Most underrated players in History

[Double Steal]

Dom DiMaggio played behind Ted Williams, Gehrig played under Ruth's shadow until he moved to the Braves, and currently Rafael Palmeiro has been behind Juan Gonzalez, and A-Rod. There are many others, who is the most under rated?...

Discuss....

Show me a guy who can't pitch inside and I'll show you a loser. - Sandy Koufax.
http://www.oregonbaseballcampaign.com

[cubbieinexile]

Barry Bonds is probably the most under rated player in the history of the game, but that is a whole nother discussion.

Following your line of thought I would say Craig Biggio is right up there for most under-rated. I personally think he has been the best second basemen since Ryne Sandberg. But since he plays for Houston and has had sluggers all around him and is not as big of a persona as Alomar he gets forgotten.

I think Goose Gossage in terms of History is under-rated.
Vlad because he plays in Montreal.
Magglio Ordonez is probably under rated by the main stream.
Brian Giles too.
Billy Williams tends to get forgotten in baseball discussions. Because of the presence of Ernie Banks and the on going HOF stuff with Ron Santo.
I think Eddie Mathews gets largely forgotten because of the presence of Hank Aaron, but I think he was just as good.

[Double Steal]

Ya, I'm reading "Bill James - Historical Abstract" and Biggio is listed as number one. Vlad looks like he'll get a chance elsewhere to show himself (read: contraction - draft dispersal), although he has lost a few years in Montreal. Giles may have the same problem, but then that's what MLB wants is better players in small markets, right?

Show me a guy who can't pitch inside and I'll show you a loser. - Sandy Koufax.
http://www.oregonbaseballcampaign.com

[cubbieinexile]

Bill according to his book believes Darrell Evans is the all time most under rated player ever.

[BASEBALL_TRIVIA_NUT]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON Apr-10-02 AT 00:28 AM (EDT)]>Dom DiMaggio played behind Ted Williams, Gehrig played under
>Ruth's shadow until he moved to the Braves, and currently
>Rafael Palmeiro has been behind Juan Gonzalez, and A-Rod.
>There are many others, who is the most under rated?...


BASEBALL_TRIVIA_NUT

` The most under rated ball player today is Roberto
Alomar, a player who can beat you every way it is
possible for you to be beaten, and will literally do
anything necessary to win!

He can hit, hit with power, run, throw, and field -
and he'll use any one or every one of those tools to
beat you or die trying!!!

If it's a clutch situation, he'll deliver a clutch hit;
if a single is needed, he will single; a homer, he'll
hit it; a dazzling catch, he'll make it, and win the game
for you

He is a superstar and is treated like a star! He
is a sure-fire Hall of Famer and deserves induction
on the first ballot - he's that great!

The most under rated super star off all time is
Frank Robinson, a guy who would literally kill to
beat you. Like all super stars, he could hit, hit
with power, run, throw, and field - he was a great
one, a player much greater than his stats show!

The most under rated pitcher I ever saw was
Mike Cuellar during his stint with the Baltimore
Orioles - he often pitched better than Palmer
and McNally and rarely got the recognition he
deserved - he was great for the Birds!

To close, I have to cite 3 other ball players I
thought were vastly under rated during their
careers, Charlie Keller, Tony Oliva, and Vada Pinson.

Enough said!!!

[Double Steal]

Needed to clarify.. not under rated. Biggio was rated the best player current, and Evans?.... awesome.

Show me a guy who can't pitch inside and I'll show you a loser. - Sandy Koufax.
http://www.oregonbaseballcampaign.com

[cubbieinexile]

Yeah I can barely remember Darrell Evans. So maybe he has a point or then again he could be completely wrong.

[Captain Cold Nose]

>>Dom DiMaggio played behind Ted Williams, Gehrig played under
>>Ruth's shadow until he moved to the Braves, and currently
>>Rafael Palmeiro has been behind Juan Gonzalez, and A-Rod.
>>There are many others, who is the most under rated?...
>
>
>BASEBALL_TRIVIA_NUT
>
> ` The most under rated ball player today is Roberto
> Alomar, a player who can beat you every way it is
>possible for you to be beaten, and will literally do
>anything necessary to win!
>
> He can hit, hit with power, run, throw, and field -
>and he'll use any one or every one of those tools to
>beat you or die trying!!!
>
> If it's a clutch situation, he'll deliver a clutch
>hit;
>if a single is needed, he will single; a homer, he'll
>hit it; a dazzling catch, he'll make it, and win the game
>for you
>
> He is a superstar and is treated like a star! He
>is a sure-fire Hall of Famer and deserves induction
>on the first ballot - he's that great!
>
> The most under rated super star off all time is
> Frank Robinson, a guy who would literally kill to
> beat you. Like all super stars, he could hit, hit
> with power, run, throw, and field - he was a great
> one, a player much greater than his stats show!
>
> The most under rated pitcher I ever saw was
> Mike Cuellar during his stint with the Baltimore
> Orioles - he often pitched better than Palmer
>and McNally and rarely got the recognition he
>deserved - he was great for the Birds!
>
> To close, I have to cite 3 other ball players I
>thought were vastly under rated during their
>careers, Charlie Keller, Tony Oliva, and Vada Pinson.
>
> Enough said!!!

I wouldn't exactly call Roberto Alomar underrated. I think he is well recognized for his talents. His name is mentioned among the greats and rightfully so. I would say he gets the amount of acclaim he deserves. As for Robby, when I get into conversations about the all time greats, he is forgotten until his name is thrown out there. The response is usually, "Ohhhhhh. Yeahhhhhh." Knowing he manages them makes one want to root for the Expos.

Defensive specialist outfielders tend to get underrated. Joe Rudi comes to mind. Everybody remembers Roger Maris for one thing (ok, everybody who's not a fanatic) but he was a tremendous defensive outfielder. And what if Curt Flood could hit for power? Could you imagine?

[trosmok]

Curt Flood is remembered for initiating the fight for free agency, and is seriously underated as an all-around player. Gene Tenace didn't have the career numbers, but his World Series performances were a small peek at his enormous talent. Perhaps the most underated player I've seen is Stan Musial; granted he's in the HOF, but when people talk about the all-time greats, he is too often overlooked.

[erictelevision]

Exactly my point in the "Underrated Icon" thread!

[researcher]

Thank you....History has forgotten two "Super Stars" from the last
50 years.............MUSIAL AND SPAHN.............

[JAdams]

Todd Helton - altitude = Mike Sweeney

[Glen Slater]

How about Al Oliver? Marty Marion? Mel Harder? Wes Ferrell? Lee May? Jerry Koosman?

There are lots of others.

By the way, I've always thought that the term should be "under-publicized" rather than "under-rated." When a person is "rated", it means that he's being recognized. The whole point is that these players were ignored or not really noticed or over-looked; no one even BOTHERED to "rate" them in the FIRST place; that's why they often go un-noticed!

[The Commissioner]

Good points. While what you say in many cases like Oliver's is true, in some of their cases they were "rated" to begin with but have unfortunately since been forgotten. I remember when I was younger people saying that before Reese or Rizzuto should get into the Hall, Marty Marion deserves enshrinement. Now you hardly ever hear Marion's name get mentioned alongside either of them, let alone as being considered for the Hall of Fame.

[brihev]

I read an article on Palmeiro at www.lifedrivemagazine.com

i know i under-rated him.
he has stats better than some in the HoF.

[Ytown_Tribe_fan]

Here's a guy who is SO underrated, he didn't even make the "most underrated" thread -- Tim Raines.

[Glen Slater]

Ytown Tribe Fan said,"Here's a guy who is SO underrated, he didn't even make the "most underrated" thread -- Tim Raines."

I am 100 percent with you on Raines, YTF.

[Glen Slater]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON May-09-02 AT 05:39 PM (EDT)]
Cubbie In Exile, back in April on this same thread, you said:
"I think Eddie Mathews gets largely forgotten because of the presence of Hank Aaron, but I think he was just as good."

The first part of that sentence, I agree with, but that last part, "but I think he [Mathews] was just as good" needs to be explained.

How, HOW was Mathews "just as good" as Aaron????? In what way??????

Please explain.

[qual101]

>
>Cubbie In Exile, back in April on this same thread, you
>said:
>"I think Eddie Mathews gets largely forgotten because of the
>presence of Hank Aaron, but I think he was just as good."
>

>How, HOW was Mathews "just as good" as Aaron????? In what
>way??????

I'm not "Cubbie" but I'd say that Mathews was VERY CLOSE to Aaron:
(1) Mathews' Lifetime OBA average of .378 for 17 seasons (versus .377 for Aaron in 23 seasons_\
(2) Mathews career BA of .271 and Slg % of .509 is great for a third-baseman. Not quite equal to Aaron's .305 BA and .555 SA, but then a little better hitting is EXPECTED from an outfielder (vesus 3B)
(3) Mathews averaged 30 HR per year over 17 seasons; Aaron averaged 33 HR per season for his 23 seasons.

Aaron was a somewhat better hitter but Mathews played a more demanding position. I also suspect that Braves Field in Boston was a tougher hitter park than Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium in Georgia.

[Glen Slater]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON May-10-02 AT 04:37 PM (EDT)]
I just looked at Eddie Mathew's stats, and they are very impressive.

I admit that I was very ignorant about Mathews; I had thought that he was a one-dimensional player as far as hitting was concerned (home runs), but I was wrong.

It seems he had good speed. He stole a lot of bases (especially considering the fact that stolen bases weren't really back in fashion until Maury Wills brought it back in '62), and he had a high stolen base to caught stealing ratio.

Plus, he scored over a hundred runs in many seasons.

Hey, I never said that I was the most knowledgable person on this forum. That is why I usually don't write about such things. I read and learn. Now look what I did! I started writing about things that I knew nothing about, and I got burned!!!

Thanks, Qual, I learned something there, and my apologies to Cubbie for jumping down his throat about something that I was totally ignorant about.

I am now getting the crow out of the freezer, and am defrosting it for my supper...............

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

I have read the responses that list Lou Gehrig, Warren Spahn, Eddie Matthews, and Stan Musial as underrated, and I don't understand them. All these guys are in the Hall of Fame, and are acknowledged as among the best (if not THE best) at their respective positions.

Now, if you are talking about which players are unknown to a young "fan" of today's baseball who believes that time began in 1995, then maybe the guys listed above qualify. But, I will assert that there is no one whom we would recognize a real "baseball fan" who is not aware of the magnitude of all of those players.

When I think of underrated players, I think of guys who should be in the Hall of Fame (or should be considered serious candidates), but are never spoken of as such. The two who best qualify for me are Thurman Munson (the best at his position in his league during his whole career) and Dave Kingman (overpowering slugger whose blackballing lessened his career numbers).

I reluctantly predict that Dave Parker (arguably the best player of the 1970s) will join this group eventually.

If we consider non-HOF-calibre players, the one guy who is *by far* the most underrated is Roy White. This guy was a switch-hitter, a fast, smart baserunner, and a consistent run producer:

1968: .287 (4th in AL), 89 runs (3rd), 20 doubles, 73 BBs (T8th)
1969: .290, 74 RBIs, 30 doubles (T8th) - in only 130 games
1970: .296, 109 runs (T3rd), 94 RBIs, 180 hits (5th) 30 doubles, 95 BBs (8th), 22 HRs
1971: .292 (9th), 86 runs (T7th), 86 BBs (T8th), 84 RBIs, 19 HRs
1972: .270, 99 BBs (T1st), 76 runs (8th), 29 doubles (5th)
1973: 88 runs (T10th), 78 BBs (T10th), 22 doubles
1974: .275, 68 runs, 67 BBs, 19 doubles - in only 136 games
1975: .290, 81 runs, 72 BBs, 32 doubles (8th)
1976: .286, 104 runs (1st), 83 BBs (5th), 29 doubles, 31 SBs
1977: .268, 72 runs, 75 BBs (T8th), 25 doubles

White was a .271 career hitter, who amassed 1803 hits and 300 doubles, and who struck out infrequently (1.32 BB/K ratio).

On top of that, he was a superior defensive outfielder. He covered vast amounts of ground in left in cavernous Yankee Stadium, and was probably the best Yankee left fielder of the past 40 years. He played the Fenway wall better than any other visiting player -- better than anyone at all except Yaz.

So, these are my choices for the most underrated players.

[cubbieinexile]

You can be in the hall and be under-rated. Heck Lou Gehrig is under rated and he was one of the greatest ball players to play the game. Most people if you ask them even baseball fans will have very little knowledge about him outside of the streak and the disease.
Eddie Mathews is under rated because almost all newer generations including the ones that grew pre-1995 never heard of him. He has become overshadowed by his teammate Hank Aaron and another third basemen who came along after him named Mike Schmidt. Yes the people of his day appreciated him but the future generations have forgotten him. I grew up in the 80's with baseball and I almost never heard about him. It wasn't until the late 90's that I really became aware of him. He wasn't some flashy ball player or involved in major scandals so he is easily forgotten.

I am afraid there are very few real "baseball fans" out there compared to the casual fan and trying to find a player that is not known from this bunch is awfully hard. Considering that most of them know a little about almost every single starter who played awhile out there.

[trosmok]

>
>
>I have read the responses that list Lou Gehrig, Warren
>Spahn, Eddie Matthews, and Stan Musial as underrated, and I
>don't understand them. All these guys are in the Hall of
>Fame, and are acknowledged as among the best (if not THE
>best) at their respective positions.
>
>Now, if you are talking about which players are unknown to a
>young "fan" of today's baseball who believes that time began
>in 1995, then maybe the guys listed above qualify. But, I
>will assert that there is no one whom we would recognize a
>real "baseball fan" who is not aware of the magnitude of all
>of those players.
>
>When I think of underrated players, I think of guys who
>should be in the Hall of Fame (or should be considered
>serious candidates), but are never spoken of as such. The
>two who best qualify for me are Thurman Munson (the best at
>his position in his league during his whole career) and Dave
>Kingman (overpowering slugger whose blackballing lessened
>his career numbers).
>
>I reluctantly predict that Dave Parker (arguably the best
>player of the 1970s) will join this group eventually.
>
>If we consider non-HOF-calibre players, the one guy who is
>*by far* the most underrated is Roy White. This guy was a
>switch-hitter, a fast, smart baserunner, and a consistent
>run producer:
>
>1968: .287 (4th in AL), 89 runs (3rd), 20 doubles, 73 BBs
>(T8th)
>1969: .290, 74 RBIs, 30 doubles (T8th) - in only 130 games
>1970: .296, 109 runs (T3rd), 94 RBIs, 180 hits (5th) 30
>doubles, 95 BBs (8th), 22 HRs
>1971: .292 (9th), 86 runs (T7th), 86 BBs (T8th), 84 RBIs, 19
>HRs
>1972: .270, 99 BBs (T1st), 76 runs (8th), 29 doubles (5th)
>1973: 88 runs (T10th), 78 BBs (T10th), 22 doubles
>1974: .275, 68 runs, 67 BBs, 19 doubles - in only 136 games
>1975: .290, 81 runs, 72 BBs, 32 doubles (8th)
>1976: .286, 104 runs (1st), 83 BBs (5th), 29 doubles, 31 SBs
>1977: .268, 72 runs, 75 BBs (T8th), 25 doubles
>
>White was a .271 career hitter, who amassed 1803 hits and
>300 doubles, and who struck out infrequently (1.32 BB/K
>ratio).
>
>On top of that, he was a superior defensive outfielder. He
>covered vast amounts of ground in left in cavernous Yankee
>Stadium, and was probably the best Yankee left fielder of
>the past 40 years. He played the Fenway wall better than
>any other visiting player -- better than anyone at all
>except Yaz.
>
>So, these are my choices for the most underrated players.
>
>Couldn't agree with you more. There was a post last August about HOF bias, where I listed my reasons for contending that Roy White was among the steadiest, hardest working, talented outfielders I ever saw, and he will not even get considered as a player, (perhaps someday as a manager, he was in AAA Sacramento, the A's top farm club last I heard from him.) His perserverance paid off in '77 and '78, after toiling tirelessly for the worst Yankee squads that ever donned pinstripes, by finally winning those WS rings. One other item of note, he went an entire season, and most of the next without committing an error, playing in some of the most difficult left fields in the game, and most (22 of 43) of the errors he committed in his career were made when he was forced to play the infield on those horrible Yankees teams. I think it was Billy Martin that said that Roy was not the best arm, or glove, or bat or legs, but he was the best at one thing: beating his opponent.

[Glen Slater]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON May-14-02 AT 00:21 AM (EDT)]
About Roy White....... DEFINITELY UNDER-RATED! Although I don't think of him as Hall of Fame material- never would have even given it a thought. I liked Roy a lot, which is saying a lot, because I grew up hating the Yankees (except for a few players, such as White and some others).

As far as Musial and Spahn... hell, can you imagine what kind of publicity they would have gotten if they played for New York teams or in higher profile markets than St. Louis and Milwaukee???? FUGEDABOUDIT!

And BTN, I agree with you about Pinson.

Other under-rated players I can think of.... (besides ones I've already mentioned, like Oliver, Marion, etc.).... Jerry Grote, Mickey Stanley, Larry Bowa, Mel Stottlemeyer, Rudy May, Garry Maddox, Bobby Murcer, Alex Johnson, Vic Wertz, Bobby Thomson (he wasn't "JUST" the guy who hit the "Shot Heard 'Round The World")... and many others. None of 'em belong in the HOF... they're just among many, many, MANY under-rated players!

Although Pinson and Marion are certainly worthy of the Hall of Fame. My father saw Marion play many times when he was a kid, and he thought that Marion was just super.

[How Boring]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON May-20-02 AT 11:41 PM (EDT)]Here is you're chance of being able to tell about who you think are the most underated players of all time. Please specify position. I will tell the correct answers. Or at least my opinions here they are.

1. Oufield- Babe Ruth- He has never been given all due respect, and I resent that. He was a much better player than people give him credit for and it's time that he got the reccognition that he deserfs.

