Greatest third basemen of all time?

[wardawg]

When I think of the greatest 3B of all time only 2 names come to mind ARod and Mike Schmidt. I was wondering what you guys think who was better at 3B

[PVNICK]

Until A-Rod plays another 5 years at 3B I'd still be inclined to put him at SS. At 3B the real question might be who is #3 after Schmidt and Matthews Brett or Boggs?

[leecemark]

--If I considered A-Rod primarily a thirdbaseman (I don't) then I expect he would eventually pass Schmidt (although he surely wouldn't be there yet) Otherwise Schmidt is the clear choice. The battle for second place is more engaging with Mathews and Brett the candidates. Boggs I have 4th,. Chipper Jones I could see bypassing Boggs, but Brett/Mathews is a much tougher challenge and Schmidt is out of reach.

[slugger33]

I think Chipper Jones is a better hitter than Schmidt. Like someone else said, A-Rod has not played enough games at 3rd yet.

[brett]

--If I considered A-Rod primarily a thirdbaseman (I don't) then I expect he would eventually pass Schmidt (although he surely wouldn't be there yet) Otherwise Schmidt is the clear choice. The battle for second place is more engaging with Mathews and Brett the candidates. Boggs I have 4th,. Chipper Jones I could see bypassing Boggs, but Brett/Mathews is a much tougher challenge and Schmidt is out of reach.


The problem is that though A-Rod has a case as a better player (because of his time at SS) he never has been as good at third base as Schmidt. In fact, had he played his whole career at third, at the defensive level of the last 4 1/3 seasons, and with his career offensive rates, he would not have matched Schmidt's career ('74-'87) from '96-'08. A-Rod has never been as good a third baseman, or potentialy as good a third baseman as Brett at his peak-though he has been TONS healthier. A-Rod basically has roughly matched Mathews top 13 years (as far as third base potential). All these guys are locked-in top 30 players, so A-Rod's time at shortstop, and his potential to have historically great longevity would eventually push him towards and into the top 10.

[Minstrel]

I still rank Rodriguez as a shortstop.

I have Schmidt as the clear #1. Mathews, Boggs and Brett are all in the same class and I don't have any of them clearly at #2.

Chipper Jones seems like a lock to end up in that Mathews/Boggs/Brett tier. I think he'll match Schmidt offensively, but his huge defensive difference will keep him well below Schmidt in total value.

[Blackout]

Alex Rodriguez
Wade Boggs
Mike Schmidt
George Brett
Chipper Jones

[brett]

My top 3rd baseman:

Schmidt
Brett/Mathews (can't decide)
Boggs/Baker/Chipper probably in that order but Chipper on the rise
Santo

As for Brett and Mathews, Brett played about 300 more games. Brett had a comparable OPS+ through a stretch as long as Mathews' career (140 to 143). Brett was a very good baserunner, decent base-stealer but very good runner even up into the 90s. Brett was a gold glove caliber fielder from '77-'80, solid in '81, '82, '84, '85, '86. Overall probably a shade above average.

Brett was a first baseman by '87 and a DH by '89 I think. Outside of '85, '80, and '79, and '76, Brett had some combination of injury problems, which either affected his hitting, fielding and or time in the field every year, or he was no longer at third base: '88, '90.

'77 was a good year but he missed 30 some games. '81, '82, were good but with injuries. '83 was a horrible fielding and baserunning season due to injuries. '84, '86 and '87 were solid but never got on track because of injuries. We never really saw the "real" George Brett for a full season and that is very painful for m to realize.

[PVNICK]

So am I pretty much the only person who has Matthews as a clear #2?

[KCGHOST]

I don't know how a guy who has played twice as many games at SS can even be in the conversation.

[dgarza]

If we consider Rodiguez a 3B, then we must consider Killebrew a 3B as well, and that would make my Top 3 :
1. Alex Rodriguez
2. Mike Schmidt
3. Harmon Killebrew

[Edgartohof]

Alex Rodriguez:

SS - 1272 (2 GG's)
3B - 668

He is STILL clearly a SS. How one can honestly consider him a 3Bman is beyond me. MAYBE if he plays another 6 or so years at the hot corner, while improving his defense (or not getting any worse), and still hitting the same, then MAYBE we could consider him a 3Bman then. But even if he were to have similar playing times at 3B and SS, I (and most others, would still consider him a SS). Just like Ernie Banks. While some DO consider him a 1Bman (as he did have more playing time there: 1259 1B - 1125 SS), most consider him a SS.

[TigerNation]

Until A-Rod plays a couple more years at 3rd I think he should still be considered a SS. When all is said and done, however, I think A-Rod will go down as the best 3rd baseman in history.

