Ken Singleton

[Cowtipper]

Ken Singleton played for 15 seasons, hitting .282 with 2029 hits, 246 home runs and an OPS+ of 132. He also hit .333 in 57 postseason at-bats.

A three-time All-Star, Singleton won the Roberto Clemente Award in 1982. In 1973, he led the league in OBP, and 1979 and 1983, he led the league in intentional walks.

None of the players that are most similar to him statistically are in the Hall of Fame. The players he is similar to are Dusty Baker, Gary Matthews, George Hendrick, Bobby Murcer, Jeff Conine, George Scott, Ron Fairly, Cy Williams, Todd Zeile and Wally Joyner.

A quick bit of trivia: he once got hits in ten straight at-bats.

The Baseball Page ranks Singleton as the 35th best right fielder of all time. In 1990, he received absolutely zero votes for the Hall of Fame.

So, what do you think about Ken Singleton? Should he be in the Hall of Fame?

[brett]

No but he's better than Jim Rice

[Fuzzy Bear]

Singleton posted a .700-plus Offensive Winning Percentage five times.

Singleton came late to the big leagues; he was 24 when called up for good, and 25 before he played his first full-time big league season.

The trade of Singleton, along with Tim Foli and Mike Jorgensen, to the Expos for Rusty Staub is rarely pointed out as a one-sided trade, but for the Mets, it was a TERRIBLE trade. It was terrible because (A) Singleton would outperform Staub not just the rest of the way, but in the IMMEDIATE future and (B) along with Singleton, the Mets gave away Tim Foli and Mike Jorgensen, guys with good gloves who could have been useful part-timers. The trade is overlooked because the Mets stole the 1973 pennant, upsetting the Reds in the NLCS despite posting an 82-79 record in the regular season.

Singleton's not a HOFer, but he's a guy who provided an example of the power of drawing walks.

[Paul Wendt]

Ken Singleton is the best player to get zero votes from the BBWAA in modern elections. Equivalently he is the best nominee to get zero votes.

When I vote "Maybe" it always means "part credit".
--and I thought BlueBlood was cheap in giving only 1/4 credit during the Coda of our Utimate Quest.
It sometimes means also, Ask me again after the Hall of Fame has inducted another fifty.
In this context it also means, This guy is in Cowtipper's top ten percent!
Ken Singleton played for 15 seasons, hitting .282 with 2029 hits, 246 home runs and an OPS+ of 132. He also hit .333 in 57 postseason at-bats.

A three-time All-Star, Singleton won the Roberto Clemente Award in 1982. In 1973, he led the league in OBP, and 1979 and 1983, he led the league in intentional walks.

I hate that, a comma used to conjoin two unrelated sentences.
Singleton, a three-time All-Star, won the Roberto Clemente Award in 1982.
Should that be incredible! or should it go without sayin'?

Here is part of what MLB says about the Roberto Clemente Award. (I wonder how they selected the list of some past winners, and whether that is entirely within authorial discretion at mlb.com.)

>>
About the award

Since 1972, Major League Baseball annually has presented an award (originally known as The Commissioner's Award) which recognizes the player who best exemplifies the game of baseball, sportsmanship, community involvement and the individual's contribution to his team.

In 1973, following the tragic death of Roberto Clemente, the award was re-named to honor the man whose spirit and goodwill always will be remembered. The award recognizes those individuals who truly understand the value of helping others.

A panel of baseball dignitaries, including Vera Clemente and Commissioner Allan H. (Bud) Selig, annually selects a winner from a list of 30 nominees, one from each Major League Baseball club. This year, the MLB.com fan ballot winner will be tallied as one vote among those cast by the special selection panel. Past winners include Al Leiter, Tony Gwynn, Sammy Sosa, Willie Mays, Lou Brock, Ozzie Smith, Cal Ripken, Jr. and Kirby Puckett.
<<
source: Roberto Clemente (Award) at mlb.mlb.com/mlb ! (http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/community/clemente.jsp)

[parlo]

Singleton posted a .700-plus Offensive Winning Percentage five times.

Singleton came late to the big leagues; he was 24 when called up for good, and 25 before he played his first full-time big league season.

The trade of Singleton, along with Tim Foli and Mike Jorgensen, to the Expos for Rusty Staub is rarely pointed out as a one-sided trade, but for the Mets, it was a TERRIBLE trade. It was terrible because (A) Singleton would outperform Staub not just the rest of the way, but in the IMMEDIATE future and (B) along with Singleton, the Mets gave away Tim Foli and Mike Jorgensen, guys with good gloves who could have been useful part-timers. The trade is overlooked because the Mets stole the 1973 pennant, upsetting the Reds in the NLCS despite posting an 82-79 record in the regular season.

