Who is the greatest baseball player of all-time?

[sneakers]

(Barry Bonds is not an acceptable answer)

This one is easy, but people try to think too hard and they end up picking someone else. Remember your first gut instinct is always right.

The answer is Babe Ruth.

any disagreers? (is that a word?)

[Northman]

Any player who DIDNT use steroids.

[deacon]

Mickey Mantle

[buffsroam]

Mickey Mantle

I agree. Jackie Robinson is my favorite player even though I never watched him play live.

[MOtorboat]

Since we immediately made this thread about steroids, let's just throw out there that steroids didn't make anyone a better baseball player, it only MAYBE allowed them to play longer. Considering that before steroids, players played 20 years, and hit over 700 home runs, I cannot say that steroids caused Barry Bonds to do what he did. I just can't.

And yes, there can be made an argument that Barry Bonds is the greatest baseball player of all time.

As far as Ruth. He was a terrible outfielder, but still probably the best player of all time. I would say arguments could be made for Henry Aaron, Joe DiMaggio, Pete Rose, Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb and Ted Williams.

[atwater27]

Since we immediately made this thread about steroids, let's just throw out there that steroids didn't make anyone a better baseball player, it only MAYBE allowed them to play longer. .

We all fully understand that one of the benefits of steroids is that it lets your body recover fast and heal fast. That said, Steroids most definitely helps your strength and power, and helps you build muscle mass faster and gives you the ability to work out harder and longer to tone those muscles into chiseled stone. Therefore, Steroids help you hit the balll much, much farther than you could normally do it. So, yes, indeed, steroids make you BETTER at sports, if you follow through and work out like you should.
Barry Bonds, Canseco, Mcguire, Sosa, Ramirez and all the rest's numbers would be DRAMATICALLY pedestrian compared to the numbers they put up directly because of the drugs they were taking. And that is a fact. Also a fact. Barry bonds is not the greatest player of all time.

[MOtorboat]

We all fully understand that one of the benefits of steroids is that it lets your body recover fast and heal fast. That said, Steroids most definitely helps your strength and power, and helps you build muscle mass faster and gives you the ability to work out harder and longer to tone those muscles into chiseled stone. Therefore, Steroids help you hit the balll much, much farther than you could normally do it. So, yes, indeed, steroids make you BETTER at sports, if you follow through and work out like you should.
Barry Bonds, Canseco, Mcguire, Sosa, Ramirez and all the rest's numbers would be DRAMATICALLY pedestrian compared to the numbers they put up directly because of the drugs they were taking. And that is a fact. Also a fact. Barry bonds is not the greatest player of all time.

I think the argument for Canseco, McGuire and Sosa having lesser numbers if they didn't take steroids may be correct, but of course we won't ever know...

Bonds was on his way to either breaking that record or being one of the best players/hitters ever BEFORE he started taking steroids.

There is no solid evidence to say Ramirez's numbers should really be in question. The guy can flat out hit. The tell-tale signs of steroid use just aren't there.

There's a lot of speculation in all of this. Obviously, Babe Ruth and Henry Aaron hit over 700 home runs without the use of steroids (we think), so why is it FACT that Bonds couldn't have done that without steroids?

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Ken Griffey, Jr.

[MOtorboat]

Ken Griffey, Jr.

Juicer. :D

[OrangeHoof]

I concur that it is Ruth. He was a great pitcher before he was a great hitter yet he still set records far and away beyond anyone else for his time. He outhomered entire teams. He sold tickets and he saved the sport from the Black Sox scandal. There are only two athletes I think that even come close to Ruth's dominance of a sport - Muhammad Ali and Wayne Gretzky.

It was fortunate for him that Ruth played in a time when the media was not as pervasive and not as inclined to dig into a player's personal life as they are today. I think if Ruth were a Yankee in this era, he'd be treated little differently than A-Rod or Clemens.

Oh, and before anyone starts with that "yeah, but Ruth never had to face the top black pitchers of his day", let me ask you how many black pitchers of the 20s and 30s are in the Hall of Fame, even after all the revisionism of various committees to put more blacks from that era in the Hall? Great black pitchers largely did not exist in the Negro Leagues.

But then factor in things like an entire season of day games, train travel between cities, doctored pitches still legal, etc. that today's stars don't encounter and I think it balances out any alleged lack of black pitching talent in Ruth's time.

[Broncospsycho77]

Pete Rose.

[MOtorboat]

Oh, and before anyone starts with that "yeah, but Ruth never had to face the top black pitchers of his day", let me ask you how many black pitchers of the 20s and 30s are in the Hall of Fame, even after all the revisionism of various committees to put more blacks from that era in the Hall? Great black pitchers largely did not exist in the Negro Leagues.

Ever hear of Satchel Paige?

[Slick]

Larry Walker in 1997.


Walker's career season came in 1997, when he hit .366 with 49 home runs, 130 RBI, 33 stolen bases, and 409 total bases, en route to becoming the first Canadian player to win the MVP Award.

In 1998, Walker won the Lou Marsh Trophy as Canadian athlete of the year after finishing runner-up the previous year to Formula One champion Jacques Villeneuve.

Combined with 12 outfield assists, the season remains one of the finest all around performances in recent baseball history. Even more impressively, Walker's breakout season came just one year after various injuries limited him to 83 games and 272 at-bats, although the NL Comeback Player of the Year award went to Darren Daulton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Walker#Career_Season

I used to like baseball, now it bores the hell out of me. I can't even make it through one inning.