[brett]

So am I pretty much the only person who has Matthews as a clear #2?

I think that people a) undervalue baserunning not in the stat line-going from first to third etc. and b) fail to appreciate that Brett was one of the best baserunners of his time. '75-'80 he really had wheels-three triples titles, the only guy with a 20 triple season over a 27 year stretch (Mays in '57, Wilson in '85), 98 triples through his first 1200 some games. He also ran very well even at the end of his career: 39 for 48 in steal attempts from '88-'91, 70 for 96 from '85 through the end of his career in '93. I'm not saying that that is equivalent to say hitting another 5-6 home runs, but probably he was worth 2-3 extra runs, or 3-4 extra OPS+ points on Mathews due to his legs and he played a stretch of his career as long as Mathews career with only a slightly lower OPS+.

In total though he only played 1692 games at third to 2181 for Mathews. That is why I basically can't decide. I still give Brett some credit for his time after he moved from third, because I rate players based on their promary position.

[RuthMayBond]

So am I pretty much the only person who has Matthews as a clear #2?I've got him at #2 but I don't see how he can be head and shoulders above Brett, you gotta look at more than HR

[Minstrel]

I think Boggs is quite underrated in this discussion. In terms of WARP, his prime is almost identical (and perhaps slightly superior to) Brett and their career values are similar (with Brett having a slight advantage, but partially due to having more bad, but above replacement value, seasons).

Boggs' ability to get on base is almost unmatched by any but the very greatest hitters of all-time. That drives tremendous offensive value, even if it wasn't flashy.

[brett]

I think Boggs is quite underrated in this discussion. In terms of WARP, his prime is almost identical (and perhaps slightly superior to) Brett and their career values are similar (with Brett having a slight advantage, but partially due to having more bad, but above replacement value, seasons).

Boggs' ability to get on base is almost unmatched by any but the very greatest hitters of all-time. That drives tremendous offensive value, even if it wasn't flashy.

And again, I would have Boggs right there with Mathews and Brett were it not for the fact that he was a station to station baserunner.

[1905 Giants]

So am I pretty much the only person who has Matthews as a clear #2?

I have Mathews as my #2 pick at 3rd.

[Second Base Coach]

The best ever Third Baseman is probably one of these fellows, listed here by a secret method using a secret statistic. Not saying that this is MY ranking... I am just too lazy to re-order them or split hairs.

Note how Chipper Jones really is climbing the ladder (super secret number does not include efforts from 2008).

1 Eddie Mathews 655
-- Alex Rodriguez (SS?) 636
2 Mike Schmidt 623
3 George Brett 593
4 Chipper Jones 564
5 Wade Boggs 556
-- Harmon Killebrew (1B?) 516
-- Dick Allen (1B?) 511
6 John McGraw 442
7 Bill Joyce 333
8 Denny Lyons 318
9 Stan Hack 315
10 Home Run Baker 303
11 Darrell Evans 301
12 Bob Elliott 265
13 Scott Rolen 256
14 Ron Santo 253
15 Bobby Bonilla 239
16 Al Rosen 230


If you take out the seasons during which they played third base less than half the time, Mathews sorts himself apart from the pack. Note how the handful of A-Rod's third base seasons have vaulted him into the -- top 15 --just on the strength of his seasons as a Yankee:

1 Eddie Mathews 652
2 Mike Schmidt 582
3 Wade Boggs 539
4 George Brett 481
5 Chipper Jones 464
6 John McGraw 398
7 Denny Lyons 323
8 Stan Hack 306
9 Home Run Baker 303
10 Bill Joyce 298
11 Ron Santo 272
12 Dick Allen 267
13 Bob Elliott 258
14 Scott Rolen 256
15 Alex Rodriguez 236
16 Al Rosen 230
17 Sal Bando 212
18 Ron Cey 206
19 Darrell Evans 189
20 Harmon Killebrew 188


So what to do with A-Rod?? Here is the super secret numbers on the top fifty hitters if you don't give a hoot where they played in the field. Note where the third basemen are right now... sorta bunched up (anyone remember Jim Thome as a young third baseman?):