Singleton's not a HOFer, but he's a guy who provided an example of the power of drawing walks.

Staub is so popular that people often ignore this trade. They gave up far too much to obtain him. On the Met threads about "worst trades", I always mention this one in my top 10 bad trades. It is usually rebutted strongly!
Chances are, the Mets wouldn't have won the NL East in '73 without Staub, and they certainly would not have upset the Reds in the playoffs. But they gave up far too much to acquire him.
I came of age (baseball wise) during this period. I have often daydreamed about how much better the team would have been if they had made no trades during that 1970-1972 period.
The outfield would have included Amos Otis and Ken Singleton; Foli could have replaced a broken down Harrelson; and Jorgenson and Milner at 1B/OF platoon.
There also would have been a fourth starter behind Seaver, Koosman, and Matlack, by the name of Nolan Ryan.
The team would have been very good through much of the 1970's.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Staub is so popular that people often ignore this trade. They gave up far too much to obtain him. On the Met threads about "worst trades", I always mention this one in my top 10 bad trades. It is usually rebutted strongly!
Chances are, the Mets wouldn't have won the NL East in '73 without Staub, and they certainly would not have upset the Reds in the playoffs. But they gave up far too much to acquire him.
I came of age (baseball wise) during this period. I have often daydreamed about how much better the team would have been if they had made no trades during that 1970-1972 period.
The outfield would have included Amos Otis and Ken Singleton; Foli could have replaced a broken down Harrelson; and Jorgenson and Milner at 1B/OF platoon.
There also would have been a fourth starter behind Seaver, Koosman, and Matlack, by the name of Nolan Ryan.
The team would have been very good through much of the 1970's.

The Mets have NOT been an organization that has made good trades over the years, by and large.

Johnny Murphy was the GM who built the team that won the World Championship in 1969. He died in the offseason, and Bob Scheffing took over. Scheffing was the guy who was the author of most of the crummy trades (Singleton, Foli, and Ryan for Staub, Ryan for Fregosi).

I can't agree with your assertion that the Mets would not have won the pennant in 1973 without Staub. Singleton had a MUCH better season than Staub in 1973; it was his first great season. Singleton led Staub in HRs (23 to 15), RBIs, (103 to 76), BA (.302 to .279), Runs Scored (100 to 77), OBP (.425 to .361), and Offensive Winning Percentage (.713 to .605). Indeed, Singleton had a HOF-caliber season for a corner outfielder in 1973, while Staub didn't even have an All-Star-caliber season for a corner outfielder. In addition, there was no reason to believe that Staub possessed any outside-the-books advantages that make up this ENORMOUS difference in performance between the two in 1973. Even winning the NL pennant doesn't really aid Staub. The 1973 Mets were 3.5 games worse in 1973 than in 1972, while Singleton's Expos were 5 games better, and were only 3.5 games out from the Mets and in contention for the NL division title until the last week. And while the Expos were a mere 79-83, this was, by far, their best record to date. Staub had a good WS (in a losing effort), but he only hit .200 in the NCLS against the Reds. Given that the Mets took the A's to seven games, it is easier to suggest that if they had Singleton instead of Staub, they may have won it all.

[SABR Matt]

Very good ballplayer...much better than Jim Rice.

But still not a HOFer.
Yr Lg Off Def O-M D-M Wins
1977 AL 14.90 1.66 25.7 1.6 16.56
1979 AL 11.63 3.66 18.9 5.7 15.29
1975 AL 13.14 1.10 21.8 0.2 14.24
1978 AL 11.39 1.28 18.9 1.1 12.67
1980 AL 8.86 1.19 13.4 0.7 10.05
1973 NL 7.95 1.63 11.5 1.2 9.58
1976 AL 7.25 1.61 10.5 1.7 8.86
1972 NL 5.43 1.41 7.2 1.1 6.84
1983 AL 5.74 0.00 7.6 0.0 5.74
1981 AL 4.25 1.05 5.8 1.4 5.30
1974 NL 4.63 0.13 5.4 -1.7 4.76
1971 NL 3.01 0.70 3.7 0.5 3.71
1982 AL 3.24 0.06 2.3 0.1 3.30
1970 NL 1.54 1.04 1.6 1.5 2.58

He had a HOF caliber peak, but the tail was a little weak for an outfielder and he has the misfortune of playing a very well-represented position (RF). At that position, you need about a 220 marker score to be a HOFer in my book...his 172 career total is impressive but not in right, where he finds himself 32nd all time.