[gnomeflinger]

Nolan Ryan.

[elsid13]

Ted Williams. Great ballplayer and even greater patriot.

[Ravage!!!]

John Elway

[MOtorboat]

John Elway

I laugh every time I watch the history of the Broncos DVD and they show George Brett on the sideline at a Broncos game and he says something to the effect of, "I'm glad he chose football."

[atwater27]

Bonds was on his way to either breaking that record or being one of the best players/hitters ever BEFORE he started taking steroids.



There's a lot of speculation in all of this. Obviously, Babe Ruth and Henry Aaron hit over 700 home runs without the use of steroids (we think), so why is it FACT that Bonds couldn't have done that without steroids?

Then Bonds is even worse, because he took roids when he already had the natural talent. So, besides being a greedy, moody dickwad who doesn't appreciate his fans, he is one of the dumbest athletes to ever walk the planet. And, regardless of his talent, by default, he is an *

[Denver Native (Carol)]

My uncle, who passed away last year at age 97, used to tell great stories about Satchel Paige. I guess it was not uncommon way back then for pitchers to pitch everyday.

http://www.satchelpaige.com/bio2.html

It is estimated that Leroy "Satchel" Paige was born on July 7, 1906. The mere idea that his birthday is an estimate provides perfect evidence to the mystery that was Satchel Paige. In 1965, 60 years after Paige's supposed birthday, he took the mound for the last time, throwing three shutout innings for the Kansas City Athletics.

Joe DiMaggio called Satchel Paige "the best and fastest pitcher I've ever faced". His pitching was amazing and his showboating was legendary. His career highlights span five decades. Pronounced the greatest pitcher in the history of the Negro Leagues, Paige compiled such feats as 64 consecutive scoreless innings, a stretch of 21 straight wins, and a 31-4 record in 1933. For 22 years, Paige mauled the competition in front of sellout crowds. Sure, he liked the attention, but to him, there was only one goal. That goal would be to pitch in the Major Leagues.

In 1948, Paige's dream came true. The Cleveland Indians were in need of extra pitching for the pennant race. Legendary Bill Veeck tested Paige's accuracy before offering him a big league contract. As the story is told, Veeck placed a cigarette on the ground to be used as a home plate. Paige took aim at his virtually nonexistent target. He fired five fastballs, all but one sailing directly over the cigarette. Veeck was indeed pleased, and Paige helped the Indians win the pennant.

In addition to Cleveland, Paige played for St. Louis and Kansas City. When his Major League career was completed, he compiled a modest 28-31 record with a 3.29 ERA. He also served as coach for the Atlanta Braves in 1968. What made Paige so memorable was his longevity in the game. The main reason his age was so difficult to track was his seemingly endless success. He rarely answered questions about his age, and when he did, he replied with something like: "Age is a question of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter."

In 1971, Leroy "Satchel" Paige was given the ultimate honor, he was elected to join the very best in baseball history in the Hall of Fame.

[Benetto]

Greatest baseball player of all time? Hank Aaron.

[topscribe]

Pete Rose.

Pete Rose did enter my mind. Willie Mays is another.

Some people have put Ty Cobb into that status, also.

-----

[Denver Native (Carol)]

There is also Babe Ruth - "The Bambino".

[OrangeHoof]

Ever hear of Satchel Paige?

Of course I have. I did not say there were NO great black pitchers then, only that there were very few. It doesn't change my point.

[MOtorboat]

Of course I have. I did not say there were NO great black pitchers then, only that there were very few. It doesn't change my point.

Here's a few names for you to do some research on...

William Bell
Ray Brown, HOF
William Byrd
Francisco Coimbre
Andrew Cooper, HOF
Leon Day, HOF
Martin Dihigo, HOF
John Donaldson
Wilmer Fields
Bill Foster, HOF
Rube Foster, HOF
Bud Fowler
Bill Gatewood
Mamie Johnson
Jose Mendez, HOF
Don Newcombe
Ted Radcliffe
Dick Redding
Bullet Rogan, HOF
Hilton Smith, HOF
George Stovey
Joe Williams, HOF

[OrangeHoof]

You obviously didn't do any research yourself


Here's a few names for you to do some research on...

William Bell
Ray Brown, HOF - career overlapped with Ruth's for just five seasons.
William Byrd - career overlapped with Ruth's just three seasons.
Francisco Coimbre - didn't start playing until 1940, after Ruth retired.
Andrew Cooper, HOF
Leon Day, HOF - career overlapped with Ruth's just two seasons.
Martin Dihigo, HOF - was an everyday player until 1935, Ruth's final year.
John Donaldson - spotty career spent mostly barnstorming
Wilmer Fields - didn't start playing until 1939, after Ruth retired.
Bill Foster, HOF
Rube Foster, HOF - phasing out his active career by 1914. He's before Ruth's time.
Bud Fowler :confused: His career was 1877-1904. Before Ruth's time.
Bill Gatewood - was a losing pitcher after 1912.
Mamie Johnson -a WOMAN pitcher from the 1950s after Babe Ruth was DEAD! :rolleyes:
Jose Mendez, HOF - pitched in the Cuban Leagues and was then a manager in the Negro Leagues by the time Ruth played.
Don Newcombe - didn't start until 1944, almost a decade after Ruth retired.
Ted Radcliffe
Dick Redding - Largely a manager in Ruth's time.
Bullet Rogan, HOF
Hilton Smith, HOF
George Stovey - pitched from 1886-1896. Maybe he pitched to Ruth's fetus.
Joe Williams, HOF

Clearly, you googled something about Negro League pitchers and tried to pass yourself off as someone who knew some shit when you clearly don't. Most of these pitchers are not relevant to a discussion of Babe Ruth because they were either before or after his prime - some even after his DEATH. Given the spotty and inaccurate records or the Negro Leagues, simple things like W-L records and ERA are not very good indicators either.