1 Babe Ruth 1795
2 Barry Bonds 1591
3 Ted Williams 1475
4 Ty Cobb 1369
5 Lou Gehrig 1247
6 Stan Musial 1204
7 Mickey Mantle 1099
8 Rogers Hornsby 1084
9 Tris Speaker 1053
10 Hank Aaron 1032
11 Honus Wagner 1011
12 Willie Mays 1008
13 Mel Ott 989
14 Jimmie Foxx 985
15 Dan Brouthers 967
16 Frank Thomas 855
17 Frank Robinson 852
18 Ed Delahanty 835
19 Roger Connor 807
20 Billy Hamilton 802
21 Nap Lajoie 785
22 Rickey Henderson 763
23 Eddie Collins 747
24 Cap Anson 730
25 Jesse Burkett 713
26 Joe DiMaggio 708
27 Manny Ramirez 695
28 Jeff Bagwell 680
29 Johnny Mize 667
30 Mark McGwire 665
T31 Harry Heilmann 663
T31 Joe Morgan 663
T31 Gary Sheffield 663
34 Jim Thome 661
35 Eddie Mathews 655
36 Edgar Martinez 647
37 Alex Rodriguez 636
38 Mike Schmidt 623
39 Willie McCovey 606
40 Sam Crawford 595
41 George Brett 593
42 Paul Waner 588
43 Ken Griffey Jr. 586
44 Pete Browning 582
45 Joe Jackson 580
46 Rafael Palmeiro 572
47 Reggie Jackson 565
48 Chipper Jones 564
49 Wade Boggs 556
50 Willie Stargell 553

[christian gentleman]

What about Brooks Robinson?

[RuthMayBond]

What about Brooks Robinson?I think we're looking at all-around, not just defense

[jjpm74]

Other: Jimmy Collins

[538280]

JDD, I have to question the formula's result of Mathews over Schmidt. I tend to think Mathews is very underrated overall and a great, great, top 25 or so player, but he's essentially the same hitter as Schmidt, but he gives up a lot to Schmidt defenisvely, which to me makes Schmidt clearly the better and more valuable player.

John McGraw also played barely 1000 career games only 4 real full seasons, and even calling those 4 all full is doing him favors. He was great when he played, but not any greater than other top 3Bman including the suspect competition he played, so ranking him among the top 10 3Bmen as well is not a good choice IMO.

[RuthMayBond]

Other: Jimmy CollinsFor his time, he was the best, but ...

[Second Base Coach]

JDD, I have to question the formula's result of Mathews over Schmidt. I tend to think Mathews is very underrated overall and a great, great, top 25 or so player, but he's essentially the same hitter as Schmidt, but he gives up a lot to Schmidt defenisvely, which to me makes Schmidt clearly the better and more valuable player.

John McGraw also played barely 1000 career games only 4 real full seasons, and even calling those 4 all full is doing him favors. He was great when he played, but not any greater than other top 3Bman including the suspect competition he played, so ranking him among the top 10 3Bmen as well is not a good choice IMO.

Those aren't my rankings. The number has nothing to do with defense and measures Runs Created against the average player of his time. I was just throwing out the offensive number there.

And the difference in defense is very small. No, not that small, smaller.

[brett]

Those aren't my rankings. The number has nothing to do with defense and measures Runs Created against the average player of his time. I was just throwing out the offensive number there.

And the difference in defense is very small. No, not that small, smaller.


Even baseball prospectus, which doesn't seem to quite give Schmidt enough defensive credit has him 180 fielding runs above Mathews.

I also doubt that your math is right. Schmidt has slightly more RC's 1797 to 1716, and the average player had almost identical offensive production in their times. How did you determine the average player's RC?

Schmidt was also a substantially better baserunner.

[jjpm74]

For his time, he was the best, but ...

Which is why I introduced him to the discussion. Mike Schmidt was a great third baseman, but in a poll that included at the very least the 3B guys in the HOF + Ron Santo, I doubt he'd be running away with this. ARod isn't a third baseman. He's a short stop who was moved to third base. Maybe when his career is over I'll think differently but at the moment, his best years were as a short stop.

[AstrosFan]

In this thread ranking 3Bmen, I count 14 out of 15 ballots ranking Schmidt as the greatest 3Bman in history:

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=60700

[jjpm74]

In this thread ranking 3Bmen, I count 14 out of 15 ballots ranking Schmidt as the greatest 3Bman in history:

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=60700

Whatever the case, what's the point of having a poll for the greatest third baseman ever that only includes Mike Schmidt and someone who is not a third baseman? It seems about as fruitful as having a thread asking who the greatest outfielder of all time is and having as the poll choices Babe Ruth, Manny Ramirez and other.

[White Knight]

Add Wade Boggs to that poll. It's to early for me to pick A-Rod, when he's only played 3rd base for a few years now. Schmidt is terribly over-rated.

[CTaka]

Other: Jimmy Collins


I love Collins and think he is very underrated by the vast majority of fans today. But I think he falls in the same category as the post mentioning Brooks Robinson - defensively I think Collins is #1. But not as an all-around 3B.

[keystone]

If we're looking at an all-around player, I'm thinking it has to be Schmidt. Too many K's for my taste, but more than got the job done offensively and excellent as a defensive player as well.

