defensive GI Summary
First Last Ps Rank CAREER RATE PEAK RANGE TOTAL
Reggie Jackson RF 31 26.16 27.15 1.64 5.50 60.45

Eeehh...there was a time in his career when he was in fact an outstanding fielder...it all comes out in the wash by the end because he finished extremely poorly, leading to a career PBA that is dead-smack average (.270 is the the all-time average figure with these PBA numbers). Despite a LONG career, his GI comes out looking pretty darned unimpressive, all things considering. 31st isn't terrible by any stretch of the imagination, but it's clear DiMaggio is a better fielder.

Add it up and DiMaggio comes out slightly behind Jackson by the overall GI (414.3 Total GI to 402.8...25th in overall rank to 28th)

[DoubleX]

Caveat #2 - I give no credit at all to players for missing time due to WWII...it's up to you whether you think that should be done...it significantly impacts ratings in the case of Joltin' Joe.

Was this done because it made the project and comparison statistically easier, and/or do you feel that in the interest of strict objectivity, no credit should be given to WWII in all circumstances for affected players?

[leecemark]

--Actually 26th of 210 qualifying CFers for DiMaggio sounds pretty good to me. I never thought DiMaggio was a candidate for best defensive CF ever or anything, but your rankings seem to agree with my own ranking him as very good on an all time scale. I also agree thar DiMaggio was a better player than Jackson at his best (I don't think that is especially close or disputable), but that Jackson accumulated more career value.

[SABR Matt]

I chose to pass on creditting players for wartime seasons because I have no way of knowing how much credit should be given and any such creditting would be strictly a guess. In the interest of objectivity I left it out, but if any of you feel it should be included, you are certainly welcome to that position and that will obviously adjust your view of the statistics I presented.

[STLCards2]

50. Arkie Vaughn
49. Al Kaline
48. Turkey Sterns
47. Pete Rose
46. Jackie Robinson
45. Mickey Cochrane
44. Harry Heilmann
43. Sam Crawford
42. George Sisler
41. Eddie Mathews
40. Cal Ripken Jr.
39. Ken Griffey Jr.
38. Tony Gwynn
37. Charlie Gehringer
36. Carl Yastremzki
35. George Brett
34. Hank Greenberg
33. Al Simmons
32. Martin Dihigo
31. Pop Lloyd
30. Joe Morgan
29. Yogi Berra
28. Ed Delehanty
27. Alex Rodriguez
26. Joe Jackson
25. Cap Anson
24. Mel Ott
23. Nap Lajoie
22. Rickey Henderson
21. Dan Brouthers
20. Frank Robinson
19. Johnny Bench
18. Mike Schmidt
17. Joe Dimaggio
16. Oscar Charleston
15. Jimmy Foxx
14. Eddie Collins
13. Barry Bonds
12. Tris Speaker
11. Mickey Mantle
10. Josh Gibson
9. Rogers Hornsby
8. Stan Musial
7. Hank Aaron
6. Lou Gehrig
5. Honus Wagner
4. Ted Williams
3. Willie Mays
2. Ty Cobb
1. Babe Ruth

[DoubleX]

I chose to pass on creditting players for wartime seasons because I have no way of knowing how much credit should be given and any such creditting would be strictly a guess. In the interest of objectivity I left it out, but if any of you feel it should be included, you are certainly welcome to that position and that will obviously adjust your view of the statistics I presented.

I actually meant if you left out war years just because of the interest of objectivity in this project, or if you generally don't give credit for war years? Sorry if I wasn't clearer.

[ElHalo]

My list... ish (recently updated to reflect a drop for George Sisler):

1. Ruth
2. Cobb
3. Mays
4. Hornsby
5. Gehrig
6. Wagner
7. Speaker
8. Williams
9. Mantle
10. J. Jackson
11. Musial
12. Lajoie
13. Foxx
14. J. Gibson
15. DiMaggio
16. Berra
17. Bench
18. Collins
19. A. Rodriguez
20. Aaron
21. Delahanty
22. F. Robinson
23. Henderson
24. Sisler
25. Cochrane
26. Gehringer
27. Ott
28. Simmons
29. Bell
30. Charleston
31. Dickey
32. I. Rodriguez
33. Mize
34. Waner
35. Vaughan
36. Kaline
37. Crawford
38. Piazza
39. Traynor
40. Griffey, Jr.
41. Cronin
42. Schmidt
43. Heilmann
44. Boggs
45. F. Thomas
46. Brett
47. Klein
48. Terry
49. Ashburn
50. Bagwell

[ElHalo]

Where on earth is Joe Morgan?