2. Outfield- Ty Cobb- Everyone says that he was just a mean man, but thats not true at all! I beg to difer. He was a solid hitter and he's in the hall of fame, so please don't nitpick.

3. Outfield- Willie Mays- He was kicked out of baseball! Why? He WAS a good player, and I don't care what Bowie Kyun says. Underated, underated, underated. Tired of this crapl.

4. 1st base- There are no underrated first baseman because all they do is stand there and catch the ball anyway. There not out there running around and keeping in form oh no they just stand there next to first base like they were kings or something and let me guarantee you this and that is they are not.

5. Shorstorp- Honus Waggoner- He played a great game at the shortstop postition and don't give me any mouth about Ozzy Schmidt. He was not as good.

6. catcher- Johnny Bench- He is underrated. Yeah, so let's see other people, the big shots who say that Bench was not so good a catcher. yeah try yourself to be squatting all day with all of that heavy equipment in the hot sun and plus a mask too and if the umpire has bad breath or body odor you could just about die out there. No way. Johnny Bench was one of the best if not THE best catchers, and I don't care what you think. Sick of this.

7.Secon base- At the hot corner there is no better player in history at the second base then Glenn Hubbard. I think he was obscyured by the fact that he played for some lousy teams, and I'm talking about the braves, no offense intended towrards braves fans. they do the tomahawk chop. I don't CARE about what a bunch of injuns say. Christopher Columbus discovered America back in the 1400s long before there was baseball, and he also discovered the injuns. so they can carry on all they want. the tomahawk chop is here to stay and bring back chief Nokahoma too because he repersents what proud people the injuns are. Plus it was fun to throw rocks at the poor ******* when the game got dull.

8. pitcher- Hey, why not Joe Nuxhall. He started younger than any pitcher in the history of pitchers in the game of baseball. And he's a great announcer too. He was only a teenager when he started to pitch for the Reds. I like it when he announces, and I liked watching him pitch. Honorable mention: Tom Seafer.

9. third base- what third baseman is more underrated than that guy Eddie Mathews. If he isn't in the hall of fame, which is located in Cooperstown, New York, then why the hell not? Sick of this.

[The Commissioner]

Thankfully, Eddie Mathews was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1978. That's at least one less thing to be sick about.

[BASEBALL_TRIVIA_NUT]

>4. 1st base- There are no overrated first baseman because
>all they do is stand there and catch the ball anyway. There
>not out there running around and keeping in form oh no they
>just stand there next to first base like they were king...

BASEBALL_TRIVIA_NUT

Please don't nitpick!

Sick of this!

BTW, Dennis Miller and Norm Crosby want you
to give them a ring, if you don't mind paying the
long-distance charges!

[brihev]

[updated:LAST EDITED ON Jun-05-02 AT 11:35 AM (EDT)]>Here is you're chance of being able to tell about who you
>think are the most underated players of all time. Please
>specify position. I will tell the correct answers. Or at
>least my opinions here they are.
>
>5. Shorstorp- Honus Waggoner- He played a great game at the
>shortstop postition and don't give me any mouth about Ozzy Schmidt. He was not as good.

Who is Ozzy Schmidt? Ozzie Smith's German cousin? a heavy metal third baseman?

i couldn't find a smiley that has that "duh" look to it.

[ed reulbach]

Don't mean to nitpick or anything, but . . . for the sake of keeping these boards as accurate as possible I must point out that "the hot corner" customarily refers to third base, not second base.

I take your remarks about "injuns" as tongue-in-cheek (although certainly flirting with bad taste) unless you specify otherwise. I also believe you meant to write "underrated" instead of "overrated" in the entry on first basemen.

Noticing that you are a new member, I hope that you will find these forums, and the rest of this website, informative and educational beyond your wildest dreams! Good fortune to you.

[How Boring]

Thank you, Ed, but if you notice I DID write underrated. But I appreecate the welcome just the same. And I do find these forms educational in fact as you mentioned.

[ed reulbach]

Dear Mr. Boring,

>>And I do find these forms (sic) educational . . .

Yes, I see that you have learned to edit your posts! Congratulations.

There's a lot of information about baseball available on this site ... perhaps more than you now imagine. I wish you the very best of luck in finding it and enjoying it.

"ed"

[rudy]

oh man, you guys are killing me here.

i haven't had comic relief like this since i last watched dumb and dumber.

[santotohof]

For me it's Ted Simmons. Switch hitting big catcher always had a top stick

[ElHalo]

I've got another catcher. Mickey Tettleton. Most statistical methods say that he's one of the greatest offensive catchers of all time (not too hot on defense, of course). But you never hear his name mentioned at ALL, not even for his memorable batting stance.

[dgarza]

I've got another catcher. Mickey Tettleton. Most statistical methods say that he's one of the greatest offensive catchers of all time (not too hot on defense, of course). But you never hear his name mentioned at ALL, not even for his memorable batting stance.
A typical Oklahoma catcher, huh?

[dgarza]

Let's see...
Rob Dibble
Kal Daniels (talk about "looks good on paper")
Otis Nixon (well...at least he had feet)
Glenn Davis gets no respect anymore
Rick Reuschel - one of the better batting pitchers of the days - actually lead in an offensive category 1 year! - add 2 GGs to that as well
Pedro Guerrero gets no love anymore either
Sid Fernandez & Jose DeLeon & Mario Soto to some extent

[julusnc]

Dale Murphy (He was the Atlanta Braves for about ten seasons. A great all around player (two time MVP) and the best player in the National League for at least 4 years)

Lee Smith (One of the greatest closers in the history of Major League baseball)

Andy Van Slyke (A great defense player and a good hitter for many seasons with the Cards and Pirates)

Bobby Grich (A great all around player and possibly the best player in the American League for at least three seasons)

[CyNotSoYoung]

I've seen a lot more minor leaguers than major league players in person (I assume this thread is about players we've actually seen). Charles Johnson was an original Portland (Maine) Seadog and was great in his short stay here at the AA level. He was a GGer for 4 years in the mid 90's and a key player in the 97 Marlins WS win. He's sort of faded away and you don't hear much about him now, but he is with Colorado so maybe his hitting stats will pick up.

I'm not always clear on what people mean by "underrated" It probably has different meanings for different people. It's hard to consider a guy truly "underrated" when he's making $9 million a year, even if he doesn't get a lot of media attention.

[nightal]

Ted Simmons for me as well, one of the best hitting catchers of alltime, and not as bad defensively as advertised.

[santotohof]

El Sid.WOW If games were 6 innings long he'd be about 145-6 .Best six inning pitcher I've ever seen but that poi caught up to him after that. I am not sure but I think he has one of the lowest all time batting averages against him

[ElHalo]

El Sid.WOW If games were 6 innings long he'd be about 145-6 .Best six inning pitcher I've ever seen but that poi caught up to him after that. I am not sure but I think he has one of the lowest all time batting averages against him

1. Nolan Ryan
2. Sandy Koufax
3. Pedro Martinez
4. Sid Fernandez

[santotohof]

thanks I thought so. Dale Murphy is an interesting one .He did win the MVP award playing for the ,then lowly Braves, but had he been a Yankee it would have been which way to Cooperstown

[dgarza]

thanks I thought so. Dale Murphy is an interesting one .He did win the MVP award playing for the ,then lowly Braves, but had he been a Yankee it would have been which way to Cooperstown
The Braves were 1st & 2nd place during those MVP years ... which is something I had not remembered. Most of the 12 years surrounding WERE 6th place finishes however.

[Bill Burgess]

As to most underrated players, I'd have to nominate:

Buck Ewing, Bill Lange, Jimmie McAleer, Jimmie Archer, Johnny Kling, Charlie Gehringer.

All Negro Leaguers in general, with the possible exceptions of Paige, Gibson.
The two NLers who I am in awe of, who are all but invisible to most white fans, are Biz Mackay and Pop Lloyd. Two phenomenal superstars. Check them out!

Bill Burgess

[csh19792001]

As to most underrated players, I'd have to nominate:

Buck Ewing, Bill Lange, Jimmie McAleer, Jimmie Archer, Johnny Kling, Charlie Gehringer.

All Negro Leaguers in general, with the possible exceptions of Paige, Gibson.
The two NLers who I am in awe of, who are all but invisible to most white fans, are Biz Mackay and Pop Lloyd. Two phenomenal superstars. Check them out!

Bill Burgess

Most underrated player I've personally seen? Now that I think about it....

Probably Bobby Abreu. NEVER gets a mention, look at the numbers he's put up.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/abreubo01.shtml

Hits .300 with 100 walks, 100 runs, and 100 RBI'S every year. Good power (OPS+ 140). Very good arm in RF.

How many guys in history have had 40 stolen bases, 30 home runs, and 47 doubles in a season? Bobby did it last year, didn't get a mention. In 2002, he had 20 homers, 50 doubles, and 30 steals- also very hard to do.

Never underestimate how underrated guys on bad and/or small market teams are.

Brett Butler is second among most underrated that I've seen, probably. I've give it some more thought.

[west coast orange and black]

not quite sure about the most underrated of all i have seen, but brett butler is at the top of my list right now.

[It's Over The Wall!]

I think it is Johnny Peskey :dance Because He was over shadowed by Phil Rizzuto(Possible misspell)













:radio

[Blackout]

in terms of players who were over-shadowed, Juan Marichal can be considered because he was losing Cy Young awards to Bob Gibson and Sandy Koufax despite putting up damn good numbers

[zzazazz]

Barbaro Garbey on the 1984 Tigers. He was their secret weapon.

[BoSox Rule]

Bobby Abreu.

[MasonDixon]

By far Stan Musial. The only person who comes close in terms of being underrated is Rogers Hornsby, and that's only by the casual fan.

[ElHalo]

By far Stan Musial. The only person who comes close in terms of being underrated is Rogers Hornsby, and that's only by the casual fan.

Agree about both. However... if I walk into a random sports bar and mention the name Stan Musial to a guy at the bar, I'll probably get a glimmer of recognition, even if he isn't quite sure what team the guy played for or how good he really was. Mention the name Rogers Hornsby, and, in my experience, ten times out of ten you'll get a blank stare and a "Who?"

[Naliamegod]

Joe Gordon

[plask_stirlac]

Well, not many fans will know Pete Alexander, as great as he was, even if you spot them a "Grover Cleveland" Alexander. And Joss, too. Even Matty, his popularity clouded by Ruth's.

Probably Ott, though. No, not Ed Ott. Not one of the best defensively, it seems, but that's a hell of a batting career and more longevity than Belle, Allen, etc.

Maybe Gehringer.

I don't know ow it took Eddie Mathews, also underrated by a lot, ten years to get into the hall. Special circumstances? 500 HR, and there are still fewer than 20 guys to hit 500.

And Abreu... jjust one ASG, barely, but the ASG is what it is, things happen ans even Santana can not be on the team for history's sake and the accolade.

[csh19792001]

Bobby Abreu.

Excellent choice- Abreu is the most underrated played of the last 20 years.

All time? I'd say Tris Speaker or Stan Musial totally off the top of my head. Whoever mentioned Gehringer is right on the money, too.

[538280]

Basically all Negro Leaguers, espeicially Oscar Charleston, Biz Mackey, Ray Dandridge, Martin Dihigo, and Willie Foster.

[cubbieinexile]

I can't really see Bobby Abreu being the most under rated player in the last 20 years. I can definitely see that Bobby Abreu is under-rated, but I don't see how he sticks out more then say Brian Giles or Magglio Ordonez.

Looking at the last 20 years I would hazard a guess that Tim Raines is probably going to go more unnoticed then Bobby Abreu. Tim had the bad luck of being the 2nd best lead-off hitter of the 20th century right when the best lead-off player was playing, plus he had the misfortune of playing in another country to boot.

One can also argue that Craig Biggio is another player who is vastly under-rated. Playing in the shadow of Ryne Sandberg then Roberto Alomar and then all the sluggers while still being one of the 10 best second basemen of all time. It will be interesting to see whether or not either of these two will get into the hall and if they do how much arm twisting is needed to get them there.

Bobby Abreu is good and over-looked but he was never really a top 3 OF'er for his league nor an all timer. He is/was an all-star caliber outfielder who played at a time when a lot of all time great outfielders played.

[MasonDixon]

Agree about both. However... if I walk into a random sports bar and mention the name Stan Musial to a guy at the bar, I'll probably get a glimmer of recognition, even if he isn't quite sure what team the guy played for or how good he really was. Mention the name Rogers Hornsby, and, in my experience, ten times out of ten you'll get a blank stare and a "Who?"

Yeah, my reasoning behind choosing Musial was that Hornsby at least gets his due among knowledgable fans. I feel that Musial is underrated by just about everyone.

[ElHalo]

Excellent choice- Abreu is the most underrated played of the last 20 years.


Actually, ever Phillies fan I know says that Abreu is horrifically overrated.

[cubbieinexile]

Most Phillie fans don't know what they got until it is gone.

[cubbieinexile]

. Mention the name Rogers Hornsby, and, in my experience, ten times out of ten you'll get a blank stare and a "Who?"


What bars are you going too? Teenage juice bars?

[ElHalo]

What bars are you going too? Teenage juice bars?

Maybe you live on a different planet from me, but I've never met a single person in real life who'd heard of Rogers Hornsby. The biggest baseball fan I know (a diehard Red Sox fan who's got something of a following on Sons of Sam Horn) literally wouldn't believe me when I said that a second baseman once hit .400 with 40 HR's until I showed him the BB-Ref page.

[cubbieinexile]

Well I live on planet Earth and fortunately for this conversation I run a restaurant. I walked into the Bar and asked the regulars if they knew who Rogers Hornsby was, almost to a man they all knew his name and knew he was a great player. Now then not all of them knew the specifics of his career and even some didn't know generalities (like what position he played) but all knew who the name and knew he as a great player.

[Naliamegod]

From my experiance, people recgonize the name but don't know much after that. Seems like some people confuse him with Wagner sometimes (I use to :laugh)

[baseball79]

By far Stan Musial. The only person who comes close in terms of being underrated is Rogers Hornsby, and that's only by the casual fan.
I agree. Musial was overshadowed by many players during his time.

[NickG]

Excellent choice- Abreu is the most underrated played of the last 20 years.

I would agree with that.

[julusnc]

Maybe you live on a different planet from me, but I've never met a single person in real life who'd heard of Rogers Hornsby. The biggest baseball fan I know (a diehard Red Sox fan who's got something of a following on Sons of Sam Horn) literally wouldn't believe me when I said that a second baseman once hit .400 with 40 HR's until I showed him the BB-Ref page.

Then he is a modern baseball fan or just doesntcare about baseball unless it is something about the BoSox.......

My nephew is 10 and he does book reports on athletes and he wanted to do a report on The Rajah......Education is the key....

tell your fan to get his head out of a box and learn.

[csh19792001]

Actually, ever Phillies fan I know says that Abreu is horrifically overrated.

Only Phillies fan I ever knew that said that is Imapotato.

And when I meant Abreu being the most underrated of the last 20 years, I meant a player who started playing the the last 20. Giles and Ordonez aren't as good as Abreu, anyway and don't deserve the recognition he does.

Interesting about the "name recognition" convo here- I agree more with ElHalo, but not to that extent. I always ask non fans and casual fans if they've heard of various alltimers. Invariably, everyone I've asked has known Ruth, Mantle, Mays, Jackie, Ripken, Gehrig, Dimaggio, Williams. Not any others I can think of at the moment, really.

I could ask my girlfriend, all of her friends, and all of my grad school friends about Musial and Hornsby, and I think that everyone would know Stan Musial was a baseball player. Very few would know that Rogers Hornsby was a ballplayer, though they might recognize the name, because it is so unusual, and he is a top tier hall of famer.

Now, this is almost certainly due to the fact that everybody loves Stan Musial, and he played into the 1960's, when television took hold of the American culture. Hornsby was basically done by the early 1930's- he's a dinosaur to the average person.

Never underestimate the power of the media.

[ElHalo]

Then he is a modern baseball fan or just doesntcare about baseball unless it is something about the BoSox.......

My nephew is 10 and he does book reports on athletes and he wanted to do a report on The Rajah......Education is the key....

tell your fan to get his head out of a box and learn.

There tend to be three types of baseball fans in NY... the first two in roughly equal proportion, and the third in a smaller, but significant, minority:

Mets fans who couldn't care less about anything that happened in baseball before 1961 and usually make fun of people who do;

Yankees fans who can tell you every single thing that's happened to the Yankees since the day Babe Ruth stepped in from Boston (though, puzzlingly, precious little before... they often don't even know that the team was called the Highlanders), and can recount every humiliating moment in the history of the Boston Red Sox... but know stunningly little about anything else related to baseball. These fans know exactly who Bob Meusel and Earle Combs and Red Ruffing are, and immediately say "mad dash" when you mention Enos Slaughter, but give you blank looks when you name Warren Spahn or Bob Feller or even ask them who the starting shortstop for the Tigers is;

Red Sox fans who can tell you in excrutiating detail everything about the history of the Sox since Babe Ruth left (though who, puzzlingly, usually don't know who Tris Speaker or Joe Wood are... it seems like history stops at 1920 for NY fans), and usually have a good understanding of Yankee history, but know essentially nothing else about baseball... the Red Sox fan of mine, the guy from SoSH, not only had never heard of Rogers Hornsby, but... and this is the one that really kills me... had never heard of Todd Helton.

The tunnell vision of the last two groups, and the disdain for history of the first, are really staggering. I've lived in many places around the country, and I've never seen such large groups of ferocious baseball fans anywhere else... but for the one half, anything that happened before the Mets got here never happened, and for the other group, anything that isn't the Yankees or Red Sox continues to not happen.

[mordeci]

I've met quite a few people who have heard of Hornsby. They don't know anything about him, but they know his name.

No one's heard of Arky Vaughn.