[brett]

If we're looking at an all-around player, I'm thinking it has to be Schmidt. Too many K's for my taste, but more than got the job done offensively and excellent as a defensive player as well.

People have to remember that when Schmidt came up, third base was still considered a CRITICAL defensive position. Teams would gladly trade offense for fielding and often would take pure defensive guys at third. This really started to change only in the early to mid 80s. Look at the all-star third basemen over the years from the 30s through the 70s. There was an occasional big hitter, but I'd bet that the average starting second basemen in the all-star game had a higher OPS+ than the average starting third basemen from the 30s at least until about '77.

[keystone]

I wish it were still considered a critical defensive position! There are some good glove men playing now, but lots of them are big bats, too.

If Chipper stays healthy, he might surpass Schmidt as the all-time best at 3rd. He's been a fairly steady fielder in his later years, and he has being switch-hitter in his favor, too.

[RuthMayBond]

If Chipper stays healthy, he might surpass Schmidt as the all-time best at 3rd. He's been a fairly steady fielder in his later yearsLike Jeter, too little too late

[keystone]

Do you think Chipper's early fielding woes would take him out of the running as best 3rd baseman?

[Colorado Express]

1a. Schmidt
1b. Mathews

These two are very close in my book.

[keystone]

Mathews was an incredible player. It could be that his overall ranking suffers from his perceived fielding defecits. I think that's because he played on less than primo fields, not that he wasn't a good fielder.

Ron Santo anyone?

[yanks0714]

1) Mike Schmidt > Not sure how anyone can be ranked over him. Someone mentioned he struckout too often but his walks compensate for that.

2) Eddie Mathews > Much underrated. Hit like Schmidt. Many don't realize that Mathews was not a slug when he was young. He did become more muscular as he got got older which cut into his running ability. Defensively, Eddie was solid, sometimes spectacular. He did knock down a number of balls with his chest or glove but had a great arm to help recover.

3) George Brett > Complete player. Maybe would move ahead of Mathews but injuries held him back. Like Schmidt, a rarity in that was a good base runner for a 3B.

4) Wade Boggs > On base machine. Little power. Poor slow base runner. Like Brett worked hard to become a solid defensive 3B. Clearly behind the top 3.

5) Frank Baker > Similiar to Mathews. Slugger for his time. Not great defensively at 3B but got the job done. Somewhat awkward. Was no speed burner. Had undeserved rep as base shy. Missed some peak years due to contract squabbles with Connie Mack and family emergency.

Now it gets tough. No order as this is thoughst being tossed out:

Jimmy Collins > Almost forgotten. Great, great player in the early days. Deserves mention for top 10.

Ron Santo > Love him but he was a Wrigley Field player. His Home/Road splits are disconcerting.

Brooks Robinson > Great defense. Fair to middling hitter. Slow as they come. Deserves top 10.

Pie Traynor > Polarizing player. I give him credit for being considered a great 3B for his time. The position spectrum was changing when he played and changed drastically afterwards. Hard to compare him to current 3B. I still have him top 10 though.

Stan Hack/Bob Elliott/Ken Boyer all deserve mention. Eddie Yost is another that deserves mention. The Walking Man. Griffith Stadium absolutely killed his power.

John McGraw > Simply did not play enough, period.

ARod > Not nearly enough games to consider his a 3B yet. Like someone else said, I consider him a SS moved to 3B. Give him another 5 or 6 years and we can re-examine this poll.

Chipper Jones > Moving rapidly up the ladder. By the time he is done could be rivaling Schmidt, Mathews, and Brett.

[letsplaytwo]

I have to say Mike Schmidt. Curious that Brooks Robinson doesn't get more mention. Clearly he was the best defensive 3rd baseman and he played pretty much his entire career in an era dominated by pitching. That being said his offensive numbers were not bad. If Arod plays the rest of his career at 3rd and picks up a gold glove or two maybe he moves up to the top spot. But right now I don't have him ahead of Schmidt, Robinson or Brett. Of course, Arod's a better player than all of them but he played most of his career thus far at short.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

It looks like the general consensus is:

1. Schmidt
2-5. Boggs, Brett, Jones, Matthews (everyone has them ordered differently)
Don't count as third basemen: A-Rod, Killebrew, Dick Allen

I agree with that. My apologies to Tupac, who, of course, has A-Rod at #1. Even if A-Rod had been a career third basemen, I don't think I'd necessarily consider him superior to Schmidt yet. Boggs, Brett, Jones, and Matthews are alll close and I can understand putting them in any order. I don't think Boggs is a notch below the rest, as some of you have implied. The quality drops off pretty quickly after that, but who's next on the list? Brooks Robinson? Pie Traynor? Ron Santo? Al Rosen? Graig Nettles? Darrell Evans? I'm particularly interested in how highly you value Brooks Robinson's defense.