Joe can't quite crack my top 50 either, though he'd probably make my top 60 (behind such other not-quites as Ramirez and Kiner).

[iPod]

That is a myth, completely. Did you see the Yankee Stadium HR factors?


Right handers hit more HR at Yankee Stadium because they saw their only saving grace as being the short porch in left, so they pulled everything toward it. DiMaggio realized that becoming a pull hitter was a waste of his talents, so he used a more balanced batting approach. Move him into a normal park, and his approach would still be balanced. Thus, the difference between his performance is that more of his deep fly balls clear the fence. He would lose HR's on fly balls along the porches, and gain a lot more HR's on fly balls to the alleys that were outs in YS.

[leecemark]

--My order is always in flux, but the top 50 by position;
C: Bench, Berra, Gibson, Piazza, Cochrane
1B: Gehrig, Foxx, Anson, Murray, Greenberg, Mize, Killebrew, McCovey
2B: Morgan, Collins, Hornsby, Lajoie, Gehringer, Robinson, Carew
3B: Schmidt, Mathews, Brett, Boggs
SS: Wagner, Rodriguez, Lloyd, Ripken, Vaughan
LF: Williams, Bonds, Musial, Henderson, Yaz, Stearnes, Delahanty
CF: Mays, Mantle, Cobb, Speaker, Charleston, DiMaggio, Griffey, Snider
RF: Ruth, Aaron, Robinson, Jackson, Ott, Crawford
--Toughest cut; Rose, Yount or Gwynn. Really the 40-60 spots are going to be close enough it could be different next. The next team by psoition
C: Hartnett (or Fisk or Rodriguez or Ewing)
1B: Bagwell (or Brouthers or Thomas)
2B: Frisch
3B: Santo
SS: Yount
LF: Rose - although he could go anywhere
CF: Hamilton
RF: Gwynn

[cbenson5]

Ruth-1919, 1920, 1921, 1923, 1924, 1926, 1928, 1929

Eight years, the same amount.

Cobb-1907, 1908, 1910, 1915, 1917

Five years. Speaker and Collins usually take the others.

Had some free time and started looking at some old posts. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on other years though I do have my arguments, but how is Ty Cobb not the best player in 1909 and 1911.

In 1909 Ty Cobb was the first ever Triple Crown (post 1901) and Chalmers (MVP) award winner.

Ty Cobb stats and MAJOR LEAGUE ranks in 1909

Runs 116- 2'nd
Hits 216- 1'st
Hr 9- 1'st
RBI 107- 1'st
TB 296- 1'st
SB 76- 1'st
On Base Percentage .415- 1'st
Slugging Percentage .517 1'st
Batting Average .377- 1'st

In 1911:

Runs 147 - 1st
Hits 248- 1'st
HR 8- 12'th
RBI's 127- 1'st
TB- 367- 1'st
SB- 83- 1'st
OBP .459 2'nd
SLugging .621- 1'st
Batting Average .420 1'st

There are other years where I think Ty Cobb was also the best but these two years are glaring omissions from your list. Who was the "best" player in these years in your mind and HOW!

[Honus Wagner]

Had some free time and started looking at some old posts. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on other years though I do have my arguments, but how is Ty Cobb not the best player in 1909 and 1911.

In 1909 Ty Cobb was the first ever Triple Crown (post 1901) and Chalmers (MVP) award winner.

Ty Cobb stats and MAJOR LEAGUE ranks in 1909

Runs 116- 2'nd
Hits 216- 1'st
Hr 9- 1'st
RBI 107- 1'st
TB 296- 1'st
SB 76- 1'st
On Base Percentage .415- 1'st
Slugging Percentage .517 1'st
Batting Average .377- 1'st

In 1911:

Runs 147 - 1st
Hits 248- 1'st
HR 8- 12'th
RBI's 127- 1'st
TB- 367- 1'st
SB- 83- 1'st
OBP .459 2'nd
SLugging .621- 1'st
Batting Average .420 1'st

There are other years where I think Ty Cobb was also the best but these two years are glaring omissions from your list. Who was the "best" player in these years in your mind and HOW!