So, you brought up a small number of decent examples and a large number of bad guesses.

Color me unimpressed.

[MOtorboat]

You obviously didn't do any research yourself



Clearly, you googled something about Negro League pitchers and tried to pass yourself off as someone who knew some shit when you clearly don't. Most of these pitchers are not relevant to a discussion of Babe Ruth because they were either before or after his prime - some even after his DEATH. Given the spotty and inaccurate records or the Negro Leagues, simple things like W-L records and ERA are not very good indicators either.

So, you brought up a small number of decent examples and a large number of bad guesses.

Color me unimpressed.

Actually, the simple assumption was made that quality pitchers weren't in the Negro Leagues, which is an absurd assumption. Does it make Ruth's accomplishment's any less, no...but to say that good pitching didn't exist in the Negro Leagues is just false.

I was fully aware when I listed those players that many did not play during the era of Babe Ruth, but that was not the assumption made in the first place.

You then referenced the Hall of Fame and how very few black pitchers are recognized, when nearly 1/3 of the Negro League Players in the Hall of Fame were pitchers. Quality pitching existed in those leagues, like it or not.

[MOtorboat]

Likewise...a number of pitchers considered quality pitchers will not be remembered in 30 years, that doesn't mean they don't exist.

And because records, and documentation rarely exist when it comes to the Negro Leagues, making the assumption that pitching sucked in the Negro Leagues is a vague assumption, at best.

[Benetto]

I would have to choose someone from a newer era of Baseball...Back in the day they didn't have pitchers with consistent multiple types of pitches and high velocity..Baseball back then was very simple and hardnosed.. Dimaggio would have never hit 56 games in a row against Jake peavy, Roy Oswald, Johan santana, Nolan Ryan, Fernando valensuela, Schilling, Johnson and those types of modern day pitchers...Im sorry but anyone considered the greatest, would have to be in the modern era.



Here's some fat to chew on...Vlad G, Adam Dunn, and Jim Thome never needed Roids to blast HR's...

Ichiro, Texiera, Brian Giles also get some consideration from me.

[MOtorboat]

I would have to choose someone from a newer era of Baseball...Back in the day they didn't have pitchers with consistent multiple types of pitches and high velocity..Baseball back then was very simple and hardnosed.. Dimaggio would have never hit 56 games in a row against Jake peavy, Roy Oswald, Johan santana, Nolan Ryan, Fernando valensuela, Schilling, Johnson and those types of modern day pitchers...Im sorry but anyone considered the greatest, would have to be in the modern era.



Here's some fat to chew on...Vlad G, Adam Dunn, and Jim Thome never needed Roids to blast HR's...

Ichiro, Texiera, Brian Giles also get some consideration from me.

Well, Aaron hit his home runs during the "dead ball era," so I would probably consider him the best to ever play.

Guerrero, who is Dominican as is a number of steroid abusers, has 393 home runs. While impressive, it's not even over 400. His .322 career average is impressive, especially for a guy who just swings at everything.

The best player I've ever seen is Bonds. I don't like the guy. I don't like that he used steroids. I don't WANT to defend him, but he is the best ball player (on the field) that I have watched.

[Benetto]

Well, Aaron hit his home runs during the "dead ball era," so I would probably consider him the best to ever play.

Guerrero, who is Dominican as is a number of steroid abusers, has 393 home runs. While impressive, it's not even over 400. His .322 career average is impressive, especially for a guy who just swings at everything.

The best player I've ever seen is Bonds. I don't like the guy. I don't like that he used steroids. I don't WANT to defend him, but he is the best ball player (on the field) that I have watched.


Even before his steroid abuse controversy Bonds hit 40 homers and stole 40 bases in the early 90's...That warrants him a consideration, no doubt.

[Benetto]

Does Carlos Delgado get any mention? What are your guys' thoughts on him?

[MOtorboat]

Even before his steroid abuse controversy Bonds hit 40 homers and stole 40 bases in the early 90's...That warrants him a consideration, no doubt.

Which is why I can't rule out the possibility that he might have done it anyway...

[Benetto]

Ozzie Smith is on my to p10 list....I LOVED watching him play.

[MOtorboat]

Does Carlos Delgado get any mention? What are your guys' thoughts on him?

Same as Vlad.

I think me and Ben need to clarify here, though, we're not talking about best player ever, we're talking about the best player we've seen (we're the same age....28).

[BroncoAV06]

I am reading "The Year Babe Ruth Hit 104 Home Runs" and the Bambino is easily 1A or 1B.