[538280]

Even if A-Rod had been a career third basemen, I don't think I'd necessarily consider him superior to Schmidt yet.

If A-Rod was a career 3Bman he wouldn't be within miles of Schmidt. A-Rod has not been any better than Scmidt as a hitter, his relative SLG and OBP are both just about the same as Schmidt. And Schmidt was a legitimately great defensive 3B, A-Rod as a 3B has been about average. If he had been a career 3Bman, the only way for A-Rod to pass Schmidt is if he just went on the best hitting run of his career in his mid to late 30s, enought to raise his career hitting rates above Schmidt, or if he lasted over 3000 games. Despite the great counting hitting stats he'll get, A-Rod has NOT been one of the best hitters of all time relative to his time. He's been no better than Schmidt was.

Even as it is now, I don't know if he's THAT better than Schmidt for defensive value, with his time at SS, and because of that I still think it's not clear he'll ever pass Schmidt, even though I think he probably will because he'll last a very long time playing at a very high level.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

If A-Rod was a career 3Bman he wouldn't be within miles of Schmidt. A-Rod has not been any better than Scmidt as a hitter, his relative SLG and OBP are both just about the same as Schmidt. And Schmidt was a legitimately great defensive 3B, A-Rod as a 3B has been about average. If he had been a career 3Bman, the only way for A-Rod to pass Schmidt is if he just went on the best hitting run of his career in his mid to late 30s, enought to raise his career hitting rates above Schmidt, or if he lasted over 3000 games. Despite the great counting hitting stats he'll get, A-Rod has NOT been one of the best hitters of all time relative to his time. He's been no better than Schmidt was.

Even as it is now, I don't know if he's THAT better than Schmidt for defensive value, with his time at SS, and because of that I still think it's not clear he'll ever pass Schmidt, even though I think he probably will because he'll last a very long time playing at a very high level.

I tend to agree with you. They are roughly equal as hitters, with Schmidt being the better defender. However, while their respective peaks as hitters will remain equal, I suspect A-Rod will end up having more career value as a hitter in terms of counting numbers. A-Rod was a very good every day player at a very young age and has had great durability and consistency over the years. I can't stand A-Rod and I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible when evaluating him as a player. I think it's a fair statement that he's overrated, but he's still very good.

[Second Base Coach]

I think he probably will because he'll last a very long time playing at a very high level. >><<

At that says it right there. ARod has a long way to go and I suspect he will play for a very long time, knowing he has a sense of baseball history about him. His offensive numbers relative to his peers are right at Schmidt's career heading into this season, and he will push them aside in no time. His shortstop offensive numbers alone put him right behind Wagner, using Runs Created above the average player of his time:

1 Honus Wagner 1011
2 Alex Rodriguez 636
3 Arky Vaughan 478
4 George Davis 379
5 Derek Jeter 350
6 Robin Yount 284
7 Barry Larkin 271
8 Nomar Garciaparra 251
9 Joe Cronin 243
10 Luke Appling 239
11 Hughie Jennings 206
12 Lou Boudreau 202
13 Jack Glasscock 188
14 Bill Dahlen 186
T15 Cal Ripken 161
T15 Alan Trammell 161
17 Vern Stephens 157
18 Ed McKean 131
19 Jim Fregosi 128
20 Julio Franco 126

If you want to just look at the years during which the players played a majority of their games a shortstop, here it is (note Ernie Banks re-enters the picture)

1 Honus Wagner 850
2 Arky Vaughan 464
3 Alex Rodriguez 400
4 Derek Jeter 350
5 Barry Larkin 271
6 Nomar Garciaparra 248
7 Ernie Banks 239
8 Joe Cronin 236
9 Luke Appling 225
10 Hughie Jennings 211
11 Jack Glasscock 209
12 Lou Boudreau 202
13 George Davis 200
14 Cal Ripken 189
15 Bill Dahlen 184
16 Vern Stephens 163
17 Alan Trammell 161
18 Joe Sewell 134
19 Ed McKean 131
20 Robin Yount 130


So here you have a guy who did enough to be considered the greatest American League Shortstop when he was in his 20s... And perhaps the third greatest offensive American League Third Baseman for his work while he was in his 30s. (Numbers for that title are listed below, note how many were active in recent years):

1 Wade Boggs 539
2 George Brett 481
3 Home Run Baker 303
4 Alex Rodriguez 236
5 Al Rosen 230
6 Sal Bando 212
7 Harmon Killebrew 188
8 Eddie Yost 162
9 Harlond Clift 152
10 Toby Harrah 139
11 Paul Molitor 138
12 Robin Ventura 133
13 Jim Thome 130
14 Edgar Martinez 128
15 Carney Lansford 126
16 George Kell 122
17 Graig Nettles 119
18 Eric Chavez 115
19 Ray Boone 112
20 Troy Glaus 100