For positional players, Total Baseball ranks Eddie Collins slighlty above Cobb
Cobb's Fielding % under .950
Collins nearly .970

For all players in 1909, Christy Mathewson wins out as POY

1911, Cobb is #1, barely edging Shoeless Joe, Mathewson, Smokey Joe Wood, Walter Johnson and Ed Walsh

[cbenson5]

To be honest I was only thinking of position players. IMO that is putting a lot of emphasis on defense because Cobb easily beat Collins in every offensive category. I don't see how Collins .20 fielding percentage points makes up for Cobb outdoing Collins by these numbers offensively:
12 runs scored
18 hits
6 home runs
61 RBI's
39 total bases
9 stolen bases
.12 On base Percentage points
.77 Slugging Percentage points
.30 Batting Average points

Especially in the RBI category that is a major advantage.

[leecemark]

--I don't think the FP difference is the biggest issue placing Collins ahead of Cobb defensively (although Collins having a significantly better fielding percent while playing a tougher position is impressive). Collins was a top notch secomdbaseman, while Cobb was patrolling RF at the time.

[ivylover]

wheres Sandberg?

[mtortolero]

I chose to pass on creditting players for wartime seasons because I have no way of knowing how much credit should be given and any such creditting would be strictly a guess. In the interest of objectivity I left it out, but if any of you feel it should be included, you are certainly welcome to that position and that will obviously adjust your view of the statistics I presented.

An alternative way to compensate a player who loss part of his prime years , as Williams, Musial, Greenberg, DiMaggio or Mize by WWII in a comparison with other player is take out of the other player those years (using his equal season by age).
What happens with Jackson if the numbers from 1974 to 1976 are not used to compare him to DiMaggio? I think he suffers a lot.
Other thing is that from 1973 to the end of his carrer Jackson was resting from time in time during the season doing AB as DH , 630 games in 2820 games is 22%). DiMaggio never had that kind of rest, easy games to play as I call, during his carrer. Is not this a plus for Dimaggio when you talk about longevity?

[Senor Octobre]

An alternative way to compensate a player who loss part of his prime years , as Williams, Musial, Greenberg, DiMaggio or Mize by WWII in a comparison with other player is take out of the other player those years (using his equal season by age).
What happens with Jackson if the numbers from 1974 to 1976 are not used to compare him to DiMaggio? I think he suffers a lot.
Other thing is that from 1973 to the end of his carrer Jackson was resting from time in time during the season doing AB as DH , 630 games in 2820 games is 22%). DiMaggio never had that kind of rest, easy games to play as I call, during his carrer. Is not this a plus for Dimaggio when you talk about longevity?

agree with this and more. i really don't see any argument for reggie being better than dimaggio. I'll take it one step further and and say that it stumps me why we're even discussing this. reggie doesn't even make my top 50, and minus the postseason heroics, he probably wouldn't even make my top 100.

[538280]

Had some free time and started looking at some old posts. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on other years though I do have my arguments, but how is Ty Cobb not the best player in 1909 and 1911.

In 1909 Ty Cobb was the first ever Triple Crown (post 1901) and Chalmers (MVP) award winner.

Ty Cobb stats and MAJOR LEAGUE ranks in 1909

Runs 116- 2'nd
Hits 216- 1'st
Hr 9- 1'st
RBI 107- 1'st
TB 296- 1'st
SB 76- 1'st
On Base Percentage .415- 1'st
Slugging Percentage .517 1'st
Batting Average .377- 1'st

1909 I have Collins. Cobb was probably a better hitter, though the advantage is not so pronounced. Eddie was 2nd or third in most of those stats you reference. Then there's the fact Collins was a 2B, making his offense a bit more valuable (even in that era when 2B wasn't as important), and the fact that he was a better defensive player. That's one's clost but I like Eddie. 2B>RF.


In 1911:

Runs 147 - 1st
Hits 248- 1'st
HR 8- 12'th
RBI's 127- 1'st
TB- 367- 1'st
SB- 83- 1'st
OBP .459 2'nd
SLugging .621- 1'st
Batting Average .420 1'st

There are other years where I think Ty Cobb was also the best but these two years are glaring omissions from your list. Who was the "best" player in these years in your mind and HOW!

1911 I had Walter Johnson. I usually don't like including pitchers, but for the "best player in the league" I think it can be appropriate.