It is hard because not only do you have the roid issue but you have just the issue of different eras. Babe Ruth played in an era with fences 500 plus feet away, where a HR wouldbe called a foul ball if it landed foul even if it went past the foul poll in fair teritory. I have no doubt that Ruth could easily be atop the all time home run list.
Just look at that SLG%:

His .690 career slugging percentage and 1.164 career on-base plus slugging (OPS) remain the major league records.
And hit for AVG:

Unlike many power hitters, Ruth also hit for average: his .342 lifetime batting is tenth highest in baseball history, and in one season (1923) he hit .393, a Yankee record.

Oh and yes as mentioned before he was a hell of a pitcher.

94-46 2.28 ERA, 163 G, 148 GS, 107 CG!, 17 SHO, 4 SV, 1.16 WHIP, 488 SO, 441 BB..

The notion he sucked at fielding is also not true. He might look "fat" in pictures but he was all over the out field and stole plenty of bases. 1923 the beginning starting to hit his stride:
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7992/ruthbatting.jpg

Ruth did deal with a ton of media attention. He barn stormed more then any other player in the history of the game, really adding a ton of extra games to his career in which Ruth went all out. He hated to dissapoint the fans and wanted to give them the best he had no matter what. Played through many injuries and to the point of serious illness at times. He IMO is a big reason why baseball took off in this country. A player that I wish I could of watched.

But as I said before they have been so many greats a different tiems it is really hard to have a true standout like say MJ in the NBA.

Yes Carrol there was no pitch count and 8th inning men back in the day. That is why pitchers such as Walter Johnson (Had many great battles with Ruth by the way) won 30 games in a season. Managers would even use their ace starters as closer as well.


As a right-handed pitcher for the Washington Nationals/Senators, Walter Johnson won 417 games, the second most by any pitcher in history (after Cy Young, who won 511). He and Young are the only pitchers to have won 400 games.

In a 21-year career, Johnson had twelve 20-win seasons, including ten in a row. Twice, he topped thirty wins (33 in 1912 and 36 in 1913). Johnson's record includes 110 shutouts, the most in baseball history. Johnson had a 38-26 record in games decided by a 1-0 score; both his win total and his losses in these games are major league records. On September 4, 5 and 7, 1908, he shut out the New York Yankees (then known as the New York Highlanders) in three consecutive games.

Three times, Johnson won the triple crown for pitchers (1913, 1918 and 1924). Johnson twice won the American League Most Valuable Player Award (1913, 1924), a feat accomplished since by only two other pitchers, Carl Hubbell in 1933 and 1936 and Hal Newhouser in 1944 and 1945.

His earned run average of 1.14 in 1913 was the fourth lowest ever at the time he recorded it; it remains the sixth-lowest today, despite having been surpassed by Bob Gibson in 1968 (1.12) for lowest ERA ever by a 300+ inning pitcher. It could have been lower if not for one of manager Clark Griffith's traditions. For the last game of the season, Griffith often treated the fans to a farce game. Johnson actually played center field that game until he was brought in to pitch. He allowed two hits before he was taken out of the game. The next pitcher - who was actually a career catcher - allowed both runners to score. The official scorekeeper ignored the game, but later, Johnson was charged with those two runs, raising his ERA from 1.09 to 1.14.

In 1913, also, Johnson won 36 games. The entire team won 90, so Walter finished with 40% of the team's total wins for the season.

[sneakers]

I am reading "The Year Babe Ruth Hit 104 Home Runs" and the Bambino is easily 1A or 1B.

.

I read that book......it is really, really good. Lots of pictures and charts.

[sneakers]

Does Carlos Delgado get any mention? What are your guys' thoughts on him?

I don't trust players who played in Canada.

[CrazyHorse]

My first instinct was Barry Bonds.

[Devilspawn]

Babe Ruth dominated the game like no other. (thanks, Boston!) :D

Second, I'd say Bonds. Griffey is a hair behind, nothing to do with his injuries, I just think that if both played healthy during their careers, Bonds would be slightly better. A shame it's come to this.

[topscribe]

Roberto Clemente was another exquisite player for as along as he was there.

I don't know how one can single out a player as G.O.A.T., there have been so many . . .

-----

[MOtorboat]

OK, its way too hard to single out one player, so what's your dream lineup and dream pitching rotation...so your dream roster?

[topscribe]

OK, its way too hard to single out one player, so what's your dream lineup and dream pitching rotation...so your dream roster?

That would be fun, but I have neither the time nor the knowledge for that undertaking.

Perhaps you would like to tackle it for us?

-----

[MOtorboat]

That would be fun, but I have neither the time nor the knowledge for that undertaking.

Perhaps you would like to tackle it for us?

-----

Working on it...had a few things I had to get done this morning in the real world...

[LRtagger]

Which is why I can't rule out the possibility that he might have done it anyway...

Yes you can.

No way Barry hits 73 in a year and I don't think he breaks Aaron's record without roids. I don't think he hits 700 hr without roids.

You are talking about a guy that would fight off pitches and hit them out...hit balls out that he got jammed on or was so far out in front, nearly cue-balling it off his front foot to center field. This was later in his career. If you watch his swings early in his career, he hit the ball out of the park because his swing was so smooth and he was on top of the ball every swing. He very rarely muscled a bad swing into the stands.

This is not to take away the fact that he is/was a great hitter. Steroids in no way improves your swing, your hand/eye coordination, or your ability to see pitches. But what huge strength does do is allow you to take bad swings and still hit the ball hard; get fooled by a pitch and still hit the ball out of the ballpark.