American League Shortstop Numbers:

1 Alex Rodriguez 400
2 Derek Jeter 350
3 Nomar Garciaparra 248
4 Joe Cronin 236
5 Luke Appling 225
6 Lou Boudreau 202
7 Cal Ripken 189
8 Vern Stephens 163
9 Alan Trammell 161
10 Joe Sewell 134
11 Robin Yount 130
12 Jim Fregosi 126
13 Miguel Tejada 101

Bold Statement: Because of the position change, allowing Jeter to get past some of A-Rods numbers in the shortstop only categories, people will argue twenty years from now who was the greatest American League Shortstop of All-Time, Jeter or A-Rod. If the discussion goes on long enough, they will go tisk-tisk about Nomar...

[White Knight]

If A-Rod was a career 3Bman he wouldn't be within miles of Schmidt. A-Rod has not been any better than Scmidt as a hitter, his relative SLG and OBP are both just about the same as Schmidt. And Schmidt was a legitimately great defensive 3B, A-Rod as a 3B has been about average. If he had been a career 3Bman, the only way for A-Rod to pass Schmidt is if he just went on the best hitting run of his career in his mid to late 30s, enought to raise his career hitting rates above Schmidt, or if he lasted over 3000 games. Despite the great counting hitting stats he'll get, A-Rod has NOT been one of the best hitters of all time relative to his time. He's been no better than Schmidt was.

Even as it is now, I don't know if he's THAT better than Schmidt for defensive value, with his time at SS, and because of that I still think it's not clear he'll ever pass Schmidt, even though I think he probably will because he'll last a very long time playing at a very high level.

A-Rod is not a better hitter than Schmidt? He hit's for far better average, hits more HR's, stikes out a little less, has more RBI's, and is a better baserunner. What more do you want him to do? :confused:

Schmidt is ranked so high here, and I can't ever see why. Horribly over-rated.

[Minstrel]

A-Rod is not a better hitter than Schmidt? He hit's for far better average, hits more HR's, stikes out a little less, has more RBI's, and is a better baserunner. What more do you want him to do? :confused:

Walk more. Also, Rodriguez plays in a higher offensive environment, which inflates his raw numbers compared to greats of some of the other eras.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

A-Rod is not a better hitter than Schmidt? He hit's for far better average, hits more HR's, stikes out a little less, has more RBI's, and is a better baserunner. What more do you want him to do? :confused:

Schmidt is ranked so high here, and I can't ever see why. Horribly over-rated.

You need to look at less traditional metrics than those and also account for differences in the eras in which they played in order to appreciate Schmidt as an equal or better hitter to A-Rod (which he was). Schmidt happened to dominate a weak offensive era. Take OPS+ for example. If you're unfamiliar with this stat, a quick definition is OPS (Slg% + OBP) that has been adjusted to account for league and park conditions. A-Rod's career number is at 148, with his career high being 178. Schmidt's career number is at 147, with his career high being 199 (this was a strike-shortened season, but I think it's likely that he would've stayed above 178 in a full season). Their career OPS+ values are roughly equal, only Schmidt maintained that rate for 350 more games. Schmidt's late career decline phase is also accounted for, but Rodriguez's is obviously not because it hasn't happened yet.

[AstrosFan]

You need to look at less traditional metrics than those and also account for differences in the eras in which they played in order to appreciate Schmidt as an equal or better hitter to A-Rod (which he was). Schmidt happened to dominate a weak offensive era.

This needs to be clarified. A lot of people see statements like this, and assume it means that Schmidt dominated an era when hitting was weak, when in fact it means that he had to deal with less optimal conditions for hitting than historical norms, and much less optimal than the conditions A-Rod has hit in.

[RuthMayBond]

Do you think Chipper's early fielding woes would take him out of the running as best 3rd baseman?"Early", as in the vast majority of his career

[keystone]

Good point, (fellow) Astros fan. I think the same sort of thinking needs to be applied to defense as well -- not about defense as an "era," but consideration of the type of fields each of these contenders played on. Artificial surfaces are easier to predict. Older stadiums had boulders in the infield! :eek:

RMB -- Fielding statistics are such a mystery to me. :confused: I am sabermetrically-challenged. Chipper hasn't made that many errors so far this year; what do you base your opinion on?

[RuthMayBond]

RMB -- Fielding statistics are such a mystery to me. :confused: I am sabermetrically-challenged. Chipper hasn't made that many errors so far this year; what do you base your opinion on?Short story is that it has more to do with range (assists + putouts).
But as I said, one decent year doesn't make many bad years into a good defensive career

[brett]

Are these numbers "above average" at their position, or overall?