[538280]

DiMaggio's offensive career:

Yr PA Wins PBA
1936 668 7.16 0.297
1937 692 13.30 0.350
1938 660 9.15 0.317
1939 524 11.77 0.369
1940 572 11.47 0.355
1941 621 13.95 0.370
1942 680 8.81 0.311
1946 567 6.81 0.305
1947 601 10.49 0.339
1948 669 11.84 0.340
1949 329 7.84 0.378
1950 606 10.17 0.335
1951 482 4.54 0.289

Career PBA: .333 (7671 PA)
Offensive GI Summary
First Last Ps Rank CAREER RATE PEAK RANGE TOTAL
Joe DiMaggio CF 36 127.30 142.05 33.36 14.27 316.98

Reggie Jackson's Offensive Career:

Yr PA Wins PBA
1967 135 0.39 0.249
1968 614 6.92 0.301
1969 677 15.85 0.375
1970 514 4.80 0.289
1971 642 8.82 0.316
1972 572 7.63 0.313
1973 629 14.47 0.373
1974 604 13.29 0.367
1975 669 9.17 0.316
1976 558 9.08 0.331
1977 606 11.73 0.350
1978 581 7.93 0.315
1979 537 7.99 0.323
1980 601 12.26 0.357
1981 382 2.56 0.272
1982 621 7.67 0.307
1983 458 0.86 0.243
1984 584 3.07 0.264
1985 541 5.67 0.296
1986 517 4.42 0.284
1987 374 1.66 0.259

Career PBA: .315 (11416)
Offensive GI Summary
First Last Ps Rank CAREER RATE PEAK RANGE TOTAL
Reggie Jackson RF 22 156.24 136.86 33.65 27.09 353.84

DiMaggio was clearly a "better" hitter, but Jackson outranks him by the GI on offense due to his much longer career. I agree with the sentiment that peak excellence is extremely important but there comes a point where you can't ignore the difference in playing time.

Wait a minute, Matt. I was just looking at this comparison a bit. I fail to see how DiMaggio by this is "quite clearly" the better hitter. DiMaggio's career figure is .333, that's with a much shorter career and basically no decline. Reggie's is .315, not very significantly worse, and that's with a very long career and a pretty long decline too (of which even when you take it off Reggie still has a longer career). What would Reggie's be taking out 1983-1987? I'm guessing it would be pretty close to the .333. And as far as peak...this is what your data shows for 5 year peak...

Jackson-15,85, 14.47, 13.29, 12.26, 11.73
DiMaggio-13.95, 13.30, 11.84, 11.77, 11.47

So I really have to ask here...how exactly is DiMaggio clearly a better hitter?

[Honus Wagner]

1. Ruth
2. Cobb
3. Mays
4. Hornsby
5. Wagner
6. Speaker
7. Williams
8. Gehrig
9. Aaron
10. Foxx
11. Frank Robinson
12. Ott
13. Anson
14. Lajoie
15. Mantle
16. Collins
17. Brouthers
18. Musial
19. Dimaggio
20. Josh Gibson
21. Paul Waner
22. Cochrane
23. Delahanty
24. Gehringer
25. Berra
26. Clemente
27. Bench
28. Shoeless Joe
29. Sisler
30. Dahlen
31. Simmons
32. Cool Papa Bell
33. Charleston
34. Frisch
35. Dickey
36. Mize
37. Terry
38. Kaline
39. Crawford
40. Traynor
41. Cronin
42. Greenberg
43. Eddie Mathews
44. Jackie Robinson
45. Killebrew
46. Schmidt
47. Campanella
48. Joe Morgan
49. Home Run Baker
50. McCovey
51. Stargell
52. Reggie
53. Yaz
54. Pete Rose
55. Kiner
56. York
57. George Davis
58. Appling
59. Ashburn
60. Doby
61. Boudreau

[Skin & Bones]

Cobb's overrated on these boards. He's NOT the second best player all-time. Mays, Mantle, Bonds ( taking his entire career at face-value), and ted williams are better. A case could easily be made for Aaron and wagner too.

[cbenson5]

1909 I have Collins. Cobb was probably a better hitter, though the advantage is not so pronounced. Eddie was 2nd or third in most of those stats you reference. Then there's the fact Collins was a 2B, making his offense a bit more valuable (even in that era when 2B wasn't as important), and the fact that he was a better defensive player. That's one's clost but I like Eddie. 2B>RF.



1911 I had Walter Johnson. I usually don't like including pitchers, but for the "best player in the league" I think it can be appropriate.


Ok, fair enough. I always separate pitchers and position players when doing rankings, so I wasn't considering pitchers. I probably don't weigh position adjustments as heavily as most when discussing something like this. Anyway, I was just curious as to your opinions on these years.