The proof to me is in the fact that he was a much more fluid hitter and all around better player in his early years...when he was hitting 20-40 HR a year but still batting .300+. Yet in his mid to later years when he slowed a step but put on 30 lbs of muscle, he was hitting 40+ a year and hitting nearly .400 every season until injuries caught up with him. It is obvious steroids played a big part in his late career success.

[In-com-plete]

Tyrus Raymond Cobb

The man had close to a hundred records when he retired. Many of which stood for years.

Like hits. Rose broke that in what . . . '85? But just compare Rose's ABs to Cobbs. Rose never hit .366 in a season, yet that's Cobbs lifetime average.

Runs. Broken just a few years ago by Ricky Henderson (who should get a couple votes for greatest of all time).

And I'm sure you baseball fans heard about the time he got all pissed off that Ruth was getting all this media attention because he hit home runs. So he told a reporter he could hit them also. He hit 5 in the next 2 games and then went back to playing the game the way he thought it should be played.

BTW, he was 38 when he did this. How many other 38 year olds have done this?

[In-com-plete]

Well, Aaron hit his home runs during the "dead ball era," so I would probably consider him the best to ever play.

Guerrero, who is Dominican as is a number of steroid abusers, has 393 home runs. While impressive, it's not even over 400. His .322 career average is impressive, especially for a guy who just swings at everything.

The best player I've ever seen is Bonds. I don't like the guy. I don't like that he used steroids. I don't WANT to defend him, but he is the best ball player (on the field) that I have watched.

I'm with you on that. Best baseball player I ever saw was Bonds. And the best pitcher I ever saw was either Pedro or Clemens.

[BroncoAV06]

I read that book......it is really, really good. Lots of pictures and charts.

You are the person that I learned about the book from back at the other forums. Definitly a good read, I am a little over half way through so far.

[MOtorboat]

Tyrus Raymond Cobb

BTW, he was 38 when he did this. How many other 38 year olds have done this?

He was on 'roids.

Bank on it. He was also the best cheater the game ever saw. :D

In all seriousness, yes, Cobb is probably in the convo.

[MOtorboat]

OK, its way too hard to single out one player, so what's your dream lineup and dream pitching rotation...so your dream roster?

As I emersed myself in this earlier today, I saw that it would take some time to get done, so I will be doing this, this evening, and watching the Nuggets.

[MOtorboat]

AL All-Time All-Star Team
C – Ivan Rodriguez, Yogi Berra
1B – Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig
2B – Eddie Collins, Charlie Gehringer
SS – Alex Rodriguez, Robin Young
3B – Brooks Robinson, George Brett
LF – Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski
CF – Ty Cobb, Ken Griffey, Jr.
RF – Mickey Mantle, Al Kaline
DH – Babe Ruth, Reggie Jackson
P – Walter Johnson, Lefty Grove, Bob Feller, Satchel Paige, Roger Clemons
Middle Relief – Jim Palmer
Setup – Dennis Eckersley
Closer – Mariano Rivera

NL All-Time All-Star Team
C – Johnny Bench, Gary Carter
1B – Nap Lajoie, Ernie Banks
2B – Jackie Robinson, Joe Morgan, Ryne Sandberg
SS – Honus Wagner, Ozzie Smith
3B – Mike Schmidt, Eddie Matthews
LF – Barry Bonds, Pete Rose
CF – Willie Mays, Roberto Clemente
RF – Frank Robinson, Mel Ott
DH – Hank Aaron
P – Cy Young, Christy Mathewson, Sandy Koufax, Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson
Middle Relief – Tom Seaver, Pedro Martinez
Setup – Bruce Sutter
Closer – Goose Gossage

[MOtorboat]

First off, that took a lot more time than I thought it might, and a little more research than I was expecting. Coming up with a "best team ever" quickly became almost impossible, so I broke it down by league. Many of those players played in both leagues, so I used number of years in each league as the deciding point as to which league they should play in, although Frank Robinson played in both leagues the same number of years, but I believe he deserved to be in there somewhere.

Second, if you won a triple crown, you are on that list.

Third, MLB began handing out Gold Gloves in 1957 and Silver Sluggers in 1980, but I did use those as somewhat of a benchmark, as I also used where they rank on all-time marks, most notably, HRs, RBIs, hits, OBP, SLG, 2B, 3B, SB.

Fourth, MVP awards date back to 1911, and CY Young awards date to 1956. The Cy Young was given out as an entire league until 1967. Those were used as well.

Fifth, I was much more subjective with the pitchers. Why? I don't know...I just was.

P.S. "Starters" are the first player listed.

[Slick]

Pretty cool you took the time to do that Mo. I have no idea who either of the two AL second baseman are. Just curious, did you consider Roberto Alomar?

[MOtorboat]

Pretty cool you took the time to do that Mo. I have no idea who either of the two AL second baseman are. Just curious, did you consider Roberto Alomar?

Both are very old players.

Eddie Collins was a 2B for 24 seasons from 1906-1930 with the Philadelphia Athletics and Chicago White Sox. He made the list because "1 MVP, 27th in BA, 7th in SB, 14th in OBP, 15th in runs scored, 10th in hits, 12th in triples" (them's my notes from my spreadsheet).

Gehringer played for Detroit from 1924 to 1942, and had "1 MVP, 19th in runs scored, 20th in doubles."