Here's Jim Rice, BTW, for comparison:
Yr Lg Off Def O-M D-M Wins
1978 AL 14.35 2.62 24.0 3.8 16.97
1979 AL 10.4 1.12 16.4 0.8 11.52
1986 AL 8.17 3.17 12.0 4.6 11.34
1983 AL 8.00 2.41 11.6 3.1 10.41
1977 AL 9.03 0.48 13.6 0.4 9.51
1982 AL 6.20 0.99 8.4 0.4 7.19
1975 AL 5.92 0.82 8.0 0.8 6.74
1976 AL 5.60 0.31 7.3 -0.5 5.91
1980 AL 4.73 0.82 6.0 0.3 5.55
1981 AL 4.04 0.97 5.0 0.6 5.01
1984 AL 3.13 1.51 1.8 1.2 4.64
1985 AL 3.99 0.38 4.1 -0.7 4.37
1987 AL 1.38 0.65 -0.1 0.3 2.03
1988 AL 1.81 0.20 0.2 0.2 2.01

His 140.0 marker score puts him a big step behind Singleton in my book.

[parlo]

Fuzzy Bear wrote: "Staub had a good WS (in a losing effort), but he only hit .200 in the NCLS against the Reds"

Rusty Staub might have only hit .200 in the '73 Playoffs, but he had 3 HRs, 5 RBIs, 3BBs, and 4Rs scored in 4 games. There were two games where he carried the offense, and he also got hurt crashing into the wall making a great catch. If there had been an MVP for the playoffs back then, he or Seaver would have received it.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Rusty Staub might have only hit .200 in the '73 Playoffs, but he had 3 HRs, 5 RBIs, 3BBs, and 4Rs scored in 4 games. There were two games where he carried the offense, and he also got hurt crashing into the wall making a great catch. If there had been an MVP for the playoffs back then, he or Seaver would have received it.

It's been a long time. The thing I remember the most about that series was Pete (Mr. Scumbag) Rose sliding hard into second and spiking Bud Harrelson.

Staub may well have been the NCLS MVP that year if such an award had been handed out (although it probably would have went to Seaver). I'll give Staub that credit. Still, Singleton was the better player throughout 1973, and by a large margin. If Singleton put up 12 years of 1973, he'd be a HOF favorite around here.

[parlo]

It's been a long time. The thing I remember the most about that series was Pete (Mr. Scumbag) Rose sliding hard into second and spiking Bud Harrelson.

Staub may well have been the NCLS MVP that year if such an award had been handed out (although it probably would have went to Seaver). I'll give Staub that credit. Still, Singleton was the better player throughout 1973, and by a large margin. If Singleton put up 12 years of 1973, he'd be a HOF favorite around here.In the Whitey Herzog book, he is very critical of that trade also.

[parlo]

It's been a long time. The thing I remember the most about that series was Pete (Mr. Scumbag) Rose sliding hard into second and spiking Bud Harrelson.

Staub may well have been the NCLS MVP that year if such an award had been handed out (although it probably would have went to Seaver). I'll give Staub that credit. Still, Singleton was the better player throughout 1973, and by a large margin. If Singleton put up 12 years of 1973, he'd be a HOF favorite around here.Here is the box score for Game 4 of the 1973 World Series. Mets won 6-1 with Staub going 4-4 with 5RBIs, a HR, and a BB.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN197310170.shtml

So, there are two Playoff games and one World Series game where Staub carried the team. They most likely dont win any of those games without him.
Assuming Singleton would have done even more than Staub seems highly speculative, even though Singleton put up better numbers during the regular season. Staub had a great postseason and the Mets wouldnt have got as far as they did without him.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I understand your point on Staub's value to the Mets in the 1973 postseason. Truthfully, the same argument could be applied even more strongly to Al Weis in 1969.

I would suggest that if the Mets had Singleton, Jorgensen, and Foli in 1973, they would have won the division more decisively. It wouldn't have been the "ya gotta believe" scenario, but it would have been more decisive, because they would have been a better team.