[mtortolero]

For comparison's sake, my top 50 (in order though, I don't do the alphabetical thing):

1.Willie Mays
2.Babe Ruth
3.Barry Bonds
4.Hank Aaron
5.Mike Schmidt
6.Oscar Charleston
7.Honus Wagner
8.Mickey Mantle
9.Ted Williams
10.Ty Cobb
11.Joe Morgan
12.Lou Gehrig
13.Josh Gibson
14.Rickey Henderson
15.Tris Speaker
16.Eddie Collins
17.Stan Musial
18.Frank Robinson
19.Johnny Bench
20.Pop Lloyd
21.Rogers Hornsby
22.Arky Vaughan
23.Christobal Torriente
24.Eddie Mathews
25.Alex Rodriguez
26.Reggie Jackson
27.Joe DiMaggio
28.Jimmie Foxx
29.Frank Thomas
30.Jeff Bagwell
31.Jackie Robinson
32.George Brett
33.Turkey Stearnes
34.Mel Ott
35.Pete Rose
36.Yogi Berra
37.Nap Lajoie
38.Tony Gwynn
39.Tim Raines
40.Ron Santo
41.Willie McCovey
42.Robin Yount
43.Charlie Gehringer
44.Sam Crawford
45.Gary Sheffield
46.Mike Piazza
47.Carl Yastrzemski
48.Wade Boggs
49.Mickey Cochrane
50.Willie Stargell

In this list Ron Santo appears as #40 all time (eight spots ahead of Wade Boggs?) but I understand from the Underarted Players thread that this is not your current list, isn´t?

[538280]

In this list Ron Santo appears as #40 all time (eight spots ahead of Wade Boggs?) but I understand from the Underarted Players thread that this is not your current list, isn´t?

It is not. That was before I came up with my new rating system. This is my new top 50, which is based exclusively on that rating system:

1.Willie Mays
2.Babe Ruth
3.Barry Bonds
4.Honus Wagner
5.Mickey Mantle
6.Oscar Charleston
7.Ty Cobb
8.Joe Morgan
9.Hank Aaron
10.Ted Williams
11.Rickey Henderson
12.Mike Schmidt
13.Josh Gibson
14.Stan Musial
15.Tris Speaker
16.Lou Gehrig
17.Frank Robinson
18.Rogers Hornsby
19.Eddie Collins
20.Pop Lloyd
21.Nap Lajoie
22.Johnny Bench
23.Cal Ripken
24.Alex Rodriguez
25.Eddie Mathews
26.Arky Vaughan
27.George Brett
28.Frank Thomas
29.Robin Yount
30.Reggie Jackson
31.Willie McCovey
32.Mike Piazza
33.Christobal Torriente
34.Carl Yastrzemski
35.Jeff Bagwell
36.Jimmie Foxx
37.Joe DiMaggio
38.Pete Rose
39.Turkey Stearnes
40.Mel Ott
41.Tim Raines
42.Jackie Robinson
43.Yogi Berra
44.Dick Allen
45.Gary Carter
46.Roberto Alomar
47.Ed Delahanty
48.Carlton Fisk
49.Tony Gwynn
50.Craig Biggio

[Da Penguin]

1.Ty Cobb
2.Willie Mays
3.Honus Wagner
4.Babe Ruth
5.Hank Aaron
6.Jackie Robinson
7.Mickey Mantle
8.Ted Williams
9.Pete Rose
10.Lou Gehrig
11.Joe Dimagio
12.Brooks Robinson
13.Stan Musial
14.Roberto Clemente
15.Yaz
16.Ken Griffey Jr.
17.Reggie Jackson
18.Ozzie Smith
19.Mike Schmidt
20.Eddie Matthews
21.Lou Brock
22.Harmon Killebrew
23.Johnny Bench
24.Pudge
25.Joe Morgan

Well, like it or not it's my opinion ...feel free to pick it to peices like i figure u will.

[Skin & Bones]

Too High: Cobb, Robinson( Both J and B), Rose, Dimaggio, Yaz, Clemente, Griffey, Reggie, Smith, Brock, Killebrew, Bench, Pudge.

Too Low: Morgan, Schmidt, Ruth ( to not have him number 1 or 2 all-time is ridiculous, IMO).

I also can't believe you left off Frank Robinson and Barry Bonds. These guy's don't even crack your top 25, but guy's like Brock and Smith do ???