The only time I've ever heard of someone referencing Vaughn was in a story about (believe it or not) Richard Nixon. Tricky Dick was denegrating Hillary Clinton for not knowing anything about Arky even though she was from Arkansas (even though Vaughn grew up in California).

[CyNotSoYoung]

Just a quick list off the top of my head. Of course it all depends on how you define "underrated" as many of these guys are in the hall of fame.

C - Bill Frehan
1B - Johnny Mize
2B - Joe Gordon
3B - Darrell Evans
SS - Arky Vaughan
LF - Fred Clarke
CF - Richie Ashburn
RF - Mel Ott
SP - Juan Marichal
SP - Bert Blyleven
RP - Lee Smith

[Honus Wagner Rules]

By far Stan Musial. The only person who comes close in terms of being underrated is Rogers Hornsby, and that's only by the casual fan.
Hornsby underrated? Certainly not here at Baseball Fever where somw have him as one of the top four greatest players of all time. Frankly, I consider Hornsby grossly overrated.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

From my experiance, people recgonize the name but don't know much after that. Seems like some people confuse him with Wagner sometimes (I use to :laugh)

Confuse Hornsby with the Great Honus Wagner!!!!

The Apocalypse is near! :grouchy

[ElHalo]

Hornsby underrated? Certainly not here at Baseball Fever where somw have him as one of the top four greatest players of all time. Frankly, I consider Hornsby grossly overrated.

Let's see, he's fifth all time in OPS+, third in black ink, second in career BA, 8th in career OPS... from second base.

Realize that while he's fifth in career OPS+, the next highest guy from a skill position (C, 2B, SS, 3B) is Nap Lajoie, at thirtieth.

I don't think it's at all stretching things to call him one of the four greatest players ever. When you're one of the top 5 hitters of all time and you play 2B, you pretty much have to be.

[moviegeekjan]

I agree. Musial was overshadowed by many players during his time. Having grown up in the St. Louis area, this is hard to fathom since Musial WAS the big story in much of the Midwest, West, and South during his prime.... But since many believe that all baseball revolves around the Northeast, I can see why they think Stan was overshadowed.

[538280]

Let's see, he's fifth all time in OPS+, third in black ink, second in career BA, 8th in career OPS... from second base.

Realize that while he's fifth in career OPS+, the next highest guy from a skill position (C, 2B, SS, 3B) is Nap Lajoie, at thirtieth.

I don't think it's at all stretching things to call him one of the four greatest players ever. When you're one of the top 5 hitters of all time and you play 2B, you pretty much have to be.

Hornsby is also a horrible fielder, a horrible runner, and a horrible teammate. Not to mention, he played in an offense inflated league most of his career.

[cubbieinexile]

Well if it is started playing in the last 20 years I still don't thin Abreu is the number one yet. Their is still Fred McGriff to contend with and still Craig Biggio.

[ElHalo]

Hornsby is also a horrible fielder, a horrible runner, and a horrible teammate. Not to mention, he played in an offense inflated league most of his career.

He was an average fielder, actually a pretty good baserunner, and what kind of teammate he was is irrelevant to how good of a player he was.

And what kind of offensive era he played in doesn't change his OPS+ a whit.

People always mention how he's last in defensive win shares / game for players with such and such innings... without realizing that in order to play that many innings you have to be either phenomenal at defense or phenomenal at hitting, and that no more than a handful of 2B's were phenomenal at hitting. Hornsby was certainly no worse than the average 2B in the league at defense.

[csh19792001]

Well if it is started playing in the last 20 years I still don't thin Abreu is the number one yet. Their is still Fred McGriff to contend with and still Craig Biggio.

It completely depends on the crowd you're drawing from. As usual, we haven't defined our crowd- and on this all depends. Are we talking about "underrated" by people on this website? NYcentrist NYM/NYY people? People who go to a few games a year and only follow their own team? The sabermetric contingent?

Biggio is certainly underrated by the plebian masses, because most people don't care/have any understanding of the nuances of the game, and focus and homeruns and "OPS+". I think Biggio is arguably one of the top 5 second baseman ever.

McGriff? I've never heard his name come up in this context, but he looks like a very good candidate. Notice that unlike most of the greats of the past 20 years, he was actually just as good before expansion. Not a big jump after 1993 brought a huge group of minor leaguers into the NL, debasing the competitive balance.

[The Dude]

Just a quick list off the top of my head. Of course it all depends on how you define "underrated" as many of these guys are in the hall of fame.
CF - Richie Ashburn


Finally, someone else who thinks he's one of the most underrated.

[Barnstormer]

Rod Carew.

He was just so far ahead of other hitters in the league as far as BA goes, until Brett came along, and won batting titles by 40 and 50 points, several times. Played half of the games of his career at second base, also adding to his value. Never mentioned in the same breath as Joe Morgan, playing in the NL at the same time, but their career OPS is the same, and Carew even has a slightly higher slugging average (.429 to .427), to go with a 60-point BA edge.

[The Splendid Splinter]

Hornsby is also a horrible fielder, a horrible runner, and a horrible teammate. Not to mention, he played in an offense inflated league most of his career.

Well... He was good on defense except for one glaring weakness and everyone takes him down a lot for that. Reminds of Jeter going glove side, he still won a GG somehow, but still he's a good defender with a glaring weakness. While he might've not a been a decent baserunner, Babe Ruth and Ted Williams wasn't a good baserunner either. Williams wasn't a good teammate, Ty Cobb wasn't, and others too. Really not the point on the teammate thing.

Also he played from Second Base... What A Rod been doing on offense in the past 10 years is what Hornsby did in the 20's. That's pretty darn good if you ask me.

[CyNotSoYoung]

Finally, someone else who thinks he's one of the most underrated.
Well - it all depends who you ask. I think most posters here know Ashburn and rate him pretty highly. I have seen other threads in BBF where he was rated as one of the best ever defensively. But the average baseball fan has probably never heard of him or knows very little about him. That's why I picked him as an underrated center fielder. I also think Curt Flood is underrated as a CF and in his case, even by some of the knowledgeable fans here.

[cubbieinexile]

Richie is an unknown because he played at a time when we had one the greatest conglomeration of CF'ers of all time. Mays, Mantle, Snider, Doby, and Ashburn.

Its hard to get noticed when 3 of the greatest CF'ers of all time are playing at the same time you are and they play in New York to boot.

[It's Over The Wall!]

. No one's heard of Arky Vaughn.

The only time I've ever heard of someone referencing Vaughn was in a story about (believe it or not) Richard Nixon. Tricky Dick was denegrating Hillary Clinton for not knowing anything about Arky even though she was from Arkansas (even though Vaughn grew up in California).
Check Bill James's Historical Baseball Almanac.
He's The Second Best SS Acording To Bill.

[CyNotSoYoung]

Check Bill James's Historical Baseball Almanac.
He's The Second Best SS Acording To Bill.
Like I said earlier - it all depends on who you ask. I'd say Bill James is a pretty knowledgeable guy - no surprise that he ranks Vaughan pretty high (though he does say that after Wagner, the next few guys are all pretty close). But ask your average fan who Arky Vaughan was and chances are pretty good they've never heard of him - or at least don't remember hearing of him. When was the last time you heard Tim McCarver compare, oh say, Cal Ripken or Ozzie Smith with Vaughan?

[ElHalo]

Check Bill James's Historical Baseball Almanac.
He's The Second Best SS Acording To Bill.

This doesn't really count as "widespread mention."

I myself have never actually met anyone who's read a Bill James book, and I personally have never even seen a copy of one.

[RuthMayBond]

This doesn't really count as "widespread mention."

I myself have never actually met anyone who's read a Bill James book, but it would explain the blank looks you get when you ask that question when you're introduced :laugh

[CyNotSoYoung]

This doesn't really count as "widespread mention."

I myself have never actually met anyone who's read a Bill James book, and I personally have never even seen a copy of one.
ElHalo - Is that because you disagree with James and aren't interested in what he has to say, or because you've just never got around to reading him? Just curious because I enjoy James and though I don't agree with him on everything, I do find him to be thoughtful and well informed.

As to what Bill James has to do with this thread, I'd be curious as to what others here think about whether what James writes or says has a significant influence over how a player is viewed. James is certainly influential among many baseball fans. How does endorsement (or lack of it) by Bill James figure into whether a player is overrated or underrated?

Arky Vaughan is a good example - how many people knew much about Vaughan before James rated him #2?

[ElHalo]

ElHalo - Is that because you disagree with James and aren't interested in what he has to say, or because you've just never got around to reading him? Just curious because I enjoy James and though I don't agree with him on everything, I do find him to be thoughtful and well informed.


There are certain things that I disagree with James about (like his 2B rankings, for example), but that's not why I've never read him. I've never read him just because I quite simply have no idea where I'd have to go to find a Bill James book. I don't really buy things online, and I've never once in my life seen a copy of a James book in a bookstore or at any of the used book sales I scour for old books on baseball. I guess I've just never had enough interest in him to spend an entire weekend driving around to different book stores throughout the Northeast in search of a James book.

[RuthMayBond]

I've never read him just because I quite simply have no idea where I'd have to go to find a Bill James book. I don't really buy things online, and I've never once in my life seen a copy of a James book in a bookstore or at any of the used book sales I scour for old books on baseball. I guess I've just never had enough interest in him to spend an entire weekend driving around to different book stores throughout the Northeast in search of a James book.Um ,public library?

[NationalPastime1980]

There are certain things that I disagree with James about (like his 2B rankings, for example), but that's not why I've never read him. I've never read him just because I quite simply have no idea where I'd have to go to find a Bill James book. I don't really buy things online, and I've never once in my life seen a copy of a James book in a bookstore or at any of the used book sales I scour for old books on baseball. I guess I've just never had enough interest in him to spend an entire weekend driving around to different book stores throughout the Northeast in search of a James book.

Bill James has sold over 3 million books.That is a huge amount of books considering only baseball fans would be interested in purchasing them.

I have checked online and Borders, Waldenbooks, Barnes and Noble, B Daltons, BooksaMillion, Labyrinth Books, The Corner Bookstore, and Loch's Books all carry Bill James books in New York city area.

You just have not spent the time to find one.Just admit you do not care about James and move on.

[cubbieinexile]

You basically have to go out of your way to not find a Bill James book in a book store. The two most common books you will find in a book store are his New Historical Abstract and Politics of Glory. His other books I have found at my public library.

[ElHalo]

You basically have to go out of your way to not find a Bill James book in a book store. The two most common books you will find in a book store are his New Historical Abstract and Politics of Glory. His other books I have found at my public library.

Well, the NYC public library system is kind of labyrinthian, and it's not someplace that I'd really want to go unless I had to.

As to bookstores carrying them, I have to say that I don't know what kind of bookstores you guys go to. In an ordinary chain bookstore in NY (Borders, Barnes and Noble, etc.), the baseball "section" will usually contain about three books... a history of the Yankees, a children's history of baseball book, and whatever autobiography from a player happens to be selling at the moment.

If you're very lucky, maybe one in five bookstores will carry a copy of "Moneyball."

The places I usually go to get baseball books are used book stores that don't carry a single thing that's been published since 1980. Usually, very little that's been published since 1970. So I guess they wouldn't have a lot of James books.

[NationalPastime1980]

Okay one last thing.I am a manager of Barnes and Noble and i know for a fact it is a required standard for a sports section to have at least 300 volumes.At least 50 of these will be dedicated to baseball.Bill James is there just look.

If you need to know how many of a certain book are in stock at a branch near you please contact me here and I will make sure they have one.

Someone that is to lazy to use the library should not picked being a lawyer as a profession. LOL!

[moviegeekjan]

As to bookstores carrying them, I have to say that I don't know what kind of bookstores you guys go to. In an ordinary chain bookstore in NY (Borders, Barnes and Noble, etc.), the baseball "section" will usually contain about three books... a history of the Yankees, a children's history of baseball book, and whatever autobiography from a player happens to be selling at the moment..
I didn't realize that NYC area was so limited.

All the chain bookstores like that that I've seen in the Phoenix area and in the midwest carry FAR more variety, and virtually certain to have copies of Moneyball and some Bill James' written material.

Are you making a comment about the ethnocentric mentality of NY baseball fans?

[Metal Ed]

Well, the NYC public library system is kind of labyrinthian, and it's not someplace that I'd really want to go unless I had to.

As to bookstores carrying them, I have to say that I don't know what kind of bookstores you guys go to. In an ordinary chain bookstore in NY (Borders, Barnes and Noble, etc.), the baseball "section" will usually contain about three books... a history of the Yankees, a children's history of baseball book, and whatever autobiography from a player happens to be selling at the moment.

If you're very lucky, maybe one in five bookstores will carry a copy of "Moneyball."

The places I usually go to get baseball books are used book stores that don't carry a single thing that's been published since 1980. Usually, very little that's been published since 1970. So I guess they wouldn't have a lot of James books.


You're in NYC, same as me. If you go to the Borders on Broadway (right across from the cemetary, downtown, in the financial district) there's a very excellent baseball section there. I know they have James' books, amongst many others. You may even spot me in there occasionally.

[ElHalo]

Someone that is to lazy to use the library should not picked being a lawyer as a profession. LOL!

My local Barnes and Noble (Broadway and 66th Street, Lincoln Center) apparently disagrees with you. I haven't checked their sports section in quite some time, but if they're required to have 300 books on sports, I'm sure that 280 of them are on basketball.

As to being "too lazy" to use the library... apparently you're not familiar with the NYC Library system. The library has 85 branches, most of them specialized. The library in my neighborhood, for example, is devoted exclusively to ballet and symphonic music. Most public library branches are used primarily as places to stay for homeless people. It's not really the kind of place I'd like to spend my time rooting around in.

And I will admit... I have a pretty extensive baseball library myself (around 200 volumes), but one area where it is weak is in the very modern writings. With the exception of one book ("The Bronx Zoo," the story of the 1978 NY Yankees), I don't believe I have anything published since 1970. So I guess there's that.

[CyNotSoYoung]

OK - I'm glad we all know where to find the book now, but before this thread gets too sidetracked, I'd like to restate my question. What influence has James had on whether or not a player is perceived as being overrated or underrated? If James says he's good and you disagree - does that make him overrated? A good example is Craig Biggio - a very good ballplayer, but James really made a big deal of how underrated he is in the recent edition of the Historical Abstract. So is Biggio overrated because James - and his loyal followers - say he is so good when a lot of others don't rate him as highly? Or, going back to Arky Vaughan - is he overrated because James picks him as the #2 all time shortstop or is he underrated because, in spite of this, most casual fans don't know who he is. How much has Bill James shaped your perception of a player - especially how you rate "underrated" and "overrated" players?

[Imapotato]

Guys getting way off topic here


Anyway, let's look at short careers in regards to talent

How about George Stone, Gavvy Cravath, Harry Lumley, George Cutshaw, Frank Schulte, Mike DOnlin

as underrated?

[ElHalo]

Guys getting way off topic here


We haven't begun to get off topic.

From Wikipedia:

"The Firth of Forth is the estuary or firth of Scotland's River Forth, where it flows into the North Sea between Fife to the north, and West Lothian, the City of Edinburgh, and East Lothian to the south. The river is tidal as far inland as Stirling, but generally it is considered that the inland extent of the firth ends at the Kincardine Bridge.

A large number of towns line the shores, as well as the petrochemical complexes at Grangemouth and Burntisland, the commercial docks at Leith, oilrig construction yards at Dalgety Bay and Methil and the naval dockyard at Rosyth, with numerous other industrial areas including the Forth Bridgehead area.

The Kincardine Bridge and the famous Forth Road Bridge and Forth Bridge carry traffic across the Firth.

The inner Firth, i.e. between the Kincardine and Forth bridges, has lost about half of its former intertidal area as a result of land being reclaimed, partly for agriculture, but mainly for industry.

The Firth is important for nature conservation. The Firth of Forth Islands SPA (Special Protection Area) is host to over 90,000 breeding seabirds every year. There is a bird observatory on the Isle of May."

[RuthMayBond]

We haven't begun to get off topic.

From Wikipedia:

"The Firth of Forth is the estuary or firth of Scotland's River Forth, where it flows into the North Sea between Fife to the north, and West Lothian, the City of Edinburgh, and East Lothian to the south. The river is tidal as far inland as Stirling, but generally it is considered that the inland extent of the firth ends at the Kincardine Bridge.

A large number of towns line the shores, as well as the petrochemical complexes at Grangemouth and Burntisland, the commercial docks at Leith, oilrig construction yards at Dalgety Bay and Methil and the naval dockyard at Rosyth, with numerous other industrial areas including the Forth Bridgehead area.

The Kincardine Bridge and the famous Forth Road Bridge and Forth Bridge carry traffic across the Firth.

The inner Firth, i.e. between the Kincardine and Forth bridges, has lost about half of its former intertidal area as a result of land being reclaimed, partly for agriculture, but mainly for industry.

The Firth is important for nature conservation. The Firth of Forth Islands SPA (Special Protection Area) is host to over 90,000 breeding seabirds every year. There is a bird observatory on the Isle of May."Sounds like ElHalo got his "taking the fifth" from his law books mixed up with other establishments :laugh

[schlabotnik]

Yeah, my reasoning behind choosing Musial was that Hornsby at least gets his due among knowledgable fans. I feel that Musial is underrated by just about everyone.


I agree 110 % with everything you have said. Seems to me that in all of our analysis, there is a place called "he won't mind...he's such a nice guy...and people will get this..." I really think Musial hits that note with perfection....

[plask_stirlac]

Ashburn is good, Carew, too.

How about Eddie Plank? Looks like a Top 20 career pitcher raw from what I can gather, but never talked about much. Maybe he wasn't the best pitcher in his (stacked) league even for a short stretch, maybe 326 wins are overrated, he's 79th in ERA+, but he's pretty underrated.

[Bill Burgess]

Under-rated depends on whether or not we're talking about on Fever, in the bar, or is the bar a sports bar.

I will go with Stan the Man for general purposes. He isn't mentioned here as much as he deserves to be, including by me.