There's a current thread discussing Carlos Lee as a HOFer. If someone is going to argue Carlos Lee as a HOFer, then why not Ken Singleton? Again: I'm not pushing Singleton's candidacy, but he was a much better player than Lee, period, and I don't think Lee can do enough the rest of the way to change that.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

Ken Singleton had a fine career. His number look good, especially when viewed through a sabermetric lens and/or adjusted for era/context. However, I can't give him my support for the HOF. His career was too short, and he didn't offer enough outside of the batter's box. Unless a player absolutely dominates for a few years, he can't afford to burn out in his mid 30s and still be a viable HOF candidate. Ken Singleton didn't dominate, but did hang 'em up after a very unproductive season at age 37. Maybe I could let this slide if he were a second baseman, or even a good center fielder, but he wasn't. If a player of his caliber hopes to get into the HOF, he needs to produce until he's 40.

[Los Bravos]

Ken Singleton is the best player to get zero votes from the BBWAA in modern elections. Equivalently he is the best nominee to get zero votes.I find it mind boggling that he was completely stiffed. Usually a few voters will throw a vote at a guy they know is short, out of respect for a fine career.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I find it mind boggling that he was completely stiffed. Usually a few voters will throw a vote at a guy they know is short, out of respect for a fine career.

Singleton's value was in his OBP. He had neither the rate stats (BA) nor the counting stats (career HRs and RBIs) that were attention grabbing, plus, he was not a defensive star (although he did play RIGHT field and had a good throwing arm).

What Singleton had were a few years of monster OWPs. They weren't enough to get him into the HOF because they weren't noticed. However, they were, arguably, enough to rank him ahead of Jim Rice. This is more of a statement about Rice NOT being Hall-worthy than Singleton being deserving, but I find it hard to not conclude that Singleton was a better player than Rice.

[Paul Wendt]

I find it mind boggling that he was completely stiffed. Usually a few voters will throw a vote at a guy they know is short, out of respect for a fine career.
Yes, it's mind boggling.
One year later his Mets and Expos teammate Mike Jorgensen scored a vote.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Ken Singleton had a fine career. His number look good, especially when viewed through a sabermetric lens and/or adjusted for era/context. However, I can't give him my support for the HOF. His career was too short, and he didn't offer enough outside of the batter's box. Unless a player absolutely dominates for a few years, he can't afford to burn out in his mid 30s and still be a viable HOF candidate. Ken Singleton didn't dominate, but did hang 'em up after a very unproductive season at age 37. Maybe I could let this slide if he were a second baseman, or even a good center fielder, but he wasn't. If a player of his caliber hopes to get into the HOF, he needs to produce until he's 40.

All of this is true. If, however, lightning ever struck and Singleton were somehow enshrined, he wouldn't be the worst player in the HOF. This, too, is not an endorsement, but it is, I believe, a factual statement.

[leecemark]

--Singleton was a valuable player but he didn't do many of the things that get guys to the Hall of Fame. If he walked his way into the Hall he would be the first to do so. He hit 30 HR only once (24 was his second best). He drove in 100 only 3 times (barely cracking 1,000 for his career). For all his times on base he scored 100 only once (coming up short of 1,000). He hit .300 four times, but his high was .328 - and his second high was only .304.
--He was regarded as a very good hitter in his time, but hardly a dominating one. His contribution outside the batters box was negligible. He was extremely slow and that was a problem in the field and on the bases. I can certainly see the sabermetric argument for him being better than Rice, but contemporary observers would have scoffed at the comparison. So would most fans looking at their numbers today and - more importantly - so would/did most Hall of Fame voters. He wouldn't be the worstplayer in the Hall, but he would have been a shocking selection. Based on Hall of Fame criteria his zero votes is easy to understand than his election would have been - even if its less just.

[Mike Hoban]

Ken Singleton was a much better player than he is usually given credit for. He had a core value (ten best win shares seasons) of 260. That is very good and should have meant that he deserved a very good look for the Hall of Fame. He should have gotten enough votes to hang around on the ballot for a few years at least.

But that does not mean that he had HOF numbers. The CAWS career Gauge has him in that group of very good players who just fell short. Here are a few such players and their CAWS scores.

Rusty Staub 279
Joe Medwick 278
Bobby Bonds 274
Tony Perez 274
Sammy Sosa 273
Ken Singleton 271
Frank Howard 270
Vada Pinson 269
Reggie Smith 269
Dave Parker 268
Orlando Cepeda 266
Edd Roush 266

They were all a lot better than Jim Rice at 245.

[jaxxr]

"Very good ballplayer...much better than Jim Rice."
.....................................

a "MUCH" better ballplayer ???, please,
I realize it's trendy to berate JIm Rice and his recent official regular election to baseball's HOF, however just not always accurate.

Defense:
Singleton was primarily a DH due to fielding liability, his range was below average, Rice was above average in range, and fielding percentage, and had an above average arm.