Alomar was strongly considered. 10 GG and 4 SS...and now looking back at it, he should probably have been ahead of Gehringer. I wasn't very familiar with Gehringer, but he's a HOFer and won an MVP, which Alomar never did. Alomar's ranks on career lists are pretty low.

But, AL 2B just didn't have a ton of guys where I said, "yup, that's the guy."

[Slick]

I think he's(Robbie) the best second baseman I've ever seen play, his glove, he switch hit, stayed healthy and played well for a very long time.


You obviously did mucho research. Kudos!

[MOtorboat]

I think he's(Robbie) the best second baseman I've ever seen play, his glove, he switch hit, stayed healthy and played well for a very long time.


You obviously did mucho research. Kudos!

The Gold Gloves are the argument for Alomar. He was spectacular at second with the glove. I think the Silver Slugger awards came because there just wasn't anyone else to give them to. Second base just isn't a position that has produced a lot of hitters. Now, the NL 2B was a tough place to choose, because you had Jackie Robinson, Jeff Kent, Joe Morgan and Ryne Sandberg. I essentially chose Robinson, Morgan and Sandberg because I think Kent is a DB...and that's about it. Robinson, imo, would have been in the mention for greatest player ever had he, A.) not been black and was allowed to enter the league at say 21 or 22, and B.) not retired at fairly young age.

[Slick]

The Gold Gloves are the argument for Alomar. He was spectacular at second with the glove. I think the Silver Slugger awards came because there just wasn't anyone else to give them to. Second base just isn't a position that has produced a lot of hitters. Now, the NL 2B was a tough place to choose, because you had Jackie Robinson, Jeff Kent, Joe Morgan and Ryne Sandberg. I essentially chose Robinson, Morgan and Sandberg because I think Kent is a DB...and that's about it. Robinson, imo, would have been in the mention for greatest player ever had he, A.) not been black and was allowed to enter the league at say 21 or 22, and B.) not retired at fairly young age.

Yeah, definitely a different story as far as the NL goes, I'd have left Kent off too because I feel the same way. I'm partial to Joe Morgan. I like him as a broadcaster too, but I think he'd have been a hell of a manager.

[MOtorboat]

Yeah, definitely a different story as far as the NL goes, I'd have left Kent off too because I feel the same way. I'm partial to Joe Morgan. I like him as a broadcaster too, but I think he'd have been a hell of a manager.

Consider this about Jackie Robinson. Had he played 20 seasons, like a number of players on that list...

He would have been fourth in runs scored, fifth in hits, tied for ninth in doubles with Honus Wagner, 9th in total bases, 21st in RBI, 23rd in runs created, 37th in OBP (which he is listed at), 47th in stolen bases, tied for 97th in triples, 98th in home runs...

Can you imagine if he'd played 20 years instead of 10?

[MOtorboat]

So, here's some food for thought, I forgot about Rogers Hornsby...just completely slipped my mind...

He had 2 National League Triple Crowns (not full triple crowns, but league triple crowns), is 2nd in BA, 8th in OBP, 12th in SLG.

[Devilspawn]

AL All-Time All-Star Team
C – Ivan Rodriguez, Yogi Berra
1B – Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig
2B – Eddie Collins, Charlie Gehringer
SS – Alex Rodriguez, Robin Young
3B – Brooks Robinson, George Brett
LF – Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski
CF – Ty Cobb, Ken Griffey, Jr.
RF – Mickey Mantle, Al Kaline
DH – Babe Ruth, Reggie Jackson
P – Walter Johnson, Lefty Grove, Bob Feller, Satchel Paige, Roger Clemons
Middle Relief – Jim Palmer
Setup – Dennis Eckersley
Closer – Mariano Rivera

NL All-Time All-Star Team
C – Johnny Bench, Gary Carter
1B – Nap Lajoie, Ernie Banks
2B – Jackie Robinson, Joe Morgan, Ryne Sandberg
SS – Honus Wagner, Ozzie Smith
3B – Mike Schmidt, Eddie Matthews
LF – Barry Bonds, Pete Rose
CF – Willie Mays, Roberto Clemente
RF – Frank Robinson, Mel Ott
DH – Hank Aaron
P – Cy Young, Christy Mathewson, Sandy Koufax, Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson
Middle Relief – Tom Seaver, Pedro Martinez
Setup – Bruce Sutter
Closer – Goose Gossage

The only person I see left out who could have a debatable place is Ricky Henderson. Especially if there was a game, have him lead off and you already have 1 on the scoreboard. Problem is, he was an AL left fielder and those two Sox are locked and deservedly so.

[MOtorboat]

The only person I see left out who could have a debatable place is Ricky Henderson. Especially if there was a game, have him lead off and you already have 1 on the scoreboard. Problem is, he was an AL left fielder and those two Sox are locked and deservedly so.

I know. I ran across a few of those...you could throw him at CF, but Ty Cobb was the original speed CF...and he had better batting numbers...