[cbenson5]

My top 25:

1. Ty Cobb
2. Honus Wagner
3. Babe Ruth
4. Tris Speaker
5. Rogers Hornsby
6. Willie Mays
7. Mickey Mantle
8. Joe Dimaggio
9. Eddie Collins
10. Hank Aaron
11. Mike Schmidt
12. Lou Gehrig
13. Johnny Bench
14. Stan Musial
15. Ted Williams
16. Jimmie Foxx
17. Nap Lajoie
18. Joe Jackson
19. Mel Ott
20. Eddie Mathews
21. Roberto Clement
22. Paul Waner
23. George Sisler
24. Arky Vaughan
25. Pete Rose

[Skin & Bones]

My top 25:

1. Ty Cobb
2. Honus Wagner
3. Babe Ruth
4. Tris Speaker
5. Rogers Hornsby
6. Willie Mays
7. Mickey Mantle
8. Joe Dimaggio
9. Eddie Collins
10. Hank Aaron
11. Mike Schmidt
12. Lou Gehrig
13. Johnny Bench
14. Stan Musial
15. Ted Williams
16. Jimmie Foxx
17. Nap Lajoie
18. Joe Jackson
19. Mel Ott
20. Eddie Mathews
21. Roberto Clement
22. Paul Waner
23. George Sisler
24. Arky Vaughan
25. Pete Rose

Dude you really underrate Mays and Mantle. And aaron at number 10 is something I cannot fathom. That's a huge flaw. And you overrate Sisler and Jackson, others too, but them the most. And again, why leave out Robinson and Bonds ????

[cbenson5]

Dude you really underrate Mays and Mantle. And aaron at number 10 is something I cannot fathom. That's a huge flaw. And you overrate Sisler and Jackson, others too, but them the most. And again, why leave out Robinson and Bonds ????


Do you think Aaron is too high or too low. Which Robinson Jackie or Frank, and I don't include active players in my ranking. I wait until a few years after they retire to fully consider them, but Bonds will likely be top 5. I'm open to Sisler being too high but I like where I have Jackson.

[Skin & Bones]

Do you think Aaron is too high or too low. Which Robinson Jackie or Frank, and I don't include active players in my ranking. I wait until a few years after they retire to fully consider them, but Bonds will likely be top 5.

Aaron's too low. A case could be made that he's a top five player all-time, even better than your beloved Cobb. And I'm talking about Frank Robinson, who's career numbers are incredible. I also noticed you left off Joe Morgan who's arguably the greatest 2B ever.

[cbenson5]

Aaron's too low. A case could be made that he's a top five player all-time, even better than your beloved Cobb. And I'm talking about Frank Robinson, who's career numbers are incredible. I also noticed you left off Joe Morgan who's arguably the greatest 2B ever.

I'd be open to putting him above Collins, but don't see the argument for putting him any higher. Aaron's slugging is only .43 points higher than Cobb's who played in the deadball era. And Cobb's on base percentage and average are much higher then Aaron's. I think Cobb is better hitter and fielder than Aaron, and he clearly has Aaron beat in baserunnning. I don't really see much case for Aaron over Cobb. Frank Robinson is next on my lsit at 26. What is your top 25 or 50.

[Skin & Bones]

I'd be open to putting him above Collins, but don't see the argument for putting him any higher. Frank Robinson is next on my lsit at 26. What is your top 25 or 50.

We'll have to agree to disagree on both Aaron and Frank Robinson. As for my top 25 or 50, I never really took the time to make one, nor do I plan to in the future. But off of the top of my head...Ruth, Mays, Barry, Mantle, Wagner, Williams, Cobb, Aaron, Speaker, Musial. This is just off the top of my head. Maybe I forgot someone who should be on the list.

[Skin & Bones]

And Cobb's on base percentage and average are much higher then Aaron's. I think Cobb is better hitter and fielder than Aaron, and he clearly has Aaron beat in baserunnning. I don't really see much case for Aaron over Cobb.

There's no evidence that Cobb was a better fielder than Aaron. The most " advanced " fielding metrics that date back to that time sees Aaron as better. BP's FRAA sees aaron at 82, and Cobb at -25. Aaron did more good with his glove than bad throughout his career, Cobb the complete opposite. As for hitting, I agree Cobb is slightly better, but it's not a big difference at all. Peak Cobb was slightly better, but career-wise aaron has better counting stats. So it's apples and oranges really. Both were great, none clearly better than the other.