Base Running:
Neither guy was a Vince Coleman on the bases, however Rice who managed to lead the league in triples, stole 58 basaes at a 63 % rate, Slug-footed Kenny swiped only 21 at a terrible, negative impact on team, 37% rate.

Hitting:
Triple crown stats, league leading seasons, Rice 5, Singleton 0
Adj OPS +, league leading seasons, Rice 1, Singleton 0
200+ Hit seasons, Rice 4, Singleton 0
Total Bases, League leading seasons, Rice 4, Singleton 0

Rice also got two SLG crowns, and Kenny one OBP title.
For career OPS +, Rice is, in actual MLB game performance, higher at 134 to 132, when the speculative park factors are applied to alter the real numbers, Kenny takes a small edge 132 to 128, not too MUCH a difference.

Rice the better baserunner, the better defender, the better power hitter/slugger, the higer raw BA, with one MVP award, Kenny was better at drawing walks and getting on base.

[Freakshow]

"Very good ballplayer...much better than Jim Rice."
.....................................

a "MUCH" better ballplayer ???, please,
I realize it's trendy to berate JIm Rice and his recent official regular election to baseball's HOF, however just not always accurate.

Defense:
Singleton was primarily a DH due to fielding liability, his range was below average, Rice was above average in range, and fielding percentage, and had an above average arm.

Base Running:
Neither guy was a Vince Coleman on the bases, however Rice who managed to lead the league in triples, stole 58 basaes at a 63 % rate, Slug-footed Kenny swiped only 21 at a terrible, negative impact on team, 37% rate.

Hitting:
Triple crown stats, league leading seasons, Rice 5, Singleton 0
Adj OPS +, league leading seasons, Rice 1, Singleton 0
200+ Hit seasons, Rice 4, Singleton 0
Total Bases, League leading seasons, Rice 4, Singleton 0

Rice also got two SLG crowns, and Kenny one OBP title.
For career OPS +, Rice is, in actual MLB game performance, higher at 134 to 132, when the speculative park factors are applied to alter the real numbers, Kenny takes a small edge 132 to 128, not too MUCH a difference.

Rice the better baserunner, the better defender, the better power hitter/slugger, the higer raw BA, with one MVP award, Kenny was better at drawing walks and getting on base.I'm not sure if the above is an attempt at a serious post or simply bait. But I'll offer a brief response because you often read similar cherry-picking of stats in defense of Rice.

I agree that it's nonsense to say Singleton was "much better than Jim Rice". Any sophisticated system tells us Singleton was better, but it's not a slam dunk.

You simply have to consider the run environment, or you will wrongly conclude Rice was a better hitter. BB-Ref gives us their "AIR" numbers, telling how every player's run environment compares to a historical average of 100. Rice is at 102 for his career, Singleton is at 94. In the ten years they played in the AL together (1975-84) Fenway boosted Rice to an AIR of 103; Memorial Stadium pulled Singleton down to an AIR of 93.

Singleton had a couple brutal sb/cs years in 1972-73, before they told him to cut it out with the basestealing. Rice was certainly the faster runner (tools) but sb/cs data doesn't necessarily indicate who was a better baserunner. I haven't researched the situational stats for baserunning. In any case, it's small potatoes value-wise.

Whatever speed advantage Rice had was negated on defense, playing in Fenway's tiny LF. Singleton clearly had a vastly better arm, everyone would try to run on Rice. Rice actually played more games at DH than Singleton. BB-Pro has Rice a well below average defender for his career, -41 FRAA. Singleton is right about average, -2 FRAA.

The media-painted image I have of Rice is one of the surly slugger, diminished by playing in the shadows of Yaz and Lynn. Singleton was seen as the quiet professional, IIRC correctly.

Rice is the better choice for a Hall of the "Famous"; Singleton a more valuable player. But neither player should be anywhere near the head of the line for HOF induction.

[dgarza]

Defense:
Singleton was primarily a DH due to fielding liability, his range was below average, Rice was above average in range, and fielding percentage, and had an above average arm.

Singleton was not primarily a DH. In fact, he DHed less that Rice. Rice actually began his career as a DH. And in his 1st 4 seasons, he DHed about 50% of the time.

As for defense, Rice and Singleton were overall pretty similar according to FRAA in their prime (edge to Rice). But Rice tanked in the second half of his career.

Rice
FRAA 1st 8 seasons : 26
FRAA the rest of his career : -66

Singleton
FRAA 1st 8 seasons : -20
FRAA the rest of his career : 21

[KCGHOST]

Nice career, but not an HoFer.