When I was a 9 yr. old kid in NJ in 1960, we all knew who Wagner was. Foxx, Ott, DiMag, Williams, Musial, Cobb, Ruth, Big Train, Matty.

Rogers didn't register until I started reading baseball books.

In a bar, few prior to 1950 will register outside of Babe/Ty. My friend Jackie is a raving BB fan. Watches every day, etc. When I asked him his all time team members, all were post 1950. When we came to 2nd base, he knew someone great had once played there but couldn't possibly come up with the name. When I said Hornsby, he asked what team. When I said Cardinals, he said, "Yeah, that must be the guy."

So it appears that Hornsby might be a good test to separate the generic fans from the sharper fans.

I agree with all the other guys mentioned. Gehringer especially.

BB

[Steve Jeltz]

Most Phillie fans don't know what they got until it is gone.

Very, very true. Curt Schilling, Scott Rolen, Del Ennis and Mike Schmidt are just a few players that Phillie fans wanted out. If Ruth,Gehrig, DiMaggio and Mantle were Phillies, the fans would have booed them out of town too. And Phillie fans wonder why they rarely win.

For an underrated players I'm going to pick Mickey Vernon, a borderline HOF canidate, and Richie Ashburn. Ashburn's only "weakness" was a lack of power when compared to his CF counterparts of Mays, Snider and Mantle.

[538280]

What about Kid Nichols? I think he may be the most underrated ever. He was a great pitcher for great teams in a hitter's era. He never seems to come up in discussions of greatest pitchers ever, and yet the numbers are certainly there. He has to be one of the most underrated ever.

Another note:

I'm not a big fan of calling players underrated. Once you start calling a player underrated enough times, he starts to become overrated. I usually try to stay away from calling players underrated, just because they can only be underrated for so long. In the case of Nichols, I'm saying it once and not beating it to death, because once I beat it to death, he'll become overrated.

[HDH]

If these members don't make it, close the poles:
Jim Kaat
Tommy John
Bert Blyleven

Joe Garigiola

[MyDogSparty]

How about Joe Rudi? He ALWAYS came through in the clutch in my Stat-O-Matic baseball board game. :clapping

[RuthMayBond]

What about Kid Nichols? I think he may be the most underrated ever. He was a great pitcher for great teams in a hitter's era. He never seems to come up in discussions of greatest pitchers ever, and yet the numbers are certainly there. He has to be one of the most underrated ever.

Another note:

I'm not a big fan of calling players underrated. Once you start calling a player underrated enough times, he starts to become overrated. I usually try to stay away from calling players underrated, just because they can only be underrated for so long. In the case of Nichols, I'm saying it once and not beating it to death, because once I beat it to death, he'll become overrated.I gotta agree with this. Apparently he gets rated poorly because baseball wasn't that deep back in his era, but other than that, his numbers look like the fifth best pitcher ever (and he did have only 94% of average run support)

[Captain Cold Nose]

If these members don't make it, close the poles:
Jim Kaat
Tommy John
Bert Blyleven

Joe Garigiola

Garagiola is where he deserves to be, a Frick award winner with a picture in the basement.

[DoubleX]

Which already very respected and accomplished players, tend to still go underrated?

The first one that comes to my mind is Tony Gwynn. I don't think people fully realized that we were watching arguably the best base-hitter since Ty Cobb (and almost certainly since Ted Williams). Plus Gwynn had some power as shown by all his doubles, and he had good speed and several gold gloves early in his career.

[abacab]

Among recent players only (since I'm a little tired of talking about players who died decades before I was born):

Raines, Bagwell, Biggio. Great all-around players always go underrated.

To a lesser extent, Piazza - mention his name and the first thing most people think of is "terrible defense" as opposed to "best hitting catcher ever by a huge margin".

[Ubiquitous]

I'd go with Mike Piazza as well.

For pitchers I would throw in Greg Maddux. He suffers the fatal flaw of not being Roger Clemens or a fireballer.

[abacab]

For pitchers, I'd add Mike Mussina and Trevor Hoffman.

[Brian McKenna]

johnny mize
tom henke


i used to say palmiero to this question

[KCGHOST]

I don't think any of those guys were underrated. Maybe underhyped.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I don't think any of those guys were underrated. Maybe underhyped.
That's come up before, KCGHOST. I share your train of thought, though. I don't think multiple award winners of first-ballot Hall of famers can really be considered underrated. Kind of forgotten over time, maybe. But not underrated.
Mize was underrated because the writers who saw him everyday didn't think enough of him to vote him into the HOF. He was well-regarded as the guy who blasted three HR in one World Series for the yankees, and had some battles for the HR title with Ralph Kiner. But his value of a baseball player wasn't fully appreciated. It took the Veteran's Committee to finally get it right, but only after Hack Wilson and Chuck Klein got in.
Tim Raines was also underrated, because he was regarded as one of the speed guys while his overall game wasn't appreciated as much as it shoud have been.
Trevor Hoffman has been overshadowed by the likes of Mariano Rivera and John Smoltz, but he shouldn't ave to take a backseat to anyone, whe he's healthy.
Tim Wallach and Bobby Grich are two players during my lifetime who struck me as not being as well-regarded as they should have been.

[ElHalo]

I'd go with Rabbit Maranville. People just think of him as one of the worst HoF selections of all time (very, very wrongly) rather than as the guy who, in his time, was as big a star as anybody of his era (excepting Ruth and Cobb).

[Ubiquitous]

I'd go with Rabbit Maranville, in his time, was as big a star as anybody of his era (excepting Ruth and Cobb).


Come again?

[yankees-chick]

Which already very respected and accomplished players, tend to still go underrated?

The first one that comes to my mind is Tony Gwynn. I don't think people fully realized that we were watching arguably the best base-hitter since Ty Cobb (and almost certainly since Ted Williams). Plus Gwynn had some power as shown by all his doubles, and he had good speed and several gold gloves early in his career.

As a san dieguan, I have to agree with you on Tony Gwynn. here in SD he is a legend and so appreciated, but i dont see much of him outside of the padres arena.

[ElHalo]

Like I said, people really, REALLY don't realize, but Maranville was a HUGE star in his own time, a true superstar... but people just look at his stats and shrug. Rabbit didn't play much in 25-27 due to injuries and alcoholism, but other than that, he was in the MVP voting every single year that there was voting between 1913 and 1933. He was a huge drawing card, and wildly popular, a serious media darling who was always in the newspapers and always billed when his team came to town. People just don't seem to realize this, but, from what I've read, he was supposedly the single most entertaining defensive player in baseball history.

[Ubiquitous]

Rabbit was a character and he played defense or I should say some plays in an unconventional way but we are not talking about a great player like Collins or Hornsby here.

Maybe I missed it but how many votes did he get in 1925, 1926, 1927, and 1930?

If he was a HUGe star how come it took him 14 elections to vote him into the Hall of Fame? His vote totals never really got going until he was near death and he didn't get elected until he died. The people who vote for the hall of fame are the exact same people who make players into stars, the reporters and the reporters certainly didn't view him the same way they viewed other players of that era. Hornsby was actually getting votes before he retired and got on the 5th time his name appeared on a vote. Eddie Collins got in the 4th time his name appeared. Tris Speaker second time. Pete Alexander the third time, Sisler 4th time, Cochrane 6th time, and Frisch 6th time.

Do I think he was a star? Yeah, but I don't think one could make the claim that he was as big as anybody except Ruth and Cobb.

[digglahhh]

Brian Giles

Bobby Abreu (although he is kind of gaining that ironic popularity for the best the posterchild for unappreciated star)

Craig Biggio

Tony Oliva

Piazza too, people don't seem to remember that season he hit over .360, and he was jerked out of an MVP by a steroid ridden Caminetti. His numbers are more outstanding when you factor in that he played his career in Dedger and Shea Stadiums.

[charlesblalack@yahoo.com]

Craig Biggio- One of the 3-5 best players of the 90s.
Todd Helton- Yes he plays at Coors, but his numbers are too great to ignore.
BRIAN GILES- Great OBP guy, still one of the best players in the NL (4th in Win Shares)

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Like I said, people really, REALLY don't realize, but Maranville was a HUGE star in his own time, a true superstar... but people just look at his stats and shrug. Rabbit didn't play much in 25-27 due to injuries and alcoholism, but other than that, he was in the MVP voting every single year that there was voting between 1913 and 1933. He was a huge drawing card, and wildly popular, a serious media darling who was always in the newspapers and always billed when his team came to town.
I checked his MVP voting record:

1913-NL-3-0.36
1914-NL-2-0.69
1924-NL-7-0.41
1928-NL-10-0.18
1929-NL-15-0.10
1931-NL-10-0.19
1932-NL-17-0.06
1933-NL-12-0.14

I don't think finishing 10th or lower is that impressive. While you statement that he should up in a lot of MVP voting is technically true it's misleading because most of the time he finished way down in the voting.

People just don't seem to realize this, but, from what I've read, he was supposedly the single most entertaining defensive player in baseball history.
Was he more entertaining defensively than Ozzie Smith, or Willie Mays, or Brooks Robinson?

[Transplanted Fan]

Harold Baines
Mark Grace
Chipper Jones
Barry Larkin
Roberto Alomar
Carlos Lee

[Buzzaldrin]

Mize was underrated because the writers who saw him everyday didn't think enough of him to vote him into the HOF. He was well-regarded as the guy who blasted three HR in one World Series for the yankees, and had some battles for the HR title with Ralph Kiner. But his value of a baseball player wasn't fully appreciated. It took the Veteran's Committee to finally get it right, but only after Hack Wilson and Chuck Klein got in.


"Your arm is gone, your legs likewise, but not your eyes, Mize, not your eyes."

Who wrote that anyhow?

[ElHalo]

Rabbit was a character and he played defense or I should say some plays in an unconventional way but we are not talking about a great player like Collins or Hornsby here.

Actually, during their respective careers, Maranville was a FAR more popular player than Hornsby. Hornsby was seen as the better player, certainly, but he was generally unliked, while Rabbit tended to be loved by everyone.

Maybe I missed it but how many votes did he get in 1925, 1926, 1927, and 1930?

As I said, he was largely out of the major leagues in 25-27 because of lingering problems with alcohol abuse (hence the disclaimer for those years in my post above). There was no MVP award in 1930.

[ElHalo]

I checked his MVP voting record:

1913-NL-3-0.36
1914-NL-2-0.69
1924-NL-7-0.41
1928-NL-10-0.18
1929-NL-15-0.10
1931-NL-10-0.19
1932-NL-17-0.06
1933-NL-12-0.14

I don't think finishing 10th or lower is that impressive. While you statement that he should up in a lot of MVP voting is technically true it's misleading because most of the time he finished way down in the voting.

I don't think it's misleading at all. His voting record is very similar to Derek Jeter's, who I think of as a good comparison to Rabbit... wildly popular player who's entertaining as hell to watch, and had a better reputation than a lot of people who were actually better than him. While he might have been overrated in his time, he was largely forgotten about after that, and as a result has swung back to being underrated.

Was he more entertaining defensively than Ozzie Smith, or Willie Mays, or Brroks Robinson?

Supposedly, yes.

[iPod]

Actually, during their respective careers, Maranville was a FAR more popular player than Hornsby. Hornsby was seen as the better player, certainly, but he was generally unliked, while Rabbit tended to be loved by everyone.


But how much value does this have?

[wilkerson_rulz-06]

Brian Schneider. Big-time underrated. At one point in the season he was batting .293 and was hot at the plate. The only problem is...very streaky, finished batting .269. Still the best defensively, threw out the most baserunners in MLB. I hope the Nats fire their hitting coach so Schneider's numbers can improve(for that to happen they must move out of RFK):grouchy

[538280]

But how much value does this have?

To ElHalo, it has lots of value. :D

Anyway, for me the answer to this question is Tim Raines. He was truly and all time great, top 50 all time player, but he goes overlooked by most. Leadoff men are often underrated, because they don't post the most exciting, eye catching numbers, but their job is very important. Raines was better at that job than everyone in history except Rickey Henderson.

[Ubiquitous]

I don't think it's misleading at all. His voting record is very similar to Derek Jeter's, who I think of as a good comparison to Rabbit... wildly popular player who's entertaining as hell to watch, and had a better reputation than a lot of people who were actually better than him. While he might have been overrated in his time, he was largely forgotten about after that, and as a result has swung back to being underrated.


Again though it isn't like the BBWAA didn't start voting 30 years after he retired. They started voting shortly after his retirement and did not think much of him compared to his contemporaries. These are the same writers who while he was playing made him out to be as great as all the others, or so you claim, yet only a few short years later they forget about him. Yet they don't forget about his contemporaries. He may have been popular but the writers at least apparently realized he was a second tier star.

Joe Carter was popular and well liked and during the bad days of Cleveland billed as their star but that doesn't mean he was as good as or as big of a star as Roger Clemens, Rickey Henderson, Frank Thomas, and others.

[Chisox]

Unless otherwise, I'm taking this to mean under-rated by the public.

I think the most under-rated player ever has to be a SS/P who was very instrumental in the early game by the name of John Montgomery Ward. He's arguably a HOF player based on his play as a SS, and pitched more innings with a much lower ERA in five fewer seasons that Koufax. I don't think he'll ever get the love he deserves over a century later.

Other under-rated players are certainly Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio, and I think Roberto Alomar's greatness has been mostly forgotten. Frank Robinson, Honus Wagner, and Stan Musial are certainly under-rated by them along with Arky Vaughan and George Davis. Ed Delahanty, Al Simmons, Barry Larkin, the Tiger's tandem of Trammell and Whitaker, Bobby Grich, Joe Sewell and Cronin, and Jimmy Wynn fit into that.

For current players, I'd have to say that Brian Giles, Jason Bay, Travis Hafner, and Jose Guillen fit.

[dgarza]

Robin Yount
Tim Raines
Jose Cruz
Don Gullet
Ken Singleton
Dwane Murphy to some extent -6 GGs in a row - 114 OPS+ .246 avg - 0 ASGs
John Tudor
Ellis Burks
Joe Adcock
Arky Vaughan
Ed Delahanty
Dan Brouthers
Buck Ewing
Harold Baines
Gene Garber
Dan Plesac
Rico Carty
Alvin Davis
Glenn Davis

[Captain Cold Nose]

One player who didn't get the recognition he deserved outside his hometown was Kent Hrbek. Good hitter, and better defensively then he was credited for. He made a stink early in his career about not making the all star team, and that may have hurt him.

[dgarza]

Johnny Allen

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I don't think it's misleading at all. His voting record is very similar to Derek Jeter's, who I think of as a good comparison to Rabbit... wildly popular player who's entertaining as hell to watch, and had a better reputation than a lot of people who were actually better than him. While he might have been overrated in his time, he was largely forgotten about after that, and as a result has swung back to being underrated.
Again, Rabbit finished better than 10th in the MVP voting just three times. That's not imprerssive at all. And how does one define "entertaining"?

Supposedly, yes.
Most of the people that say Rabbit play never saw Ozzie Smith play, right? Being an entertaining players isn't the same as being great ballplayer.

[Chisox]

One player who didn't get the recognition he deserved outside his hometown was Kent Hrbek. Good hitter, and better defensively then he was credited for. He made a stink early in his career about not making the all star team, and that may have hurt him.

You know, if Maris didn't hit 61 in '61, I'd say that Hrbek was about as deserving for the HOF as Maris.

[BoSox Rule]

Bert Blyleven is one of the 15-20 best pitchers ever.

[Chisox]

Bert Blyleven is one of the 15-20 best pitchers ever.

Maybe, just maybe, if you're going by strike-outs. Otherwise, how do you get that?

[BoSox Rule]

I've made this post at a few boards.

"Bert Blyleven is one of the best pitchers in the history of baseball and he isn't in the Hall of Fame. He had a 3.31 ERA in almost 5,000 innings. Let's just give Bert Blyleven the free 30 innings and look at this list.

5,000 innings with an ERA under 3.40.

Cy Young
Pud Galvin
Walter Johnson
Phil Niekro
Nolan Ryan
Gaylord Perry
Don Sutton
Warren Spahn
Steve Carlton
Pete Alexander
Kid Nichols
Tim Keefe
*Bert Blyleven

All of these players are in the Hall of Fame. Now, let's look at their peripherals (translated to today's game from BP, to make the era adjustment) just to take out the luck factor.

Cy Young: 6.3 K/9, 1.2 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9
Pud Galvin: 3.6 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 1.1 HR/9
Walter Johnson: 8.0 K/9, 2.1 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9
Phil Niekro: 6.8 K/9, 2.8 HR/9, 0.9 HR/9
Nolan Ryan: 10.2 K/9, 4.8 BB/9, 0.7 HR/9
Gaylord Perry: 6.4 K/9, 2.1 BB/9, 0.8 HR/9
Don Sutton: 6.3 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 1.1 BB/9
Warren Spahn: 5.5 K/9, 2.2 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9
Steve Carlton: 8.0 K/9, 2.9 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9
Pete Alexander: 6.5 K/9, 1.6 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
Kid Nichols: 6.5 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9
Tim Keefe: 6.2 K/9, 3.2 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9
*Bert Blyleven: 7.4 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9

And here are their translated ERA's:
Cy Young: 3.07
Pud Galvin: 4.30
Walter Johnson: 2.98
Phil Niekro: 3.43
Nolan Ryan: 3.53
Gaylord Perry: 3.28
Don Sutton: 3.64
Warren Spahn: 3.25
Steve Carlton: 3.49
Pete Alexander: 3.22
Kid Nichols: 3.15
Tim Keefe: 4.05
*Bert Blyleven: 3.22

[mordeci]

I've never been a big believer in Blyleven for the HOF. He averaged 13 wins/year for 22 years. I believe that longevity should be heavily weighted in hof consideration, but longevity is really all Blyleven has. Plus the guy gave up 2.7 billion home runs (approximately).