[soberdennis]

As with the various positions, I am just going with who I 've seen in 42 years of following the game. I had to shuffle some and There are a few I hate to leave off, but here's my top 20.
1. Willie Mays
2. Roberto Clemente
3.Hank Aaron
4. Mickey Mantle
5. Frank Robinson
6. Tony Gwynn
7. Pete Rose
8. Barry Bonds
9. Carl Yaztriemski
10. Alex Rodriguez
11. Johnny Bench
12. Ricky Henderson
13. Joe Morgan
14.Albert Pujols
15. Cal Ripken, Jr.
16. Mike Schmidt
17. Frank Thomas
18. Rod Carew
19. Dave Winfield
20. Andre Dawson

[cbenson5]

Looking at it now, I should probably put Musial higher. Mine are really just off the top of my head as I'm not into formulas. IMO Cobb is number one but I could very well change any of the others.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Aaron did more good with his glove than bad throughout his career, Cobb the complete opposite.

What are you basing this opinion on?

Cobb was extremely unfortunate to play in the same era with other amazing defensive outfielders, so his own defensive greatness was over-shadowed by that. Also, his own amazing hitting and baserunning over-shadowed his own defensive greatness.

[Skin & Bones]

What are you basing this opinion on?

I'm basing this on BP'S FRAA, which is strikingly similar to Bill James new Relative Range Factors.

[Skin & Bones]

Looking at it now, I should probably put Musial higher. Mine are really just off the top of my head as I'm not into formulas. IMO Cobb is number one but I could very well change any of the others.

Well, to each is own I guess. If you want to rate Cobb that high and aaron that low, then so be it.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I'm basing this on BP'S FRAA, which is strikingly similar to Bill James new Relative Range Factors.

And those numbers tell you that Cobb did more bad than good with his glove throughout his career? Would you mind posting those numbers, cause that's a pretty bold statement. Thanks in advance.

[leecemark]

[I] There's no evidence that Cobb was a better fielder than Aaron. The most " advanced " fielding metrics that date back to that time sees Aaron as better. BP's FRAA sees aaron at 82, and Cobb at -25. Aaron did more good with his glove than bad throughout his career, Cobb the complete opposite.

--Randy, he posted the numbers in the same post he made the original statement. I don't neccessarily agree with BP's numbers, but they are what was cited.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

"We'll have to agree to disagree on both Aaron and Frank Robinson. As for my top 25 or 50, I never really took the time to make one, nor do I plan to in the future. But off of the top of my head...Ruth, Mays, Barry, Mantle, Wagner, Williams, Cobb, Aaron, Speaker, Musial. This is just off the top of my head. Maybe I forgot someone who should be on the list."

I can't believe nobody is balking at the thought of ranking Bonds so highly. It's like giving an A++ to a student who cheats.

Bonds is a probable Top 15 player, and certainly a Top 20 player. That's through 1999. As of 2000, the effects of his performance-enhancing drugs were transparent to anyone who watched him on a daily basis, which included me, a resident of Northern California and a life-long Giants fan. To believe he did his second-coming-of-Babe-Ruth routine legitimately, all of a sudden and from out of nowhere at age 35 and thereafter, is not unlike believing in the Tooth Fairy.

Through 1999, the guy is one of the Top 15 or Top 20 players of all time, and for that reason he should get into the Hall in his first year of eligibility... unless you believe he should be penalized with a couple of years in limbo because of his cheating, which I don't. But to put him in the Top 5 is to reward his cheating.

Hell will burn over before I play along with that one.

BHN

[Sultan_1895-1948]

As with the various positions, I am just going with who I 've seen in 42 years of following the game. I had to shuffle some and There are a few I hate to leave off, but here's my top 20.
1. Willie Mays
2. Roberto Clemente
3.Hank Aaron
4. Mickey Mantle
5. Frank Robinson
6. Tony Gwynn
7. Pete Rose
8. Barry Bonds
9. Carl Yaztriemski
10. Alex Rodriguez
11. Johnny Bench
12. Ricky Henderson
13. Joe Morgan
14.Albert Pujols
15. Cal Ripken, Jr.
16. Mike Schmidt
17. Frank Thomas
18. Rod Carew
19. Dave Winfield
20. Andre Dawson

Dennis, why bother posting a list if you're not going to include historical players? Makes it hard to compare or analyze your list with others. Surely you've read books and peer accounts as well as poured over stats from old-time players. Heck, people rank Negro Leaguers and you know the story there. So...It would be nice to get your opinions on everyone. Just my opinion.

[Skin & Bones]

And those numbers tell you that Cobb did more bad than good with his glove throughout his career? Would you mind posting those numbers, cause that's a pretty bold statement. Thanks in advance.