I think he probably will because he'll last a very long time playing at a very high level. >><<

At that says it right there. ARod has a long way to go and I suspect he will play for a very long time, knowing he has a sense of baseball history about him. His offensive numbers relative to his peers are right at Schmidt's career heading into this season, and he will push them aside in no time. His shortstop offensive numbers alone put him right behind Wagner, using Runs Created above the average player of his time:

1 Honus Wagner 1011
2 Alex Rodriguez 636
3 Arky Vaughan 478
4 George Davis 379
5 Derek Jeter 350
6 Robin Yount 284
7 Barry Larkin 271
8 Nomar Garciaparra 251
9 Joe Cronin 243
10 Luke Appling 239
11 Hughie Jennings 206
12 Lou Boudreau 202
13 Jack Glasscock 188
14 Bill Dahlen 186
T15 Cal Ripken 161
T15 Alan Trammell 161
17 Vern Stephens 157
18 Ed McKean 131
19 Jim Fregosi 128
20 Julio Franco 126

If you want to just look at the years during which the players played a majority of their games a shortstop, here it is (note Ernie Banks re-enters the picture)

1 Honus Wagner 850
2 Arky Vaughan 464
3 Alex Rodriguez 400
4 Derek Jeter 350
5 Barry Larkin 271
6 Nomar Garciaparra 248
7 Ernie Banks 239
8 Joe Cronin 236
9 Luke Appling 225
10 Hughie Jennings 211
11 Jack Glasscock 209
12 Lou Boudreau 202
13 George Davis 200
14 Cal Ripken 189
15 Bill Dahlen 184
16 Vern Stephens 163
17 Alan Trammell 161
18 Joe Sewell 134
19 Ed McKean 131
20 Robin Yount 130


So here you have a guy who did enough to be considered the greatest American League Shortstop when he was in his 20s... And perhaps the third greatest offensive American League Third Baseman for his work while he was in his 30s. (Numbers for that title are listed below, note how many were active in recent years):

1 Wade Boggs 539
2 George Brett 481
3 Home Run Baker 303
4 Alex Rodriguez 236
5 Al Rosen 230
6 Sal Bando 212
7 Harmon Killebrew 188
8 Eddie Yost 162
9 Harlond Clift 152
10 Toby Harrah 139
11 Paul Molitor 138
12 Robin Ventura 133
13 Jim Thome 130
14 Edgar Martinez 128
15 Carney Lansford 126
16 George Kell 122
17 Graig Nettles 119
18 Eric Chavez 115
19 Ray Boone 112
20 Troy Glaus 100

American League Shortstop Numbers:

1 Alex Rodriguez 400
2 Derek Jeter 350
3 Nomar Garciaparra 248
4 Joe Cronin 236
5 Luke Appling 225
6 Lou Boudreau 202
7 Cal Ripken 189
8 Vern Stephens 163
9 Alan Trammell 161
10 Joe Sewell 134
11 Robin Yount 130
12 Jim Fregosi 126
13 Miguel Tejada 101

Bold Statement: Because of the position change, allowing Jeter to get past some of A-Rods numbers in the shortstop only categories, people will argue twenty years from now who was the greatest American League Shortstop of All-Time, Jeter or A-Rod. If the discussion goes on long enough, they will go tisk-tisk about Nomar...

[keystone]

Do you think they'll mention Cal?

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

This needs to be clarified. A lot of people see statements like this, and assume it means that Schmidt dominated an era when hitting was weak, when in fact it means that he had to deal with less optimal conditions for hitting than historical norms, and much less optimal than the conditions A-Rod has hit in.

Yes, that is what I was saying.

[yanks0714]

A-Rod is not a better hitter than Schmidt? He hit's for far better average, hits more HR's, stikes out a little less, has more RBI's, and is a better baserunner. What more do you want him to do? :confused:

Schmidt is ranked so high here, and I can't ever see why. Horribly over-rated.

Several months ago you got into a extended discussion on this type topic. You look at counting stats alone to reach a conclusion that shapes your own opinions. Several posters pointed out the weakness of that outlook, suggesting you look deeper into more advanced metrics.

Now, months later, you are bringing up the same arguments once again.

It is true, that looking solely at traditional counting stats ARod beats Schmidt. But there is more than meets the eye. More advanced metrics will show you that Schmidt is clearly still ahead of ARod particularly when you consider the era they played in.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

A-Rod is not a better hitter than Schmidt? He hit's for far better average, hits more HR's, stikes out a little less, has more RBI's, and is a better baserunner. What more do you want him to do? :confused:

Schmidt is ranked so high here, and I can't ever see why. Horribly over-rated.