[In-com-plete]

AL All-Time All-Star Team
C – Ivan Rodriguez, Yogi Berra
1B – Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig
2B – Eddie Collins, Charlie Gehringer
SS – Alex Rodriguez, Robin Young
3B – Brooks Robinson, George Brett
LF – Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski
CF – Ty Cobb, Ken Griffey, Jr.
RF – Mickey Mantle, Al Kaline
DH – Babe Ruth, Reggie Jackson
P – Walter Johnson, Lefty Grove, Bob Feller, Satchel Paige, Roger Clemons
Middle Relief – Jim Palmer
Setup – Dennis Eckersley
Closer – Mariano Rivera

NL All-Time All-Star Team
C – Johnny Bench, Gary Carter
1B – Nap Lajoie, Ernie Banks
2B – Jackie Robinson, Joe Morgan, Ryne Sandberg
SS – Honus Wagner, Ozzie Smith
3B – Mike Schmidt, Eddie Matthews
LF – Barry Bonds, Pete Rose
CF – Willie Mays, Roberto Clemente
RF – Frank Robinson, Mel Ott
DH – Hank Aaron
P – Cy Young, Christy Mathewson, Sandy Koufax, Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson
Middle Relief – Tom Seaver, Pedro Martinez
Setup – Bruce Sutter
Closer – Goose Gossage

This is a great job Missouri. But when I read "Dream Lineup", I initially thought about batting order. Like 1-9. So the first person that came to my mind is the greatest leadoff hitter to ever play the game.

Hell, he should be on your list for his quotes. And you know he wasn't on steroids. When a reporter asked him what he thought about Caminiti saying 50% of ballplayers were on roids he said something like "Well, Rickey’s not on them, so that makes it 49%."

[In-com-plete]

I know. I ran across a few of those...you could throw him at CF, but Ty Cobb was the original speed CF...and he had better batting numbers...

Didn't make it down to this post otherwise I probably wouldn't have posted about "The greatest (base stealer) of all-time".

[MOtorboat]

This is a great job Missouri. But when I read "Dream Lineup", I initially thought about batting order. Like 1-9. So the first person that came to my mind is the greatest leadoff hitter to ever play the game.

Hell, he should be on your list for his quotes. And you know he wasn't on steroids. When a reporter asked him what he thought about Caminiti saying 50% of ballplayers were on roids he said something like "Well, Rickey’s not on them, so that makes it 49%."

My lineups would probably look something like this:
AL
Ty Cobb
Ted Williams
Alex Rodriguez
Babe Ruth
Jimmie Foxx
Mickey Mantle
Ivan Rodriguez
Eddie Collins
Brooks Robinson

and
NL
Jackie Robinson
Willie Mays
Honus Wagner
Barry Bonds
Hank Aaron
Mike Schmidt
Johnny Bench
Nap Lajoie
Frank Robinson

[Medford Bronco]

(Barry Bonds is not an acceptable answer)

This one is easy, but people try to think too hard and they end up picking someone else. Remember your first gut instinct is always right.

The answer is Babe Ruth.

any disagreers? (is that a word?)

Great minds think alike :cool::salute::cool:

My 2nd is Willie Mays who could do it all and was not on any juice either

[drewloc]

Here are my lineups for each league. Also I am going to list my starting rotation and just one relief pitcher, under the assumption that they are my closer.

AL Lineup

C - Yogi Berra
1B - Lou Gehrig
2B - Rod Carew
3B - Brooks Robinson
SS - Alex Rodriguez
LF - Ted Williams
CF - Ty Cobb
RF - Babe Ruth

AL Pitchers

SP - Bob Feller
SP - Nolan Ryan
SP - Cy Young
SP - Walter Johnson
SP - Satchel Paige
RP - Dennis Eckersley

NL Lineup

C - Johnny Bench
1B - Willie McCovey
2B - Rogers Hornsby
3B - Mike Schmidt
SS - Honus Wagner
LF - Stan Musial
CF - Willie Mays
RF - Roberto Clemente

NL Pitchers

SP - Sandy Koufax
SP - Bob Gibson
SP - Christy Mathewson
SP - Don Drysdale
SP - Juan Marichal
RP - Goose Gossage

That's my attempt at the lineup. :salute:

[BroncoAV06]

We could create multiple teams full of great players. Thats what is so interestign about baseball, the length of time it has been played and the difference in era's etc.. Great debate for years to come.

[sneakers]

All Steroid Team:

Starters:
C: Benito Santiago
1B: Mark McGuire
2B: Neifi Perez
SS: Miguel Tejada
3B: Alex Rodriguez
LF: Barry Bonds
CF: Rondell White
RF: Manny Ramirez
SP: Roger Clemons

Starting Pitchers:
SP: Andy Pettit
SP: Ricky Bones
SP: Paul Byrd
SP: Chuck Finley

Relief Pitchers:
LR Sergio Mitre
MR Juan Rincon
MR J.C. Romero
SU: Derek Turnbow
SU: Guillermo Mota
CP: John Rocker


Bench Players:
1B: Rafael Palmeiro
OF: Glenallen Hill
OF: Jose Canseco
C: Bobby Estalella
IF: Jim Leyritz
2B: Bret Boone

[Medford Bronco]

All Steroid Team:

Starters:
C: Benito Santiago
1B: Mark McGuire
2B: Neifi Perez
SS: Miguel Tejada
3B: Alex Rodriguez
LF: Barry Bonds
CF: Rondell White
RF: Manny Ramirez
SP: Roger Clemons

Starting Pitchers:
SP: Andy Pettit
SP: Ricky Bones
SP: Paul Byrd
SP: Chuck Finley

Relief Pitchers:
LR Sergio Mitre
MR Juan Rincon
MR J.C. Romero
SU: Derek Turnbow
SU: Guillermo Mota
CP: John Rocker


Bench Players:
1B: Rafael Palmeiro
OF: Glenallen Hill
OF: Jose Canseco
C: Bobby Estalella
IF: Jim Leyritz
2B: Bret Boone



Where is Pudge Rodriguez, the poster boy for steriods.

http://bleacherreport.com/images_root/image_pictures/0011/7958/Picture_75_article.png

http://msp191.photobucket.com/albums/z101/Scott_GFX/Images/Sports/MLB/Detroit%20Tigers/Rodriguez/fullj.jpg

[Poet]

Willie Mays is the first one that popped into my head. Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Henry Aaron, and others also pop into my head.