[538280]

Again, Rabbit finished better than 10th in the MVP voting just three times. That's not imprerssive at all. And how does one define "entertaining"?


That's a good point, HWR.

ElHalo,

Entertaininment value should have almost no effect on a player's merit. Eric Davis may have been the most entertaining player I've ever seen. Does that make him a HOFer? Jose Guillen is very entertaining. Does that make him a HOFer? I could give you tons of players who are extremely entertaining and I'd get up early to watch. Does that make all of the HOFers?

Entertainment value does not translate to actually helping teams win, ElHalo.

[Ubiquitous]

To defend ElHalo, which for me is an odd thing to be doing, I don't think he is saying that Rabbit was as valuable on the field as say Hornsby or Collins but that he was as popular and as entertaining if not moreso then those guys. And by ignoring him or forgetting him, or pigeonholing him into a stereotype we under-rate his impact on the game of baseball in that era.

[charlesblalack@yahoo.com]

Words can't describe how underrated Brian Giles is

[ElHalo]

That's a good point, HWR.

ElHalo,

Entertaininment value should have almost no effect on a player's merit. Eric Davis may have been the most entertaining player I've ever seen. Does that make him a HOFer? Jose Guillen is very entertaining. Does that make him a HOFer? I could give you tons of players who are extremely entertaining and I'd get up early to watch. Does that make all of the HOFers?

No, but it's most certainly a factor to be considered. Daryll Strawberry was immensely entertaining, but that doesn't make him a truly great player.

However, when you're talking about two players who had a fairly comparable effect on their teams' ability to win (like, say, Derek Jeter and Miguel Tejada), the aesthetic differences should absolutely be taken into account, and largely so. Baseball is entertainment, people. It serves absolutely no other purpose in the world. Home Runs, walks, and strikeouts are the three least interesting outcomes of an at bat in baseball. A player who does those a lot is not entertaining. That has to be factored into the equation.

Entertainment value does not translate to actually helping teams win, ElHalo.

Absolutely not, but winning isn't necessarily the only factor to be considered.

[Chisox]

No, but it's most certainly a factor to be considered. Daryll Strawberry was immensely entertaining, but that doesn't make him a truly great player.

However, when you're talking about two players who had a fairly comparable effect on their teams' ability to win (like, say, Derek Jeter and Miguel Tejada), the aesthetic differences should absolutely be taken into account, and largely so. Baseball is entertainment, people. It serves absolutely no other purpose in the world. Home Runs, walks, and strikeouts are the three least interesting outcomes of an at bat in baseball. A player who does those a lot is not entertaining. That has to be factored into the equation.
#1.Miguel Tejada is better than Derek Jeter, at least over the past few years. He is also everybit as "entertaining" for me to watch because I'm scared to death of facing him, something I cannot say for Jeter.
#2.Yeah, the world certainly stayed away from the Mark McGwire, Mickey Mantles, and Reggie Jackson's of the world, and in his day, Babe Ruth.


Absolutely not, but winning isn't necessarily the only factor to be considered. Huh? I have no idea how to answer that. #1You're a Yankee's fan. #2.I cannot think of any team that values entertainment over winning. Wait, I just remembered the Cubs. Maybe you have a point.:eek:

[plask_stirlac]

Kevin Brown
Fred McGriff

Without going into a little detail. I could.

And Jason Schmidt should have a Cy Young, it just was Gagne's year, too. Schmidt pitched like Maddux, but you'd think the clincher would be his ace status on a first-place, 100 win team, which Gagne didn't have.

[digglahhh]

EH,

I hate to come down on you because you think more like I do than most on this board but, you just mentioned the three least interesting outcomes of an AB, in your opinion. BB,K,HR. You also claimed Strawberry was an entertaining player. He spent many seasons on the leaderboards on all three of those categories. That seems kind of paradoxical, unless you were referring to off the field, where Strawberry was as "interesting" as anyone.

One more thing, what exatly is entertainment value? Doesn't that really pertain mostly to the casual fan; knowledgable and passionate fans are entertained by the game itself, no?

I guess I shouldn't be talking though I love Allen Iverson and can't stand Tim Duncan.

[joshlaw1976]

For me I'd have to say Andre Dawson. He doesn't get the credit I think he deserves.

[rsuriyop]

Too many candidates to list for that title...

In no particular order:

1. Gabby Hartnett
2. Ed Cicotte
3. Dazzy Vance
4. Sherry Magee
5. Wes Ferrell
6. Cy Young
7. Ron Santo
8. Dick Allen
9. Joe Wood
10. Tony Oliva
11. Mordecai Brown
12. Ed Walsh
13. Edd Roush
14. Stan Coveleski
15. Bill Freehan
16. Tim Raines
17. Johnny Mize

Any of the above would do in my book.

[538280]

Dawson was overrated IMO. He was a pretty good slugger, but he couldn't get on base to save his life (below average OBP), and lost his defensive ability in the 2nd half of his career. The MVP he won was one of the worst selections in history. His 119 OPS+ is not anything special for an OFer.

Most underrated player-Jimmy Wynn

[Gee Walker]

1. Gil McDougald
2. Willie Davis
3. Bill Freehan
4. Bobby Grich
5. Frank Howard

[Taco De Muerte]

Tim Raines, Joe Torre, Darrell Evans, Jimmy Wynn, Gary Sheffield.

[538280]

Tim Raines, Joe Torre, Darrell Evans, Jimmy Wynn, Gary Sheffield.

I would agree with all of those. All of them I rate much higher than the general consensus.

[STLCards2]

Some pre-1900's players underrated by general public and BBF:

Kid Nichols
Cap Anson
Ed Delehanty
Dan Brouthers
John Clarkson
Tim Keefe
Billy Hamilton

Others:

Stan Coveleski
Mordeci Brown
Arkie Vaughn
Gabby Hartnett
Joe Cronin
Goose Goslin
Joe McGinnity
Sam Leever
Billy Pierce
Earl Averill
Edd Roush
Zach Wheat
Bobby Grich
Vern Stephens
Fred McGriff
Tom Glavine
Kevin Brown
Mike Mussina

...many others

[baseballPAP]

Tim Raines, Joe Torre, Darrell Evans, Jimmy Wynn, Gary Sheffield.
BINGO! 5 for 5...I'd throw in Billy Hamilton, every star from Japan, and Willie McCovey as well....he gets so little credit, yet he slugged right on through the pitcher's era.

[Sockeye]

Fred McGriff
Jose Canseco
Andre Dawson
Darrell Evans
Dave Kingman
Rafael Palmeiro
Sammy Sosa
Juan Gonzalez

[The Dude]

Ted Simmons.

[Ubiquitous]

For me I'd have to say Andre Dawson. He doesn't get the credit I think he deserves.


An old post about Dawson from me, personally I think he is more over-rated then under-rated.


Personally I don't think he should go to the hall of fame but I don't have a vote. So my opinion really doesn't matter.

Since this is a Cubs section and most of us are Cub fans and a little bias to our Cubbies. I believe though that when you talk about national awards such as MVP, Cy Young, or HOF you should put your local favoritism aside and look at it with open eyes. Having said this and knowing what I am going to say next. Let me state that I loved watching Dawson play and was glad he was on our team.

Dawson was a good player not a great player. In fact I believe his best seasons were with the expos not with the Cubs. If you look at his 1987 MVP seasons it isn't all that great. In fact he had better season with the expos then that year. The reason he won the award is because he led the league in HR and RBI's two stats that voters love. Even though those two stats might not be the best indicators of importance. That year he crushed 49 HR's (which is a mind-boggling number back then in the 80's) but only slugged .568 and had a on-base percentage of .329. He couldn't even get on-base a third of the time (also his career OBP is .327). In fact he isn't even in the top five in slugging that year.

Lets look at the traditional stats that most people look at when evaluating players. He only top 100 RBI's 4 times in his 21 seasons. He only tops 100 runs twice. He only hits 30 or more HR's three times. In fact he only avg 21 hrs a season. He only hits over .300 4 times. True he did bat .299 one year, but to credit that then you have to discount the years he batted .301 and .302. He never topped 200 hits, he topped 180 twice. Andre did have a stretch of seven seasons where he did top 20 SB's. Everybody likes to look at his low home run total and say "well he played in a different era. Players didn't hit as many HR's. You have to factor that in." And they are right in saying that. Unfortunatly they don't factor his era in when looking at his SB's. Andre played in an era where it was common for the SB leaders to have 60, 70, 80, 90, or even over 100 SB's in a season. In fact Andre was never in the top 5 in SB's any of those 7 years. In fact we was only slighly above average in SB's those years. To me just looking at the traditional stats reveals nothing truly great about Dawson.

Looking at the non-traditional stats like OBP, Slugging, and BB/K ration reveals even further that Dawson doesn't deserve to go into the hall. From what I understand .500 Slugging is the benchmark for above average hitter. Dawsons career avg is .482, he only tops .500 4 times. His career OBP is .327 he only has 2 seasons above .350. His career BB/K is close to 1/3. Which means for every walk he strikes out three times. Which any stat head will tell you is unacceptable.


To me Dawsons numbers look good or I should say better than they really are because he played long after he should of retired. I personally think he should of retired after the 1990 season. Yeah the next season he hit 31 homers but that was basically all he did. He hung around for six more seasons basically as a spare part or being a name. You take away those six years of padding and he would lose 93 homers and something like 370 RBI's. Granted if you like we can subtract his 91 from that list and say he should of retire after 91 not 90 but still he would padding. Dawson in my view was an all or nothing guy. He would either hit one over the wall, off the wall, into a mitt, or strike out. He was not a complete hitter and it shows in his stats much more than in the retelling of his legend.


Basically this is what I believe to be true. Andre Dawson was a great Cub Player because of his leadership and his persona. He was not however a great Major League Ballplayer worthy of the HOF. A good ballplayer yes, great one no.

[Wee Willie]

Arky Vaughan
Roger Connor
Darrell Evans
Pee Wee Reese
Lou Whitaker
Bobby Grich
Dick Allen
Ron Santo
Tim Raines

[TheSandman]

I have to say Gary Sheffield. Gary's one of my favorite players and is extremely underrated, mainly due to the way the media portrays him.

[Yankwood]

For me I'd have to say Andre Dawson. He doesn't get the credit I think he deserves.I agree. Very good all-around player.

[geezer]

Eddie Murray

Hank Aaron (He deserved more credit)

Ted Simmons

Jeff Bagwell

Craig Biggio

Garett Andeson

[THE OX]

I'd like to celebrate my first post on this board by nominating the Phillies main offense between 1946 and 1956: DEL ENNIS!

[flash143817]

Jimmy Wynn and Dick Allen for sure. Both deserve to be in the HOF.


Going back to the 19th century I think Billy Hamilton is underrated. Everyone remembers guys like Anson, Delahanty, Brouthers, and even Roger Conner, but nobody in the general public knows who Billy Hamilton is and he might have been better than all of them.

[538280]

Hamilton may be underrated in the sense literally no casual fans would have heard of him, and he wasn't thought to be so great while active, but I think his great raw numbers have led to him being somewhat overrated by historians. Adjust for context and LQ, and he's nowhere near the leadoff man Rickey or Raines were.

[futurehalloffamer]

Fred McGriff
Jose Canseco
Andre Dawson
Darrell Evans
Dave Kingman
Rafael Palmeiro
Sammy Sosa
Juan Gonzalez

How is Sammy Sosa underrated? He used a corcked bat and played dumb "no speak English!" in front of congress, for christ sake!

[geezer]

According to ESPN, when they did the "Who's #1" on underrated players, Stan Musial finished #1 in that list, he is also not mentioned as much.

[Wee Willie]

How is Sammy Sosa underrated? He used a corcked bat and played dumb "no speak English!" in front of congress, for christ sake!
I agree. Sosa belongs on the overrated thread.

[538280]

According to ESPN, when they did the "Who's #1" on underrated players, Stan Musial finished #1 in that list, he is also not mentioned as much.

That "Who's #1" show was ridiculous. Musial isn't underrated at all, and he's not really overrated either. I think most have him around 10th. I have him 14th, which would make him perhaps a bit overrated in my eyes, but I don't think many people would call him particularly overrated or underrated.

[geezer]

That "Who's #1" show was ridiculous. Musial isn't underrated at all, and he's not really overrated either. I think most have him around 10th. I have him 14th, which would make him perhaps a bit overrated in my eyes, but I don't think many people would call him particularly overrated or underrated.

That list of ESPN makes some questionable choices, I dont consider Frank Robinson underrated, he received the credit he deserved, and Hank Aaron received a lot of credit, but I think deserved a little more respect, well thats my opinion.

[john1972]

Eddie Murray

Hank Aaron (He deserved more credit)

Ted Simmons

Jeff Bagwell

Craig Biggio

Garett Andeson

Craig Biggio? Was he not ranked 35th player all time by Bill James whom many regard highly for his baseball opinion. Where was Alomar on that same list?
80th? And when Biggio collects 3000 hits his perceived value will inflate even more. In my strong opinion, Biggio will be the most overrated player of the past 25 years along with Ripken.

It blows my mind that people will consider Biggio superior to Alomar given the fact he lasted longer. In Alomar's prime years he was a force on more levels than Biggio. How was Biggio better? Based on the secondary stats. Where were those secondary stats in the playoffs?

Mark my words, Alomar should go down as the most underrated player. I have my doubts he'll even get in the Hall of Fame. When Biggio collects 3000 hits he'll probably go first ballot. If this situation unfolds it will be one of the greatest travesties ever. And I'm strongly thinking it may well happen.

[Gee Walker]

Although Craig Biggio leads Roberto Alomar in almost all the secondary factors, little things like walks, hits, and range at second base, Alomar does lead Biggio 1-0 in spitting on an umpire.

[geezer]

Craig Biggio? Was he not ranked 35th player all time by Bill James whom many regard highly for his baseball opinion. Where was Alomar on that same list?
80th? And when Biggio collects 3000 hits his perceived value will inflate even more. In my strong opinion, Biggio will be the most overrated player of the past 25 years along with Ripken.

It blows my mind that people will consider Biggio superior to Alomar given the fact he lasted longer. In Alomar's prime years he was a force on more levels than Biggio. How was Biggio better? Based on the secondary stats. Where were those secondary stats in the playoffs?

Mark my words, Alomar should go down as the most underrated player. I have my doubts he'll even get in the Hall of Fame. When Biggio collects 3000 hits he'll probably go first ballot. If this situation unfolds it will be one of the greatest travesties ever. And I'm strongly thinking it may well happen.

And what if Alomar never hanged it up at 37??

[john1972]

And what if Alomar never hanged it up at 37??

Well I suppose he would have continued to stink. I guess he had deteriorating vision. Makes me sick to my stomach his career became derailed so quick. Funny thing, I don't think he cares much.

[futurehalloffamer]

That "Who's #1" show was ridiculous. Musial isn't underrated at all, and he's not really overrated either. I think most have him around 10th. I have him 14th, which would make him perhaps a bit overrated in my eyes, but I don't think many people would call him particularly overrated or underrated.

Musial is a very underrated player...he never really gets the recognition of players like Joe Dimaggio, despite the fact that Stan was the vastly superieor player. However, most people know that he is one of the greatest players ever (quite likely the greatest living player) so I'm not so sure he belongs at number one.

[futurehalloffamer]

In many ways it can be argued that Rickey Henderson is an underrated player. His supersized ego may make some people hate to admit it, but he is one of the greatest to ever play the game. If Ripken gets 100% of the Hall of Fame vote and Rickey doesn't, count me in disgust!

[wamby]

In many ways it can be argued that Rickey Henderson is an underrated player. His supersized ego may make some people hate to admit it, but he is one of the greatest to ever play the game. If Ripken gets 100% of the Hall of Fame vote and Rickey doesn't, count me in disgust!

I met Rickey Henderson in the Cincinnati airport in November of 1990. It was a very interesting encounter.

[geezer]

Musial is a very underrated player...he never really gets the recognition of players like Joe Dimaggio, despite the fact that Stan was the vastly superieor player. However, most people know that he is one of the greatest players ever (quite likely the greatest living player) so I'm not so sure he belongs at number one.

The greatest living playera are between Musial, Mays and Aaron.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

The greatest living playera are between Musial, Mays and Aaron.

I agree, with one provision:

You've doubtless seen the projected stats for Bonds if he weren't cheating. They have him just over 600 HR's, with various other very big #'s. All the #'s I saw looked very reliable, based on the assumptions he'd have enormously fewer walks and a vastly reduced HR/AB ratio, but would recover quite a lot of HR's because of the many, many increased AB's he'd have. I absolutely don't believe steroids/HGH have increased his career longevity--they sure didn't for McGwire or Sosa, among others--so these projections seem reasonable to me.

IF you want to give Bonds credit for these realistic projections, and dump what obviously were phony stats, I think he'd go ahead of both Musial and Aaron. If not--if you want to take the reasonable view that he should be given no credit at all after 1999, or after 2000--then I agree with Bill James' incredibly timely comment after the 1999 season that as of then, Bonds was the #14 MLB player ever, and the #16 total player ever (with Charleston #4 and Josh Gibson #9).

Has any baseball historian ever written anything with such amazing timing?

BHN

[flash143817]

I think most people penalize Bonds too much for his alleged steroid use. Most people only seem to believe that hitters were using steroids. I find this highly unlikely. One pitcher I personally believe was probably using steroids just from watching the Dodgers and his career path was Eric Gagne. I've also heard speculation that Roger Clemens was possibly juicing.

There were most likely roughly equal numbers of hitters and pitchers using steroids which would lead me to believe that there shouldn't be a discount to Bonds' numbers because they were achieved against cheating pitchers which would balance out his alleged cheating.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

The numbers I'm talking about are not nearly as "penal" as what all the baseball fans I know would propose. These numbers give him something like 620 or 640 HR's, a huge number of runs scored, a lot of RBI's, and I believe they put his SB's over 700. If accepted, they would, in my opinion, make him one of the five greatest players ever. I know almost nobody (in real life) who is willing to consider him anywhere near that high.