Just go to both of their BP pages.

[Skin & Bones]

"We'll have to agree to disagree on both Aaron and Frank Robinson. As for my top 25 or 50, I never really took the time to make one, nor do I plan to in the future. But off of the top of my head...Ruth, Mays, Barry, Mantle, Wagner, Williams, Cobb, Aaron, Speaker, Musial. This is just off the top of my head. Maybe I forgot someone who should be on the list."

I can't believe nobody is balking at the thought of ranking Bonds so highly. It's like giving an A++ to a student who cheats.

Bonds is a probable Top 15 player, and certainly a Top 20 player. That's through 1999. As of 2000, the effects of his performance-enhancing drugs were transparent to anyone who watched him on a daily basis, which included me, a resident of Northern California and a life-long Giants fan. To believe he did his second-coming-of-Babe-Ruth routine legitimately, all of a sudden and from out of nowhere at age 35 and thereafter, is not unlike believing in the Tooth Fairy.

Through 1999, the guy is one of the Top 15 or Top 20 players of all time, and for that reason he should get into the Hall in his first year of eligibility... unless you believe he should be penalized with a couple of years in limbo because of his cheating, which I don't. But to put him in the Top 5 is to reward his cheating.

Hell will burn over before I play along with that one.

BHN

I didn't necessarily put the players in order, again, it was off the top of my head. If you feel I have Bonds too high, so be it. We apparently have completely different views on the steroids/cheating issue, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't want this thread to morph into a steroids debate.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

"Debate?" OK. Sultan, would you like to debate whether the sun will come up tomorrow?

[soberdennis]

Dennis, why bother posting a list if you're not going to include historical players? Makes it hard to compare or analyze your list with others. Surely you've read books and peer accounts as well as poured over stats from old-time players. Heck, people rank Negro Leaguers and you know the story there. So...It would be nice to get your opinions on everyone. Just my opinion.
I appreciate your opinion. But I'd rather just stick to the ones I've seen.
Do I have an opinion on those from yesteryear. Yes. But I'lll tell you it was difficult enough coming up with the list I made.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

"Debate?" OK. Sultan, would you like to debate whether the sun will come up tomorrow?

Would make just as much sense actually.

And BHN...if you ask me anymore questions like that, I would want you banned :grouchy :D

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Oh, you can't ban me. I'm a big, tough, courageous, unstoppable hacker. :atthepc ;)

Now, where were we?

Roberto Clemente at #2? Boy, talk about a disagreement. I think he's the fourth best right-fielder born in a three-year span, behind Aaron, Robinson and Kaline.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I appreciate your opinion. But I'd rather just stick to the ones I've seen.
Do I have an opinion on those from yesteryear. Yes. But I'lll tell you it was difficult enough coming up with the list I made.

Yeah, it is pretty difficult if you get all serious about each and every spot. Fortunately I don't, so I just have a top 25 or something based more on a tiered system instead of individual spots. And pretty much everyone on there could move around depending on any and all new info/considerations. Could you give it a shot maybe. Nothing concrete. Even ballparking top 5, top 10, top 20, would be cool. Not looking to tear your choices apart just curious about the opinions of others on here, especially someone who has watched as much ball as you have.

[RuthMayBond]

As with the various positions, I am just going with who I 've seen in 42 years of following the game. I had to shuffle some and There are a few I hate to leave off, but here's my top 20.
1. Willie Mays
2. Roberto Clemente
3.Hank Aaron
4. Mickey Mantle
5. Frank Robinson
6. Tony Gwynn
7. Pete Rose
8. Barry Bonds
9. Carl Yaztriemski
10. Alex Rodriguez
11. Johnny Bench
12. Ricky Henderson
13. Joe Morgan
14.Albert Pujols
15. Cal Ripken, Jr.
16. Mike Schmidt
17. Frank Thomas
18. Rod Carew
19. Dave Winfield
20. Andre DawsonWell, it's definitely the highest I've ever seen Clemente, Gwynn, Pujols, Carew, Dawson :eek:

[RuthMayBond]

6.Jackie Robinson
7.Mickey Mantle
8.Ted Williams

9.Pete Rose
10.Lou Gehrig

12.Brooks Robinson
13.Stan Musial

18.Ozzie Smith
19.Mike Schmidt

21.Lou Brock
23.Johnny Bench

24.Pudge
25.Joe Morgan

Well, like it or not it's my opinion ...feel free to pick it to peices like i figure u will.Let's just say it's interesting