[jaxxr]

"agree that it's nonsense to say Singleton was "much better than Jim Rice". Any sophisticated system tells us Singleton was better, but it's not a slam dunk."
.................................

Exactly,

and depending on the weight or value given,
to recorded defensive stats like Fldg pct and range, in addition to recorded stolen bases and triples for base running, even a greatly lesser amount of league leading seasons might show Singleton a slightly better hitter, but certainly not neccaessarily a better overall ballplayer.

[Freakshow]

Ken Singleton is the best player to get zero votes from the BBWAA in modern elections. Equivalently he is the best nominee to get zero votes.Perhaps. Usually, you see Jimmy Wynn more highly regarded than Singleton. The Toy Cannon was skunked in the 1983 election. Frank Tanana would be another candidate for best player to be zeroed out.

[AG2004]

"Very good ballplayer...much better than Jim Rice."

Defense:
Singleton was primarily a DH due to fielding liability, his range was below average, Rice was above average in range, and fielding percentage, and had an above average arm.

Singleton played 1538 games in the OF, and 477 at DH. Rice played 1543 games in the OF, and 530 at DH.

Rice earned a letter grade of C+ for outfield defense from Bill James; Singleton, a C. That's not a huge difference, as they were both corner outfielders; it comes down to 5 win shares over the course of a career.


Hitting:
Triple crown stats, league leading seasons, Rice 5, Singleton 0
Adj OPS +, league leading seasons, Rice 1, Singleton 0
200+ Hit seasons, Rice 4, Singleton 0
Total Bases, League leading seasons, Rice 4, Singleton 0

Rice also got two SLG crowns, and Kenny one OBP title.
For career OPS +, Rice is, in actual MLB game performance, higher at 134 to 132, when the speculative park factors are applied to alter the real numbers, Kenny takes a small edge 132 to 128, not too MUCH a difference.

Singleton was in the top five in OPS+ five times; Rice, twice.

Should I also add that Rice led the league in GIDP repeatedly, and holds the single-season record for GIDP? That decreased his offensive value.

There is a reason for taking park effects into account. When we express runs in terms of fractions of a win, a run in Baltimore was worth more than a run in Boston, since it took more runs to win in Boston than in Baltimore. Fenway increased the triple crown stats of players -- but, when we express offense in terms of games won, which is what the win share system claims to do, Singleton has the advantage over Rice.

Rice the better baserunner, the better defender, the better power hitter/slugger, the higer raw BA, with one MVP award, Kenny was better at drawing walks and getting on base.

I made Keltner lists for both Singleton and Rice. Singleton is a very strong candidate whose only weaknesses were in ink/standards scores and All-Star game appearances. However, the ink/standards tests are based on what voters to Cooperstown did in the past, and All-Star game appearances for corner outfielders are, for the most part, based on raw triple crown stats. Earl Weaver, who thought highly of Singleton, was a Moneyball-type thinker long before the book was written; Singleton came along just before the sabermetric revolution would have boosted his general reputation to where it deserved to be.

Rice, on the other hand, has a weak case. His peak levels would put him in the lower tier of BBFHOF left fielders -- but a low peak needs high career totals to balance it out, and Rice doesn't come close to the BBFHOF cutoff there. He wasn't at his best for an extended period of time; from 1977 to 1979, he would have been able to lead a typical team into the thick of a pennant race, but he was too inconsistent otherwise. Rice's major strengths are in ink scores and MVP voting; however, voters of the time placed heavy weight on Triple Crown stats in MVP votings, and, due in part to Fenway, Rice excelled in those aspects of the game.

Singleton's contemporaries knew he was good, but very few people looked at OBP back then or took park effects into account to the degree they should have, and that prevented them from seeing him as being as great as he really was. Rice was a good player, but not a great one. Contemporaries may have thought he was great. By the standards they used, they had a case, but the standards were flawed in a way that favored Rice and harmed Singleton.

[jaxxr]

OPS + is a good way to evaluate hitters, however it is not close to perfect, nor the only manner in which to do so.

Eddie Yost posted some fine OPS + numbers, he was never considered a fine hitter, nor much of a run producer, due to the composition of his numbers, two identical 135 numbers, for example, may be put up by two vastly different levels of "hitters".

If one compares Rice to Singleton, the OPS shows different compositions.
Actual OPS, Rice .854, Singleton .824, Actual OPS + Rice 134, Singleton 132, PF adjusted OPS +, Rice 128, Singleton 132. Somehow Rice was the league leader in those categories at least once, Singleton never "peaked" enough to ever be a league leader in an OPS stat.