So these numbers aren't that punitive. And, living in Northern California as I do, I have to tell you that even without the benefit of the long-distance HR expert's data, it was VERY obvious to me by mid-2000 that Bonds was cheating. He was hitting the ball enormously farther and harder than before; his head was obviously much bigger, which just doesn't happen legitimately; etc., etc., etc.

But, like I said, using that garbage sure doesn't do anything for one's playing longevity, so I have to believe Bonds would have continued to be a very fine player even without the garbage. He would not, however, have changed from a fast, all-around star to the second Babe Ruth. And, obviously, if he hadn't "pulled a McGwire/Sosa," he would have had an enormously larger number of AB's, and thus would have recovered at least a fair (good word, huh?) share of the HR's he'd illegitimately gained.

Pretty much all the baseball fans I know are unwilling to give him credit for ANYTHING after 1999, or 2000, if ever. I have a big problem with that, because they don't feel that way about McGwire, who was 10% the player Bonds was au naturel.

I made a post elsewhere on here saying that I'm going to adopt the stats that espn.com's "experts" worked out for Bonds (minus cheating). They look realistic to me, and I'm quite sure Bonds could have kept playing this long without cheating. Hell, he'd probably be in better athletic shape now.

I'm also quite sure that his career stats, and the interpretation of those stats and his historical ranking, are going to be huge problems for baseball historians as long as the game is played. I am not satisfied with either (1) giving him full credit for his b.s.; or (2) throwing out everything after 1999. Given the choice, I'd opt for (2), but I'd rather find a middle ground, and after seeing these projections, I believe middle ground exists.

Yes, I realize a very persuasive argument can be made that Bonds is not entitled to one iota of credit for anything he did after turning himself into a mountain range. Lord knows Palmeiro's career stats will be tossed wholesale into the trash. But I'm not entirely satisfied with that, and I guarantee you historians won't be.

So, again speaking strictly for me, I like the middle-ground approach which both espn.com and others apparently have suggested.

Maybe this is something one has to take a stand on, one way or the other. Maybe there IS no middle ground. But one's been suggested, and I'm taking it. It leaves Bonds behind at least Ruth, whom he's behind anyway, and Mays and Cobb. The overwhelming majority of people at this site rate Honus Wagner much higher than I do, and even if they took my exact perspective on where Bonds rates under this compromise, they would then probably put Wagner ahead of him (if not Mays and/or Cobb, as well). So that's #5 at best, right there.

I don't know. Like I said, the one thing I'm sure of is this: Rating Barry Bonds will be an enormous problem which baseball historians will have to confront as long as the game is played. I'm willing to respect any opinion on the subject, other than "Barry Bonds did not use any performance-enhancing and/or muscle-building substances."

BHN

[BaseballHistoryNut]

I think most people penalize Bonds too much for his alleged steroid use. Most people only seem to believe that hitters were using steroids. I find this highly unlikely. One pitcher I personally believe was probably using steroids just from watching the Dodgers and his career path was Eric Gagne. I've also heard speculation that Roger Clemens was possibly juicing.

There were most likely roughly equal numbers of hitters and pitchers using steroids which would lead me to believe that there shouldn't be a discount to Bonds' numbers because they were achieved against cheating pitchers which would balance out his alleged cheating.


As for Clemens, I have to admit I'm troubled by this possibility. He is currently my #1 all-time RHP, though both Maddux and Johnson may overtake him soon. Although I know of zero direct or circumstantial evidence against Clemens (whereas there's a mountain of circumstantial evidence against Bonds, pun intended), the possibility of his using HGH/steroids is obvious and really troubles me. I want it to be not true, but the suspicious way Ryan kept going sticks in my mind--as does the way Schilling magically got much greater at a late point in his career.

You are, I think, correct that the degree to which pitchers have juiced is way underreported and underconsidered. But NONE of that, in my view, is any excuse for the sorry likes of McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Palmeiro and the innumerable other cheats who have done permanent damage to the game. It's like the parallels to "greenies" and "red juice" in the 50's and 60's. Huge difference between drinking something that increases your energy/keeps you awake, and taking something that turns you into a muscular mountain range who can hit baseballs like they're golf balls.

[soberdennis]

Too many candidates to list for that title...

In no particular order:

1. Gabby Hartnett
2. Ed Cicotte
3. Dazzy Vance
4. Sherry Magee
5. Wes Ferrell
6. Cy Young
7. Ron Santo
8. Dick Allen
9. Joe Wood
10. Tony Oliva
11. Mordecai Brown
12. Ed Walsh
13. Edd Roush
14. Stan Coveleski
15. Bill Freehan
16. Tim Raines
17. Johnny Mize

Any of the above would do in my book.
Young won 511 games and has a major award named after him. How was he underrated?
I agree with Cicotte. Like his more famous fellow "cheater", he put up numbers that would warrant HOF consideration if he were eligible.
I find it interesting that 8 of the 16 eligible players you list are in the HOF.

[john1972]

Although Craig Biggio leads Roberto Alomar in almost all the secondary factors, little things like walks, hits, and range at second base, Alomar does lead Biggio 1-0 in spitting on an umpire.

The last section of your comment is a typical response from someone who believes Biggio had better range than Alomar at second. People who believe those defensive stats tell the whole story are the greatest threat to the understanding of baseball history.

You're right though, Biggio certainly has more counting stats almost across the board, along with more AB's, significantly more strikeouts, and outs recorded. Also Biggio does lead Alomar 1-0 in wearing arm protection that is not completely allowed under regular baseball rules.

[538280]

Musial is a very underrated player...he never really gets the recognition of players like Joe Dimaggio, despite the fact that Stan was the vastly superieor player. However, most people know that he is one of the greatest players ever (quite likely the greatest living player) so I'm not so sure he belongs at number one.

Musial doesn't get the mainstream media attention of Joe DiMaggio, because he wasn't a New York player basically, (and he was better than Joe) but he does get the attention as one of the best baseball players of all time, and he gets plenty of recognition in St.Louis from Cards fans.

He isn't the greatest living player, though, not by a long shot. Willie Mays has that covered pretty well.

[flash143817]

The numbers I'm talking about are not nearly as "penal" as what all the baseball fans I know would propose. These numbers give him something like 620 or 640 HR's, a huge number of runs scored, a lot of RBI's, and I believe they put his SB's over 700. If accepted, they would, in my opinion, make him one of the five greatest players ever. I know almost nobody (in real life) who is willing to consider him anywhere near that high.

So these numbers aren't that punitive. And, living in Northern California as I do, I have to tell you that even without the benefit of the long-distance HR expert's data, it was VERY obvious to me by mid-2000 that Bonds was cheating. He was hitting the ball enormously farther and harder than before; his head was obviously much bigger, which just doesn't happen legitimately; etc., etc., etc.

But, like I said, using that garbage sure doesn't do anything for one's playing longevity, so I have to believe Bonds would have continued to be a very fine player even without the garbage. He would not, however, have changed from a fast, all-around star to the second Babe Ruth. And, obviously, if he hadn't "pulled a McGwire/Sosa," he would have had an enormously larger number of AB's, and thus would have recovered at least a fair (good word, huh?) share of the HR's he'd illegitimately gained.

Pretty much all the baseball fans I know are unwilling to give him credit for ANYTHING after 1999, or 2000, if ever. I have a big problem with that, because they don't feel that way about McGwire, who was 10% the player Bonds was au naturel.

I made a post elsewhere on here saying that I'm going to adopt the stats that espn.com's "experts" worked out for Bonds (minus cheating). They look realistic to me, and I'm quite sure Bonds could have kept playing this long without cheating. Hell, he'd probably be in better athletic shape now.

I'm also quite sure that his career stats, and the interpretation of those stats and his historical ranking, are going to be huge problems for baseball historians as long as the game is played. I am not satisfied with either (1) giving him full credit for his b.s.; or (2) throwing out everything after 1999. Given the choice, I'd opt for (2), but I'd rather find a middle ground, and after seeing these projections, I believe middle ground exists.

Yes, I realize a very persuasive argument can be made that Bonds is not entitled to one iota of credit for anything he did after turning himself into a mountain range. Lord knows Palmeiro's career stats will be tossed wholesale into the trash. But I'm not entirely satisfied with that, and I guarantee you historians won't be.

So, again speaking strictly for me, I like the middle-ground approach which both espn.com and others apparently have suggested.

Maybe this is something one has to take a stand on, one way or the other. Maybe there IS no middle ground. But one's been suggested, and I'm taking it. It leaves Bonds behind at least Ruth, whom he's behind anyway, and Mays and Cobb. The overwhelming majority of people at this site rate Honus Wagner much higher than I do, and even if they took my exact perspective on where Bonds rates under this compromise, they would then probably put Wagner ahead of him (if not Mays and/or Cobb, as well). So that's #5 at best, right there.

I don't know. Like I said, the one thing I'm sure of is this: Rating Barry Bonds will be an enormous problem which baseball historians will have to confront as long as the game is played. I'm willing to respect any opinion on the subject, other than "Barry Bonds did not use any performance-enhancing and/or muscle-building substances."

BHN

I agree with pretty much everything here. I'm certainly not trying to deny that Bonds was juicing. I won't throw him under the bus until there is hard evidence proving that he did, although certainly I put the likelihood at about 99%. My whole point, was just that the pitchers were likely also cheating, which would theoretically balance out Bonds' juicing and make his numbers fairly legit. Now if you wanna get into a debate on whether Bonds should be punished for his ethics due to the steroid use, that is certainly allowable.

I personally rate Bonds in the top 5. Tough to say exactly where in the top 5, but to me he is unquestionably top 5. He was the best player of the last 25 years even before he began the steroid use. That is the difference to me between Bonds and the other alleged 'roiders. He was legitimately an all time great before he started using. Those other players linked to steroids were not. Steroids merely changed the type of player that he was. He went from being a 5-tool, all-around great, to a slugger.

I would be curious to see those projected numbers you referred to however. Just to see how they differ from his actual numbers and where I would place him if he had the projected numbers instead of his actual numbers.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Musial doesn't get the mainstream media attention of Joe DiMaggio, because he wasn't a New York player basically, (and he was better than Joe) but he does get the attention as one of the best baseball players of all time, and he gets plenty of recognition in St.Louis from Cards fans.

He isn't the greatest living player, though, not by a long shot. Willie Mays has that covered pretty well.


I agree Mays is the greatest living player. I don't agree it's "by a long shot." Stan Musial was a TREMENDOUS ball player. He got on base more often than Mays, struck out less often, and, like Mays, played his career in the desegregated league. Ted Williams did not. VERY few people comment on how the NL was where virtually all the great black players went/were taken, but it's a fact, and Musial did great in competition with them.

But Willie he wasn't. Musial is probably Top 10, if you do not include Charleston and Gibson. Mays is Top 5, whether you include them or not.

Remember, however, that one of the great Negro Leaguers--I believe it was Monte Irvin--once said, "Willie Mays is the greatest major leaguer I ever saw, but Oscar Charleston is the greatest baseball player I ever saw."

BHN

[dpc7390]

Harold Baines
Paul Molitor
Luke Easter (look him up, he would've had awesome numbers if it weren't for racism)
Ted Simmons (more RBIs than Bench, more runs than Carter, more hits than Berra or Fisk)
Greg Maddux (most underrated pitcher with 300 wins)
Jimmy Key

[Yankwood]

Harold Baines
Paul Molitor
Luke Easter (look him up, he would've had awesome numbers if it weren't for racism)
Ted Simmons (more RBIs than Bench, more runs than Carter, more hits than Berra or Fisk)
Greg Maddux (most underrated pitcher with 300 wins)
Jimmy KeyLuke Easter was a monster most people aren't aware of.

[geezer]

Mark Grace, the player with the most hits in the 1990s, and had 500+doubles.

[dpc7390]

Another guy who gets no credit, partly because he was a DH, is Edgar Martinez.

[digglahhh]

Not that any of these guys would be the MOST underrated, but they all sure are underrated. Good on base 1Bs without awesome power often get the shaft so I'd like to mention the group of

Hernandez
Clark
Olerud

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Luke Easter was a monster most people aren't aware of.


There is another sports talk site--called Sportztawk, in fact--where the site's most valuable member, one "Toejam", has tragically up and disappeared. (It will never be the same place again, so I'm NOT trying to lure anyone away from here and please nobody accuse me of that.) Anyway, he used to see Luke Easter after his major league career had ended and he was playing for a minor league team near where "Toejam" lived.

Toejam told us about watching Easter. He said the guy just murdered the ball--and this would be well into his 40's, long after his prime. Like that post I saw here about Ruth's hitting the longest HR's in that contest in the late 1930's, when he was well into retirement and competing against the likes of Greenberg, Foxx, etc., still in their primes.

I'm not suggesting Easter was on a par with Ruth, of course, but it sounds like he could hit the ball just about as far. And yeah, it's a bloody shame he couldn't play in the majors.

BHN

[riverfrontier]

Albert Belle.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Albert Belle is a modern Dick Allen. A lot of people will read that sentence and think, "Yeah, BHN is right, he was an immature jerk who could have been a great player if he hadn't been such a jerk, just like Allen."

That's not what I mean. He WAS a great player, unless he juiced. The media hated the guy from day one, set out to crucify him, and repeatedly did so--just like they did with the unequivocally great Allen.

Belle could have hit 80 HR's with 200 RBI's, and they'd have minimized it because he was a lousy fielder, or some such thing. He set TWO franchises' records for HR's in a season. He hit 50 HR's in a season and 50 doubles in a season... IN THE SAME SEASON. He was a great, great hitter.

I will announce right now that he and I have something in common. I, too, am a recovered alcoholic. Yeah, I'm supposed to say "recovering," but I'm not into A.A. and have never attended one of their meetings, and could never have sobered up if I'd needed them, and after 26 years without a drop, I'm comfortable saying recoverED. But when he went into the stands after that fan, the fan allegedly had been taunting him about his illness and suggesting they get together for some drinks. This was shortly after Albert's recovery. If you're not an alcoholic, you don't know how big a thing that is. Yeah, a guy with his muscles should not set upon another man, and having a player attack a fan is terrible publicity, but it was certainly a mitigated offense.

The media were on him like jackals forevermore after that. Now, we've all been saying that Ty Cobb and others should be forgiven for their myriad sins, and rated without regard to their detestible personalities. I absolutely believe that, including the obvious (to me) notion that Cobb's maniacal racism has nothing at all to do with how good a player he was, nor with his fitness for Cooperstown. I also absolutely believe this who-cares-if-he-was-a-jerk method of evaluation applies to Belle. And Belle never went into the stands to beat the hell out of a man with no legs, like Cobb did.

His teammates, who knew him far better than Costas and company, spoke of him much more highly. And while I sure wouldn't rate him more highly than the three of them, I would point out he had a higher career slugging average than Mays, Mantle and Aaron.

BHN

[baseball junkie]

Quickly scanned through the players named and I didn't see him listed so sorry if I'm rehashing another writer's nominee.

My choice broke into the majors at age 21 and was a bona fide star by age 24. Although he played 19 big league season he was elected to just three All-Star Games.

He was a five-tool player with a great combination of power and speed. He was loved in the clubhouse -- a true leader, a man among boys.

His stat line is impressive but not gaudy: 2,380 hits; 1,240 runs, 804 extra base hits -- including 350 home runs; 1,372 RBI; 142 stolen bases; .811 OPS.

He never won any post-season awards. He'll never be in the Hall of Fame but he powered the Minnesota Twins to the 1991 World Series Championship -- launching two home runs in that match up. His career post-season record is 16-2. Not resting on his laurels, he topped off his career in fashion winning back-to-back World Series Championship in 1998 & 1999 with the Yankees.

His name is Charles "Chili" Davis and his is perhaps the most under-rated player of our era or any other.

[wamby]

I'm not suggesting Easter was on a par with Ruth, of course, but it sounds like he could hit the ball just about as far. And yeah, it's a bloody shame he couldn't play in the majors.

BHN

Luke Easter is suppsed to have hit the longest HR in the history of Cleveland Municipal Stadium. I think it was in 1952.

His death was a sad day in Cleveland's history.

[yankillaz]

Ted Simmons.

DIDO. Took the words right out of my fingertips.

[geezer]

Right now, nobody is talking much about Michael Young, last year's batting champions, on pace on his 4th straight 200-hit season.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

I would be curious to see those projected numbers you referred to however. Just to see how they differ from his actual numbers and where I would place him if he had the projected numbers instead of his actual numbers.


Hi, again. I'm browsing around ESPN.com, trying to find those projections. If anyone here is more familiar with--or better able to use--that site than I am, please feel free to post their projections of Barry Bonds' career numbers without the b.s. The hypothesis behind the numbers, with which I agree completely, is that if Bonds hadn't cheated, he would have lost a ton of bases, HR's, R's, RBI's, etc., but would have recovered a lot of the HR's and RBI's because he'd have had an enormously higher number of AB's (and fewer BB's), and thus more opportunities for legit HR's.

Since there is zero evidence steroids or HGH prolongs anyone's career--and, indeed, a fair amount of evidence steroids may shorten one's career--it appears Bonds' great natural talent included a predisposition for career longevity. The numbers I saw had him up to something like 620 HR's, with a huge number of runs and a very impressive number of RBI's. Does anyone else have those numbers, and can you please post them here, as was requested on the previous page of this thread?

They are--as far as I can see--the only "middle ground" between throwing his post-1999 stats in the trash and giving "full faith and credit" to them. Anyway, the guy on the previous page requested them. Anyone got them?

BHN

[flash143817]

Hmm I did some research trying to find the article you spoke of and I think I might have found it except that it doesn't have complete stats, merely a revised HR total to 616.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hruby/060512

[BaseballHistoryNut]

That's not the same one. The one I saw had a lot more than just HR's.