Also, if you aren't inclined to investigate sabermetrics, there are simpler ways to evaluate how they compare to their peers. Schmidt led the league in:

HR eight times
OBP three times
Slg% five times
OPS five times
RBI four times
walks four times

The same totals for A-Rod are:

five
zero
three
two
two
zero

Granted, A-Rod is not quite 33 years old and still has some good years ahead of him, but his days of leading the league in major categories are numbered. What I'm getting at is, because of the conditions under which he played, what Mike Schmidt did is more impressive than raw totals make it look. It's more impressive that Schmidt hit 48 homers in 1980 than it is that A-Rod hit 57 in 2002. Schmidt was 13 homers ahead of anyone else in the league, while A-Rod only had a 5 homer advantage over Jim Thome (not to mention Barry Bonds had hit 73 the year before). Look at these National League leaderboards from 1980 and 1981:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL_1980_t.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL_1981_t.shtml

No one even came close to doing what Schmidt did as a hitter.

[Minstrel]

Also, if you aren't inclined to investigate sabermetrics, there are simpler ways to evaluate how they compare to their peers. Schmidt led the league in:

HR eight times
OBP three times
Slg% five times
OPS five times
RBI four times
walks four times

The same totals for A-Rod are:

five
zero
three
two
two
zero

While offensive environment is always an important factor to account for, this sort of analysis has a problem, IMO. Leagues can be deficient in star-quality players, and those are the types of players who would challenge for league leaderships. How many other great players played in the NL at that time? I think Alex Rodriguez has had considerably more competition for leading the league in those categories.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Schmidt's league was weaker (though, I do think it was). It could be that the middle and/or bottom of Schmidt's league was stronger than the middle and/or bottom of Rodriguez's league, evening it out or even giving LQ to Schmidt. I don't think that's the case, but it's not impossible. Even if that is the case, though, it would even out LQ without giving Schmidt added competition for league leaderships.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

While offensive environment is always an important factor to account for, this sort of analysis has a problem, IMO. Leagues can be deficient in star-quality players, and those are the types of players who would challenge for league leaderships. How many other great players played in the NL at that time? I think Alex Rodriguez has had considerably more competition for leading the league in those categories.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Schmidt's league was weaker (though, I do think it was). It could be that the middle and/or bottom of Schmidt's league was stronger than the middle and/or bottom of Rodriguez's league, evening it out or even giving LQ to Schmidt. I don't think that's the case, but it's not impossible. Even if that is the case, though, it would even out LQ without giving Schmidt added competition for league leaderships.

You make some valid points, but understand that I was trying to offer an alternative to sabermetrics to show that Schmidt was a better hitter than A-Rod. This was my original response (which is on page two of this thread) to the same post about A-Rod being superior:

"You need to look at less traditional metrics than those and also account for differences in the eras in which they played in order to appreciate Schmidt as an equal or better hitter to A-Rod (which he was). Schmidt happened to dominate a weak offensive era. Take OPS+ for example. If you're unfamiliar with this stat, a quick definition is OPS (Slg% + OBP) that has been adjusted to account for league and park conditions. A-Rod's career number is at 148, with his career high being 178. Schmidt's career number is at 147, with his career high being 199 (this was a strike-shortened season, but I think it's likely that he would've stayed above 178 in a full season). Their career OPS+ values are roughly equal, only Schmidt maintained that rate for 350 more games. Schmidt's late career decline phase is also accounted for, but Rodriguez's is obviously not because it hasn't happened yet."

OPS+ considers the entire league, not just the stars like the leaderboards do. This is pure speculation on my part, but I am generally skeptical about there ever being less overall talent in one era as compared to another. So many kids grow up wanting to play Major League Baseball, and only the best of the best even get a cup of coffee. Granted that MLB has gotten more international influence recently, but it has also expanded to more teams, thus more roster spots and dilution of the talent. That's another discussion for another thread, so I won't go any further, but my opinion stands that Schmidt was a slightly better hitter than A-Rod and there are multiple ways to show it.

[Minstrel]

This is pure speculation on my part, but I am generally skeptical about there ever being less overall talent in one era as compared to another.

In baseball overall, perhaps not, but certainly leagues (AL versus NL) can be unbalanced. For the last few years (but perhaps changing again now), it was almost consensus that the NL was a weaker league than the AL, top to bottom. Schmidt's NL strikes me as a particularly weak league, a league well-suited for an inner circle Hall of Famer to dominate. I think if you replaced Schmidt with Rodriguez, you'd see at least similar dominance in league-adjusted metrics, if not greater.

Speculation, of course.