For their respective career averages, Rice got his OPS figures with an average of 190 base hits, producing 320 total bases with 52 walks, Singleton averaged 158 base hits producing only 244 total bases with 97 walks. More power and more hits, rather than more walks.

As for those dreaded GIDPs, which can actually advance a baserunner or drive in a run, on occassion, Both fellows were league leaders, Rice has 6 seasons with 20 or more, Singleton has 5.

One may choose to feel an adjustment or normalization of OPS + which results in a 3% downward alteration of the actual better numbers by Rice, does absolutely show Singleton the better hitter, despite the composition within,
and is not offset by four total base crowns, four 200+ hit seasons, greater HR ability, both raw and via HRF, more runs scored per season, more RBI per season, and a better BA, both actual and in relation to his peers, or BA+, if you prefer,
so be it.

[AstrosFan]

OPS + is a good way to evaluate hitters, however it is not close to perfect, nor the only manner in which to do so.

Right. Actually, Rice is overrated, and Singleton underrated, by OPS+, because Singleton's OPS is much more OBP weighted.

If one compares Rice to Singleton, the OPS shows different compositions. Actual OPS, Rice .854, Singleton .824, Actual OPS + Rice 134, Singleton 132, PF adjusted OPS +, Rice 128, Singleton 132. Somehow Rice was the league leader in those categories at least once, Singleton never "peaked" enough to ever be a league leader in an OPS stat.

We can basically throw this comparison out. The raw stats are useless, since they make no park adjustment. League leadership is far more meaningless than actual performance. In terms of production, Singleton's best years are better than Rice's best.

For their respective career averages, Rice got his OPS figures with an average of 190 base hits, producing 320 total bases with 52 walks, Singleton averaged 158 base hits producing only 244 total bases with 97 walks. More power and more hits, rather than more walks.

Welcome back to park adjustments.

As for those dreaded GIDPs, which can actually advance a baserunner or drive in a run, on occassion, Both fellows were league leaders, Rice has 6 seasons with 20 or more, Singleton has 5.

Singleton was slow. No getting around it. I'm not going to use baserunning in any form to try to give him an edge.

One may choose to feel an adjustment or normalization of OPS + which results in a 3% downward alteration of the actual better numbers by Rice, does absolutely show Singleton the better hitter, despite the composition within, and is not offset by four total base crowns, four 200+ hit seasons, greater HR ability, both raw and via HRF, more runs scored per season, more RBI per season, and a better BA, both actual and in relation to his peers, or BA+, if you prefer,
so be it.

I hope this is the last time I'm going to have to say park adjustments. Second, you've basically cherry-picked stats to make Rice look better, most of which are meaningless in a good evaluation of hitting ability. BA+? If two players have identical OBP and identical SLG in the same context and the same playing time, but one hits .300 and the other hits .250, they are still equally productive as hitters. RBI? How out of touch are you?

As I said before, Singleton's edge in OPS+ underrates how much better he was than Rice as a hitter, because it is much more OBP heavy. To insert raw stats back into the argument defeats the purpose of using the context adjustments. If two players have similar numbers, but one plays in a higher run context, that player will have better raw numbers, but he is not a better hitter.

[jaxxr]

OBP can also be a misleading stat,
a fellow with a .400 OBP with 100 walks, is much less the quality "hitter", than a guy with the same numerical .400 OBP who had only 60 walks.

Park factor was in favor of Rice, although the imperfect adjusment takes no injury status, no weather conditions, no pitching ability, nor teammate effects, into account, it does have some influence.

There are also figures available for RH/LH hitters and the specific type of hit, nevertheless, Rice in the midst of his career, 1980, played in Fenway with a one year PF of 102, his 1986 season saw Fenway at 99 for the season, the PF changes more often than the players do, thus is often a resultant, rather than a cause, of the hitting done there.
Most good ballplayers learn to adjust and adapt to their home parks, some may be be penalized for being overly skilled at such. Rice had his best averages via BA, HRs, and OPS in Yankee Stadium, noted as tough on RH hitters, although he gets no "bonus" credit.

Regardless, lets say Rice played half his games in Fenway with an average PF of 106. Singleton, more a traveling man, played in Shea, PF of 100, Montreal PF of 103, and Baltimore PF of about 99, likely a career PF of 100, a 6 % difference. For a reasonable estimate, probably 3 or 4 percent would be a more reflective half home games, representation, 6 % would assume every game Rice ever played was in Fenway.