[MasonDixon]

That "Who's #1" show was ridiculous. Musial isn't underrated at all, and he's not really overrated either. I think most have him around 10th. I have him 14th, which would make him perhaps a bit overrated in my eyes, but I don't think many people would call him particularly overrated or underrated.

Well you have to consider ESPN's target audience too. Sure, most of the people here have Musial around 10th. But then realize that in the MLB All-Century Team voting, which probably most accurately captures the opinions of the average fan, Musial finished 11th in the voting... among outfielders. Frank Robinson finished 16th among outfielders. That's how you can call them underrated.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

In that idiotic poll, neither Lefty Grove nor Honus Wagner even made the fricking team, until some "oversight committee" put them on there, to compensate for the ignorance of the voters. The whole thing was a farce, not just the comedic rating of Nolan ("I can walk 'em as fast as I can strike 'em out) Ryan.

[538280]

Well you have to consider ESPN's target audience too. Sure, most of the people here have Musial around 10th. But then realize that in the MLB All-Century Team voting, which probably most accurately captures the opinions of the average fan, Musial finished 11th in the voting... among outfielders. Frank Robinson finished 16th among outfielders. That's how you can call them underrated.

I've seen that voting before, I tried to forget it. The whole thing was a disaster.

I didn't know Frank Robinson finished that low, though. I'm rather surprised, especially since he's still involved in modern baseball (Nationals manager), and thus still in the public's eye.

[mordeci]

1. Arky Vaughan
2. Arky Vaughan
3. Arky Vaughan
4. Arky Vaughan
5. Zack Wheat

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Many people consider Bill James the foremost living authority on baseball history, and it would be pretty hard to claim James has underrated Vaughan. James rates him as the #2 SS of all time, and I doubt you'd want to say Vaughan was better than Honus Wagner, unless you wanted to lose all credibility.

Personally, I don't rate Vaughan quite that high, but I think putting him at #2 is a completely credible, justifiable position. Vaughan's real problem, I believe, was that like Eddie Mathews and various others, he started off with such astonishing greatness, it was impossible for him to maintain the expectations he had created, and he ended up being viewed by many fans of his time as something of a disappointment.

My father was one of those fans. He was real surprised when I told him how good Vaughan's career stats were. He then said, "But Vaughan never had a year nearly as good as that one, right?" I told him, "No, he didn't, but he still had one helluva career. If he'd had lots of years like 1935, he WOULD be rated ahead of Honus Wagner, and just about everyone else."

BHN

[mordeci]

I agree that putting Vaughan at #2 is certainly not underrating him. However, outside of serious, hardcore baseball history fanatics, Vaughan is completely unknown. Bring up Vaughan in the local sports bar and you'll be met with a blank stare. Even on bbf he is an afterthought. Everyone here knows who he is (I hope), but he is rarely mentioned except in the occasional top n list or in comparison to another player. A search of bbf for 'arky' in the title returns only 3 threads.

I would also like to add Hippo Vaughn to my list of underrateds. Maybe it's something about the last name.

[tommydale1]

FERGIE JENKINS
Michael Young
Vernon Wells
Bobby Abreau (sp?)

They get credit...but not the amount they deserve. These guys put up great numbers!

[538280]

FERGIE JENKINS


I definitely agree about Fergie. Almost everyone has Jim Palmer ahead of him. Fergie's edge is longevity, of course, but most people think Palmer had a much better peak and better when he played. I think they're wrong, simply because Palmer had some of the best defenses of all time behind him, and also Jenkins was a hitting machine in best season (1971), something that should defnitely be taken into account. Palmer's DERA is just three points higher, with Jenkins' longevity his figure is more impressive. I think if people took more trust in adjusting for defense behind and less on raw ERA they may see Jenkins was probably the better pitcher. I made another post on this a while ago.

[Baseball Guru]

Tim Raines, Joe Torre, Darrell Evans, Jimmy Wynn, Gary Sheffield.


Good call and I'd add Fred McGriff to the mix as well...

[Redfoot]

A few I will throw out there, and would be happy to discuss: Norm Cash, Brian Giles, Charlie Keller, Bret Saberhagen.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Bill James wrote at some length about Keller in his circa 1985 historical abstract, and put him in the Reiser/Score/Conigliaro group of guys who coulda been much greater than they were. Keller, as many of you know, had his career derailed by degerative lower-back disc problems, a congenital problem. James seems to think this guy could have been a player like Frank Thomas was in the first half of his career, getting on base a ton and hitting the bejesus out of the ball, to boot.

He had limited range, due to considerable size, but an OBP over .400 in 7 of his first 8 years, and a slugging percentages over .500 in all 8. Those stats are hard to argue with. In those first eight years:

(1) He was always in double figures in HR's, and hit the 30 mark 3 times;

(2) He slugged between .500 and .580 EVERY year;

(3) He had five seasons of over 100 BB's, three of over 100 runs, and three of over 100 RBI's, yet only struck out 499 times in 4,604 plate appearances;

and,

(4) Despite obvious strength (nickname, "Charlie King Kong Keller"), he grounded into fewer than 1 double play per 77 career AB's.

James naturally did not rate Keller among the Top 10 RF's of all time in "Career Value." In "Peak Value," however, James rated them as follows:

1. Babe Ruth
2. Mel Ott [grrr]
3. Hank Aaron
4. Frank Robinson
5. Charlie Keller
6. Roberto Clemente [grrr]
7. Reggie Jackson
8. Paul Waner
9. Chuck Klein
10. TIE: Kaline & Winfield

IF you buy the legitimacy of James' RC/27 stat (huge "IF"), Keller might be the greatest eligible player not in the Hall. I'm not saying a guy with his relatively few PA's should get in, but he had a MUCH better career than a whole lotta Hall members. His career was ruined by congenital back problems, as was that of his son.

BHN

[538280]

IF you buy the legitimacy of James' RC/27 stat (huge "IF"), Keller might be the greatest eligible player not in the Hall. I'm not saying a guy with his relatively few PA's should get in, but he had a MUCH better career than a whole lotta Hall members. His career was ruined by congenital back problems, as was that of his son.

BHN

Keller was a big impact hitter for a short time but that was a very short time indeed for a supposed HOFer, and he was playing in the one of the biggest offensive eras of all time, so his raw numbers aren't really as good as they look. An extremely valuable player for a short time, but not so overwhelmingly great (it would be hard to say Keller was the best in his league at any point) that it can make up for his short career. 5 full seasons do not make a HOFer.

The RC/27 thing is misleading. Keller's RC/27 (7.75) is outstanding, but he had an extremely short career. It is easier to keep your rate stats up for a short amount of time, and he was playing in a huge offensive era. In context, I would bet that Dick Allen's RC/27 (7.29) is much better.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

I agree with everything you have said. But, of course, I consider Dick Allen arguably the greatest player NOT in the Hall of Fame.

Were it up to me, however, Keller would not make the Hall. He would be among those who came close, but he would not make it, due to the brevity of his career and the discount I give to LH hitters who played in The Stadium.

[ElHalo]

James naturally did not rate Keller among the Top 10 RF's of all time in "Career Value." In "Peak Value," however, James rated them as follows:

1. Babe Ruth
2. Mel Ott [grrr]
3. Hank Aaron
4. Frank Robinson
5. Charlie Keller
6. Roberto Clemente [grrr]
7. Reggie Jackson
8. Paul Waner
9. Chuck Klein
10. TIE: Kaline & Winfield


Having Klein behind any of these guys except Ruth and (arguably) Ott is ludicrous. I simply can't fathom a world where rational people would choose Reggie Jackson's best five years over Klein's best five.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Having Klein behind any of these guys except Ruth and (arguably) Ott is ludicrous. I simply can't fathom a world where rational people would choose Reggie Jackson's best five years over Klein's best five.
"Welcome to the real world."-Morpheus ;)

[BaseballHistoryNut]

If I were left-handed, I would have liked to take a shot at hitting in the Baker Bowl.

Anyone who thinks Klein was for real should note what he did immediately after he left the Phils and went to the Cubs, for whom he was the #3/#4 OF. The idea of rating him ahead of Aaron, Robinson, Gwynn, Waner, Rose, Jackson or even the hugely overrated Clemente is unthinkable. James has him #40 in RF. I can't argue.

BHN

[538280]

If I were left-handed, I would have liked to take a shot at hitting in the Baker Bowl.

Anyone who thinks Klein was for real should note what he did immediately after he left the Phils and went to the Cubs, for whom he was the #3/#4 OF. The idea of rating him ahead of Aaron, Robinson, Gwynn, Waner, Rose, Jackson or even the hugely overrated Clemente is unthinkable. James has him #40 in RF. I can't argue.

BHN

Couldn't agree more. Klein didn't deserve to get anywhere near the HOF. Unfortunately, the HOF has a long history of not paying attention to any sort of contexts.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

They paid attention for a long, long time. Chuck Klein retired in 1944 and was enshrined in 1980.

Even through Steroid Ball, the feat of getting 100 XBH in a season has only been achieved 15 times in MLB history. Three guys have done it twice: Lou Gehrig, who did it legitimately, plus Chuck Klein and Todd Helton. I'm gonna guess there's no need to explain how Klein and Helton did it. No, they didn't cheat; and yes, they were/are fine ballplayers; but no, they'd never have done it in any other park in their respective eras. (I consider Helton much the better player, but still, it can't seriously be claimed he gets the 105 and the 103 outside of Coors.)

Klein won a Triple Crown. He hit 4 HR's in a game at FORBES Field--and for the rest of his life, he immediately invoked that fact, whenever someone threw the unreal dimensions of Baker Bowl in his face.

Cooperstown made him wait 36 years, and there was a raging uproar over it when he finally did get in. I believe that in my adult lifetime, only the enshrinements of Hack Wilson (with which I agree) and Phil Rizzuto (at which I alternate between raging and laughing myself silly) have compared to Klein for controversy. And I'm serious about this. And we have sportswriters at this site who can tell you I'm right about that controversy. It was B I G, regardless of one's individual belief on the merits of the situation. And I'm talking about "controversy," as opposed to "terribleness." I think Klein's enshrinement was also terrible, but he was no George Kelly.

So no, Cooperstown was not blind to the Baker Bowl. Not by a long shot. They just ultimately reached the same conclusion James did in his 1985 abstract: that there was ultimately "too much there" in the way of statistical evidence to deny him admission.

Since James now considers him the fortieth greatest RF ever, he obviously has had an epiphany and seen the error of his ways... unless he thinks 40 RF's belong in the Hall. :crazy But I'm with you, Little Joe. What the hell were those sportswriters in 1980, and James in 1985, thinking of?

Do you know what I once did? Not having home-away splits or anything that extravagant, I calculated Klein's stats from 1928-1933, his first Baker Bowl years--the statstically awesome six years which made his career. Then I calculated his stats for the rest of his career.

I no longer have those stats, but I can tell you, for instance, that his slugging percentage was 200+ points higher in the first six years than it was thereafter, including in his later returns to Baker Bowl. His OBP, BA, 2B's, 3B's and HR's, along with RBI's, R's, etc., were all mammothly different on a per-game basis, as well. It was like looking at a piece of paper where Lou Gehrig turned into Pat Seerey.

Anyway, anyone with the interest and a calculator can do it. Calculate his AB's during those first 6 years, then work out his BA, Slg, OBP, HR's and all the other stats; then do the same for the rest of his career. You'll all know, going in, that you'll see lopsided differences, but you'll be stunned by just how lopsided they are. When I read them to fellow baseball fans, they were in stitches.

And this is NOT George Sisler or Hal Trosky. No great medical calamity struck Chuck Klein to ruin his baseball career, unless you include the alcoholism which caused him to have a stroke at a very young age and die at the age of 53. What struck him during his career was that he no longer had a ballpark where it was 272 feet down the line and an unreal 300 or so feet to his power alley.

I do not understand why history has been so kind to Klein. NOBODY takes Gavvy Cravath seriously. During the 1910's, he led the NL in HR's and HR/AB SIX times; to my knowledge, only Ruth, Schmidt and Kiner have more MLB HR titles. He also led it in slugging and OBP twice apiece. Yet nobody (including me) thinks he belongs in the Hall of Fame--even though he was a RIGHT-handed hitter--because we all know he learned to inside-out the ball over that joke of a fence.

But Klein did not play in the Dead Ball Era, so his raw numbers look a lot more impressive than Cravath's. I think they're less so. He was a lefty, and if Ott got grossly inflated numbers because he was a great pull-hitter swinging at a gold mine (which he was and he did), Klein was the guy swinging at the motherlode.

I would guess what got him into the Hall in 1980 was a "happy" confluence of events whereby veteran players and sportswriters died off, and their replacements on the Veterans Committee weren't old enough to known any better than to put this fraud in the Hall of Fame. Their predecessors had, obviously, known better.

BHN

[GiambiJuice]

Bobby Abreu
John Olerud
Derek Jeter (in this forum)
Larry Walker (People knock him because he put up his best numbers in COL. But I think he's easily one of the top 10 all around players of the last 15 years - hitting, fielding, and baserunning considered)

[ElHalo]

I do not understand why history has been so kind to Klein. NOBODY takes Gavvy Cravath seriously.

Are you kidding me? I know that I, at least, consider Cravath one of the five most deserving players not in the Hall (along with Sherry Magee (another Baker Bowl player), Joe Gordon, and whoever else I feel like talking about at any given time).

The dimensions are what they are. The fact is that, over a five year period, Klein averaged 132 R, 224 H, 46 2B, 36 HR, 139 RBI, .360/.411/.636. Did the Baker Bowl contribute to that? Absolutely. Did any other player who ever played in that park put up numbers like that? Absolutely not. Regardless of anything else, those numbers blow away anything else anyone ever did there, and offer some reflection that either a) Klein was actually a pretty good player regardless of his park, or b) he had learned how to take special advantage of the park over and above what others could do. Either way, he deserves credit. His peak numbers are among the greatest of all time... like, top three or four all time. His era and the Baker Bowl obviously take away from that. But not enough to keep his peak from being one of the top... say... 20 of all time. He was an amazing, tremendous player, and just because he wasn't as good as his numbers would make you believe doesn't mean he wasn't a great player at all.

[538280]

Are you kidding me? I know that I, at least, consider Cravath one of the five most deserving players not in the Hall (along with Sherry Magee (another Baker Bowl player), Joe Gordon, and whoever else I feel like talking about at any given time).

The dimensions are what they are. The fact is that, over a five year period, Klein averaged 132 R, 224 H, 46 2B, 36 HR, 139 RBI, .360/.411/.636. Did the Baker Bowl contribute to that? Absolutely. Did any other player who ever played in that park put up numbers like that? Absolutely not. Regardless of anything else, those numbers blow away anything else anyone ever did there, and offer some reflection that either a) Klein was actually a pretty good player regardless of his park, or b) he had learned how to take special advantage of the park over and above what others could do

He put up much better numbers than anyone else did for the simple reason that he caught it at the perfect time-not only in the Baker Bowl, the best hitters park ever probably until Coors Field-but also in the era with the highest offensive levels of all time. Those numbers in that era, while still very good, aren't really HOF level when put in league and park context for a guy with a short career. Sherry Magee would have probably put up better numbers if he played in the Baker Bowl in the 1930s, rather than the 1900s and 1910s. Klein became a much worse player after he left the Baker Bowl, and it's not like you can toss that up to aging. He was 29 his first year with the Cubs-in Wrigley Field no less. Only a second engagement in the friendly confines prevented his career from ending much sooner than it did.

Either way, he deserves credit. His peak numbers are among the greatest of all time... like, top three or four all time. His era and the Baker Bowl obviously take away from that. But not enough to keep his peak from being one of the top... say... 20 of all time. He was an amazing, tremendous player, and just because he wasn't as good as his numbers would make you believe doesn't mean he wasn't a great player at all.

Absolutely they keep his peak from being one of the top 20 all time. Klein's best five OPS+ years were 175, 164, 159, 152, and 152. That's good, but for a RFer playing in the 1930s NL (a weak league) they're NOT historically great. Reggie Jackson's were 187, 172, 166, 161, and 155-clearly better than Klein, depsite playing in a much stronger league and in parks that killed him (Reggie's offense over his career was tremendously hurt by his parks-his road relative BA is 109).

[yankillaz]

Good post BHN. Truly. But still, cut some slack to the "fraud". As EH mentions, nobody else took advantage of the Baker Bowl as Klein did, so this has to count for something. Also, is he the only player to take advantage of his ball park in such a preposterous way???

Wade Boggs, who many consider a top 5 third basemen had his way with the Green Monster, and it shows a .338 BA while playing in Boston, while a .307 BA in other teams, including the Yankees and their lefty-hitter-friendly Yankee Stadium. Something similar was said od Ted Williams, and still we do not diminish their careers due to this matter.

I also like to point out that Klein had a brief stint in which he didn't play in Philly. He played in Chicago-Philly in 1936 and Philly-Pittsburgh in 1939. In 1935, he had the better numbers while in Philly, even though ChiTown had a hitter's ballpark too. But the thing was different in 1939, where he had the second highest HR total for the Forbes Field playing team, the Pirates. In 270 ab's, and in a pitcher's park.

I do not credit on their totality the stats he put from 1929-1933, but like i do with Helton...is not any player from it's team that can accomplish it. Is not like were saying Chuck Klein is Vinny Castilla, is it???

[Bill Burgess]

The word 'under-rated' is such a tricky word. Even the elite top end players felt under-rated at times. Such as.

1. Babe Ruth - Every time he got reminded he broke team curfew, he probably felt under appreciated. He probably thought - "Those ungrateful sons of bitches! After all I've done for them! My fans are paying off their stadium, and they're STILL petty enough to razz my butt!"

2. Ty Cobb - After Babe shoved him off the headlines, as baseball's most famous player, even in Detroit, Babe got standing ovations, while Ty was in the dugout, trying to beat their Yankee rivals. Must have made old Tyrus feel like murdering those fickle, ungrateful fans.