Althoiugh, if we reduce Rice's numbers by 6%, he still betters Singleton in,
Total bases per season, 320 which becomes 300, still very much more than Kenny's actual average of 244.
Same effect in other actual stats, Rice is still better in HRs, RBI, Runs scored, and Base hits per season. Rice also is still better in seasonal averages for doubles and triples, Kenny has an even bigger edge in walks however.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

OBP can also be a misleading stat,
a fellow with a .400 OBP with 100 walks, is much less the quality "hitter", than a guy with the same numerical .400 OBP who had only 60 walks.

I agree. Ignoring the Singleton versus Rice comparision momentarily, I'd rather have a .400 hitter with a .400 OBP than a .300 hitter with that same .400 OBP. Hits are better than walks - they advance runners and produce runs at higher rates. Unfortunately, that hypothetical choice is not usually available. More often, a guy like Alfonso Soriano (.280 hitter with a .330 OBP) gets praised, while a guy like Adam Dunn (.250 hitter with a .380 OBP) gets bashed. Soriano gets more hits (which, as I said, are better than walks), but not enough to make up the huge edge Dunn has in reaching base. The Soriano versus Dunn comparision is an extreme one. Rice (.298/.352) versus Singleton (.282/.388) compares two much more similar hitters. Where do we draw the line? What's the exchange rate between hits and walks? I, for one, am not sure. I tend to think, based mainly on his power advantage, that Rice was the better hitter, but I'm not as confident as I'd like to be in that assertion.

[AstrosFan]

OBP can also be a misleading stat,
a fellow with a .400 OBP with 100 walks, is much less the quality "hitter", than a guy with the same numerical .400 OBP who had only 60 walks.

Again, if two players have identical OBP, and identical SLG, in the same context, they are equally productive as hitters, regardless of their batting averages.

Most good ballplayers learn to adjust and adapt to their home parks, some may be be penalized for being overly skilled at such. Rice had his best averages via BA, HRs, and OPS in Yankee Stadium, noted as tough on RH hitters, although he gets no "bonus" credit.

Regardless, lets say Rice played half his games in Fenway with an average PF of 106. Singleton, more a traveling man, played in Shea, PF of 100, Montreal PF of 103, and Baltimore PF of about 99, likely a career PF of 100, a 6 % difference. For a reasonable estimate, probably 3 or 4 percent would be a more reflective half home games, representation, 6 % would assume every game Rice ever played was in Fenway.

Althoiugh, if we reduce Rice's numbers by 6%, he still betters Singleton in,
Total bases per season, 320 which becomes 300, still very much more than Kenny's actual average of 244.
Same effect in other actual stats, Rice is still better in HRs, RBI, Runs scored, and Base hits per season. Rice also is still better in seasonal averages for doubles and triples, Kenny has an even bigger edge in walks however.

You're still cherry-picking stats, and they're still the wrong ones.

And why approach things like the park factor effect with a "let's say" argument? The numbers are available. It's just a matter of working things out. Second, the park factors at Baseball Reference or anywhere else DO NOT assume a player plays all his games at home. Third, Rice benefited MORE compared to what the park effects suggest than Singleton. His home/away splits are extreme.

Every argument you've presented here further strengthens the evidence for Singleton as being better.

[jaxxr]

We know Rice was the better hitter in HRs, BA, Total Bases, RBI, Runs scored, and several other raw stats, perhaps it was ALL FENWAY, but perhaps not, maybe we dont realize he could hit pretty good in other parks too, The Yankee Satdium stats, mentioned prior, notwithstanding.

In 1978, Jim Rice got an outstanding offensive production of 406 total bases, the last true pre-roids player to do such. He was the best in the league four separate times.

That season he got 175 TB on the road, double that to give 350, some 15% better than Singleton's best ever 304 in a full season.
There are more seasons where this happens again.

In 1983, Jim Rice led the league in HRs, a feat Ken never 'peaked' well enough to accomplish. Rice got 23 on the road, if doubled, his 46 are some 31% higher than Ken's best ever full season of 35.
There are more seasons where this happens again.

In SLG, RBI, and other stats , several seasons of Rice's mere road numbers doubled, will exceed the very best single season numbers Singleton ever had.

[Freakshow]

Career Road stats.

Jim Rice
.277 .330 .459

Ken Singleton
.288 .384 .443

Singleton beats Rice handily in road hitting, an OPS of .827 to .789.

Singleton was more "feared" as well, with 125 intentional walks, twice leading the league. Rice had 77, never leading the league.