3. Lou Gehrig - He said that he could hit standing on his head and nobody would notice, after the Babe hit.

4. Sam Crawford - Lou Gehrig's predecessor. Felt unsung. It took Baseball Magazine until Sam's final season, to devote an issue to him.

5. Hank Aaron - In his early days, Eddie Mathews got the banners. And after Hank got rolling, Eddie must have felt the sudden loss of love.

I'm sure most great defensive SS/Catchers feel under-valued. Our Giants catcher Mike Matheny is tops with the glove, but gets so little rave reviews. Much like the Detroit catcher, Johnny Bassler in the 20's. Was the best glove of his day, did fantastic in MVP voting, but never got the headlines.

And in the same vein, NL stars normally get a fraction of the fame/celebrity of AL stars. Don't know why. But everyone from Wagner/Hornsby/Musial have flown under the radar of the national media, compared to their AL rivals.

Bill Burgess

[538280]

Good post BHN. Truly. But still, cut some slack to the "fraud". As EH mentions, nobody else took advantage of the Baker Bowl as Klein did, so this has to count for something. Also, is he the only player to take advantage of his ball park in such a preposterous way???

Other players DID put up just as good numbers in the Baker Bowl as Klein did. The thought that he was the only one to do things like he did is just because he was also playing in the highest run context of all time, as well as the park. Sherry Magee and Gavy Cravath both put up numbers exactly like Klein did, relative to the league. Klein's numbers only look so unbelieveable because he played in just about the most favorable conditions possible, league and park. Klein's numbers fell right off when he should have been in the middle of his prime (age 29) in 1934. I think the post 1934 numbers are a better representation of the real Klein.

I also like to point out that Klein had a brief stint in which he didn't play in Philly. He played in Chicago-Philly in 1936 and Philly-Pittsburgh in 1939. In 1935, he had the better numbers while in Philly, even though ChiTown had a hitter's ballpark too. But the thing was different in 1939, where he had the second highest HR total for the Forbes Field playing team, the Pirates. In 270 ab's, and in a pitcher's park.

In the brief stint out of Philly, he wasn't near the hitter he was in Philly. I don't see what your point is here.

I do not credit on their totality the stats he put from 1929-1933, but like i do with Helton...is not any player from it's team that can accomplish it. Is not like were saying Chuck Klein is Vinny Castilla, is it???

I don't know, he might be like Castilla. Like him, his numbers fell right off when he left the friendly confines. Of course he was better than Castilla, but it's a similar situation.

[yankillaz]

In the brief stint out of Philly, he wasn't near the hitter he was in Philly. I don't see what your point is here.


He wasn't near the hitter he was in Philly from 1929 thru 1933, but he was a better hitter playing in both Chicago and Pittsburgh in 1936 and 1939 respectively, than he was while playing in Philly in those same years. He just had a decline...isn't it obvious?

Take a look at the following...

R/G OPS+
1929 5.36 152
1930 5.68 159
1931 4.48 152
1932 4.60 164
1933 3.97 175
1934 4.68 136
1935 4.71 123
1936 4.71 124
1937 4.51 130
1938 4.42 83
1939 4.44 127

Those were the league average runs/game from 1929-1939 (The so-Called Hitter-Friendly League), and Klein's adjusted OPS for each season. Ummm, Klein's best RELATIVE season came in the worst offensvie year of the decade. And we can see how beginning in 1934 there's a clear decline phase, similar to other players (Reasons don't matter).

This makes it clear that Park Adjusted or not, he wasn't such a lousy player.

[538280]

He wasn't near the hitter he was in Philly from 1929 thru 1933, but he was a better hitter playing in both Chicago and Pittsburgh in 1936 and 1939 respectively, than he was while playing in Philly in those same years. He just had a decline...isn't it obvious?

Take a look at the following...

R/G OPS+
1929 5.36 152
1930 5.68 159
1931 4.48 152
1932 4.60 164
1933 3.97 175
1934 4.68 136
1935 4.71 123
1936 4.71 124
1937 4.51 130
1938 4.42 83
1939 4.44 127

Those were the league average runs/game from 1929-1939 (The so-Called Hitter-Friendly League), and Klein's adjusted OPS for each season. Ummm, Klein's best RELATIVE season came in the worst offensvie year of the decade. And we can see how beginning in 1934 there's a clear decline phase, similar to other players (Reasons don't matter).

This makes it clear that Park Adjusted or not, he wasn't such a lousy player.

The park adjustments don't fully capture how much Klein was helped by his park. He wasn't nearly the player he was at the Baker Bowl after he left at age 29. He was a very good player for a short time. He was NOT a true all time great. I think Bill James has got this one right.

[ElHalo]

The park adjustments don't fully capture how much Klein was helped by his park.

So... first, when people argue that Joe DiMaggio was hurt by his home park more than park factors reflect, that's garbage, and the park factor adequately explains his record. Second, when park factors are used to hurt Chuck Klein, that's garbage, and the park factor doesn't adequately explain his record. Which one is it?

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Obviously I'm not the one you're addressing, but there's nothing inconsistent about my position regarding those two guys. Here's what I think:

(1) It's almost impossible to overstate the degree to which Chuck Klein was helped by Baker Bowl during his first six years. James is PERHAPS going a bit overboard by ranking him as the #40 right fielder, but I wouldn't put him higher than #30. He was in the greatest possible park--I cannot imagine that even Coors Field is as good for a LH hitter--and in the greatest possible years, for a non-steroid/HGH user. The 4-HR game at Forbes is the only thing that even slightly troubles me.

(2) One has to wonder if it's possible to quantify how much Yankee Stadium hurt DiMaggio. But almost all of you other historians are into stats formulae a lot more than I am. So tell me this: Isn't there a pretty much agreed-upon amount by which the "normal" player will do better at home than on the road? Say, using the 1970's or 1980's as your example, and excluding players from Fenway, Yankee or Wrigley. The rest of those ballparks were pretty sterile, symmetric, ho-hum, etc. I'm sure y'all must be able to agree on a general figure, give or take a percentage point or two, by which a player is expected to do better at home than on the road, right? Couldn't that projection just be made for DiMaggio? I know that sounds simplistic, but what's better? How else to rectify such a gross unfairness?

I mean, once again, I have a litho of the old park and know the exact dimensions. I actually know someone who says it wasn't that bad for RH hitters because it was only 301' down the LF line. Har de har har. Yeah, for about 6 feet, and then it was forever. 415' to straightaway LF, 457' to LCF, 459' to deepest LCF, 461' to CF, 407' to RCF.... Exactly how was DiMaggio supposed to get his fair share of HR's in that park?

And one of the most amazing stats in baseball history, one which Ruth, Williams, etc., are not within a mile of:

Despite all of the HR's he lost in Death Valley--and you know there were a ton of them--if Joe DiMaggio had retired one year sooner, he would have had well more career HR's than career strikeouts. Yes, for those of you who didn't already know it, that's correct. Through 1950, despite losing god-knows-how-many HR's to that LF, LCF and CF, he had 349 HR's and 333 strikeouts. Every time I want to feel guilty about rating DiMaggio the lowest of The Great Five CF's, especially since I give him full credit for the three war years he missed, I look at that stat and cringe. I can still justify putting Speaker ahead of him, but....

Baseball History Nut

[Imapotato]

Too many candidates to list for that title...

In no particular order:

1. Gabby Hartnett
2. Ed Cicotte
3. Dazzy Vance
4. Sherry Magee
5. Wes Ferrell
6. Cy Young
7. Ron Santo
8. Dick Allen
9. Joe Wood
10. Tony Oliva
11. Mordecai Brown
12. Ed Walsh
13. Edd Roush
14. Stan Coveleski
15. Bill Freehan
16. Tim Raines
17. Johnny Mize

Any of the above would do in my book.

Except for Ed Walsh (one of the 3 Pitchers to throw a spitter in his time) I love that list

[Imapotato]

The park adjustments don't fully capture how much Klein was helped by his park. He wasn't nearly the player he was at the Baker Bowl after he left at age 29. He was a very good player for a short time. He was NOT a true all time great. I think Bill James has got this one right.


Klein hit 4 HRs at Forbes Field

But yea he was PUTRID :crazy

[538280]

So... first, when people argue that Joe DiMaggio was hurt by his home park more than park factors reflect, that's garbage, and the park factor adequately explains his record. Second, when park factors are used to hurt Chuck Klein, that's garbage, and the park factor doesn't adequately explain his record. Which one is it?

People say that Joe DiMaggio was hurt by the park far more than the park factor suggests. The numbers I have suggest that's garbage, they say that Yankee Stadium really wasn't tough for RH batters at all. That's what my numbers say.

Then, when I look at the stats and see Klein before and after the Baker Bowl, it makes me really suspicuous. These are the LH park factors I've got for the Baker Bowl in Klein's years (1928-1933):

YEAR LEAGUE TEAM Team_ID PARK_ID Park 1B_L 2B_L 3B_L HR_L
1928 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 114 138 51 173
1929 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 113 140 96 145
1930 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 110 150 28 129
1931 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 111 120 115 123
1932 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 113 137 51 220
1933 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 110 146 38 150

Altogether that's an absolute hitter's haven....You have a park that was about 50% better than average for HRs, 40% better for doubles, and 10% better for singles. One of the best hitter's parks of all time, certainly.

[yankillaz]

People say that Joe DiMaggio was hurt by the park far more than the park factor suggests. The numbers I have suggest that's garbage, they say that Yankee Stadium really wasn't tough for RH batters at all. That's what my numbers say.

Then, when I look at the stats and see Klein before and after the Baker Bowl, it makes me really suspicuous. These are the LH park factors I've got for the Baker Bowl in Klein's years (1928-1933):

YEAR LEAGUE TEAM Team_ID PARK_ID Park 1B_L 2B_L 3B_L HR_L
1928 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 114 138 51 173
1929 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 113 140 96 145
1930 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 110 150 28 129
1931 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 111 120 115 123
1932 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 113 137 51 220
1933 NL PHI Phi_Phi PHI09 Baker Bowl 110 146 38 150

Altogether that's an absolute hitter's haven....You have a park that was about 50% better than average for HRs, 40% better for doubles, and 10% better for singles. One of the best hitter's parks of all time, certainly.


No doubt about that one, but he was the BEST player in the HITTER's Park, this has to come as a given.

[538280]

No doubt about that one, but he was the BEST player in the HITTER's Park, this has to come as a given.

Klein was not the best player in the history of the Baker Bowl. Gavy Cravath posted numbers relative to the league just as good or better than Kline in the 1910s. He looks like far and away the best because he was not only playing in the Baker Bowl, but also in a very high offensive league. Lefty O'Doul had a few seasons with numbers just as good as Klein's. Neither Cravath nor O'Doul were HOF caliber hitters, and netiher was Klein.

[Redfoot]

I still love pointing out that my boy Bret Saberhagen belongs in the underrated players category, because few people realize it.

#1 - as far as career value goes, Saberhagen amassed a 126 ERA+ (53rd all-time) in 2562 IP. That's not great, but for the era he pitched in, it's nothing to sneeze at either.

#2 - he established a nice 6-year peak, although it was the first 6 seasons of his career. From 1984 thru 1989, Bret was top 5 in ERA and ERA+ three times (finishing first once), won 20 games twice (and 18 in another season), led the AL in WHIP, K/BB and BB/9 twice, and was a certified innings eater over this period.

#3 - outstanding accomplishment? Check. How about a K/BB of 11.00 in 1994. While this was accomplished in a strike-shortened season, it was still over a span of 177 IP. This is easily the greatest single season K/BB in baseball history, with three of the other four pitchers in the top 5 coming from seasons that took place in the 19th century.

#4 - while no longer a dominant force, Saberhagen was still helping his teams late in his career. After missing the entire 1996 season and most of the 1997 season due to injury, the 34-year old Saberhagen tossed 175 innings for the Red Sox to the tune of a 116 ERA+ in 1998. The next year his ERA+ was a sterling 172 in 119 IP. Both of these Boston teams made it to the postseason. He missed the entire 2000 season, once again due to injury, and realized he couldn't pitch anymore after a short attempt of a 2001 comeback that lasted only 15 innings. He didn't let his career drag on and bring his team down like a lot of veterans have done, and I admire that.

I'm not advocating that Saberhagen should be associated with words such as great or outstanding, but I enjoy pointing out that this was a solid pitcher who often times gets overlooked. He had decent career value, a nice 6-year peak, is the proud owner of a single season K/BB ratio that may never be beaten, and was still an effective pitcher later in his career who wisely knew when it was time to hang up the spikes. Maybe people just remember him as the a-hole who dumped bleach on several reporters when he was with the Mets.

[ElHalo]

Klein was not the best player in the history of the Baker Bowl. Gavy Cravath posted numbers relative to the league just as good or better than Kline in the 1910s.No, he didn't. His OPS+'s look good because he drew a LOT more walks, relative to his era, than Klein did... a factor which shouldn't really be affected by park all that much. But his best seasons were nowhere near as good as Klein's. Lefty O'Doul had a few seasons with numbers just as good as Klein's. Neither Cravath nor O'Doul were HOF caliber hitters...
Yes, they were. It's just that Klein is about at the short end as far as you can get as far as career length for HoF'ers, and Cravath and O'Doul, respectively, played about 500 and 800 fewer games. At their best, both were easily HoF caliber players.

[csh19792001]

Obviously I'm not the one you're addressing, but there's nothing inconsistent about my position regarding those two guys. Here's what I think:

(1) It's almost impossible to overstate the degree to which Chuck Klein was helped by Baker Bowl during his first six years. James is PERHAPS going a bit overboard by ranking him as the #40 right fielder, but I wouldn't put him higher than #30. He was in the greatest possible park--I cannot imagine that even Coors Field is as good for a LH hitter--and in the greatest possible years, for a non-steroid/HGH user. The 4-HR game at Forbes is the only thing that even slightly troubles me.

(2) One has to wonder if it's possible to quantify how much Yankee Stadium hurt DiMaggio. But almost all of you other historians are into stats formulae a lot more than I am.

It's extremely rare that I find a post this lengthy that completely resonates for me, but I think this one fits the bill. Also, that was eloquently worded, per your usual....I completely agree, the 361 homeruns and 369 career strikeouts (and that's in Yankee Stadium) is one of the greatest accomplishments in baseball history. And, apropos to your questions about Death Valley, BHN. I posted this a long, long time ago.

As to Joe Dimaggio:

In order to truly reconcile the egregious park disparity, you could double Dimaggio's career road homerun total (which would give you a total of 426). Then add in the three prime seasons lost to WWII (average of 33 homeruns/year).

Anyway,that brings us to an estimate of 525 career homerunsfor Dimaggio, given a reasonable park and his not missing the age 28-30 seasons.

And again, this is certainly NOT gratuitous; it would only assume a NEUTRAL park in terms of homeruns (equal homeruns at home vs. road)!! We're not putting him at Fenway or Shibe or the Baker Bowl!! Most players actually hit slightly more homers at home, despite having more career at bats on the road.

Then you would have to adjust all of the rate stats and career totals in a commensurate fashion- the dramatic increase in home run percentage would bolster his Win Share totals vastly more than your projections, and his career totals in Runs, RBI, TB, etc, etc would go through the roof.

Joe Dimaggio's career OPS on the road was 1.015, which is top 10 alltime (a few of the players ahead of him are still active, and will likely drop off). And consider that this kind of incredible production is coming from a guy who was incredible in center field, never struck out, and was an outstanding baserunner. The top guys in OPS alltime are almost all exclusively "sluggish sluggers"- nobody in the top 10 was an outstanding fielder (in fact, most are/were pretty poor), most were slow, and most struck out a ton to go with their homeruns.

In any case, a proper and fair adjustment would only serve to demonstate how much Dimaggio got screwed by his park and missing what are often a player's best seasons to the military service.

No alltime great was ever routed more be their home park than Joe Dimaggio.

Yankee Stadium
.315/.391/.546 (148 hr)

On The Road
.333/.405/.610 (213 hr)

Yankee Stadium was a bad place for batting average in those days, especially for right handers.

On page 2199 of the 1990 Edition of Total Baseball, they discuss park effects, and they mention the Dimaggio-Williams trade which was proposed over a few drinks (albeit in 1949). The authors play the subjunctive and project what each player's career lines would have looked like had they played for the other team. Thorn and Palmer estimate that (without any war credit), Dimaggio would have hit .340 with 417 career homeruns (in 13 seasons) playing at Fenway. I think that's certainly reasonable, if not even an underestimate of what would have happened if Dimag had played out his career in one of the greatest RH hitters parks in history (among the parks that lasted, that is). No foul territory, and that RF wall 310' away to pull doubles off of or hit homers over....

[BiggestYankeeFan_in_Memphis]

My pick, Sounds Crazy, but i will go with Stan the Man Musial

[BiggestYankeeFan_in_Memphis]

Honorable Mention: Joe Morgan

[Blackout]

Honorable Mention: Joe Morgan

wait, i thought this was for UNDER rated, not over?

[GiambiJuice]

Joe Morgan is easily the most OVERrated player on Baseball Fever, but to the general public, I don't think he's overrated or underrated, I guess he's just "rated".

[85cards]

My pick, Sounds Crazy, but i will go with Stan the Man Musial

Its true he is underrated now. I think during his playing days he was as respected as a player can possibly be. We are still living in the world of a media dominated by "I grew up on the East coast in the 50's and 60's and it was baseball heaven" group. And they have a real hard time getting past DiMaggio, Mantle, Mays and Williams. I am not saying Stan was clearly better than these players, but he has to be in the argument.

[mtortolero]

Johnny Mize was so underrated that he got his ticket to HOF via VC.
A shame that his carrer was cut by the WWII just in the middle of his peak.

[julusnc]

Ron Santo
Sherry Magee
Keith Hernandez
Al Rosen

[BiggestYankeeFan_in_Memphis]

wait, i thought this was for UNDER rated, not over?
Actually It's "Uder" rated, because my ******* didn't put the "n" there. woops