Things like different eras, rules, what race could play, all factors into this.

For me, I value consistency and a long career. Hank Aaron would probably be my guy. Note that I am not a huge baseball buff.

[lex]

A lot of pitchers have been users...it actually seems like most users have been pitchers. Plus on top of that, it seemed like baseball went directly from a time where it was a common belief that weight lifting was bad for you (you lose flexibility) to an era that people associate with steroids. There doesnt seem to be an interim period between "its bad to lift weights" and steroids. So this makes it hard to tell what is attributable to weigthlifting.

Also, some things to keep in mind. People often carry on about how its more advantageous to hit now. Theyll refer to things like the dead ball era and bigger ball parks. Here are a variety of reasons why MLB is more competitive and consequently more of a challenge now:

* Ball parks back in the day often had really deep CF but short porches down the line. The short porch down the line is often forgotten.

* Integration-- this has increased the talent pool incredibly and its even become more global

* Specialization-- this is one of the biggest. Back in the day, Babe would generally see the same pitcher 3 or 4 times a game. This makes it easier to get to him later on. Now, not only would Babe not see the same pitcher 3 or 4 times but theyre relying heavily on statistics to make it harder for him. This ones huge

* More night games-- the ball doesnt carry as well at night, especially in CA.

* Equipment-- Not only are players more athletic now from an expanded talent pool, but they have better equipment. If youve ever seen your grandfathers baseball glove, you know what I mean. A hit here and a hit there, adds up. Better gloves can account for a lot of that. The gloves are so good now that you have guys starting double plays by throwing it to second without using their throwing hand.

* Pitch velocity-- I think I read that in Babe's day, you rarely saw someone throwing in the 90s...at least it wasnt close to what you see now.

[BroncoAV06]

Good points indeed. But there is no way IMO that you can bring down The Great Bambino. No one else came close to the numbers he put up in his time. He did see pitchers more because in the 20's starters went as far as they could, there really was no bull-pen but he also saw the other teams top pitcher more then not as well. I don't buy into that the pitchers threw any less back then. There might be more pitchers today that hit 96+, but really how many in the game today hit that number?

You are right, baseball is a game that you have to break down into eras more then any other sport. The new Yankee stadium has already given up 102 HR's! The great ones will stand out through the eras.

[topscribe]

I prefer to choose players who performed with what they had to deal with. It is
true that players are bigger, faster, better hitters, and have better arms now.
But I tend to look at them in relation to the circumstances and conditions of the
day.

For instance, Ty Cobb, as he was in that day, might not excel as he did back
then. Maybe he wouldn't even make a team. :noidea:

But who's to say Ty Cobb of today would not be a physical peer to the other
players and still excelled because he's Ty Cobb?

I don't know . . . maybe that doesn't make much sense, but it surely does
simplify things, doesn't it?

-----

[MasterShake]

Babe Ruth. He played great with performance inhibiting drugs like alcohol.

[BroncoAV06]

The short porche argument has alot of holes in it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babe_Ruth

Another rules change that affected Ruth was the method used by umpires to judge potential home runs when the batted ball left the field near a foul pole. Before 1931, i.e. through most of Ruth's most productive years, the umpire called the play based on the ball's final resting place "when last seen". Thus, if a ball went over the fence fair, and curved behind the foul pole, it was ruled foul. Beginning in 1931 and continuing to the present day, the rule was changed to require the umpire to judge based on the point where the ball cleared the fence. Jenkinson's book (p. 374-375) lists 78 foul balls near the foul pole in Ruth's career, claiming that at least 50 of them were likely to have been home runs under the modern rule.

[lex]

The short porche argument has alot of holes in it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babe_Ruth

It was barely 300 ft. down the lines at Yankee Stadium, if you add another 30to 40 ft. like what you see now in more modern ballparks, perhaps they would have been foul. And perhaps they were foul anyway. Unfortunately games werent on tv back then.

[slim]

Ruth is the greatest ever. I don't think much of an argument can be made for anyone else.

The best I have seen is Griffey Jr (I won't consider Bonds because he is an asshat and I have no use for him).

Also, I would give Ricky Henderson a shout. That guy was unreal.

[Timmy!]

Me.

[CoachChaz]

I'll go with Cal Ripken. 2 MVP's, ROY, WS Champ, redefined the SS position, played the toughest defensive position (after catcher) for a million consecutive games AND played it almost flawlessly while posting consistent and solid offensive numbers. An ambassador to the game and an excellent mentor.

We can list guys all day long based on numbers, but I believe it take more than 500 or 700 HR's to define a player as "The Greatest". You have to have the personality, the passion and the absolute respect and love for the game and those qualities have to be felt by your teammates.

The best "total package" SS to ever play the game and the best ambassador the game has ever seen. Ripken gets my vote

[Timmy!]

I'll go with Cal Ripken. 2 MVP's, ROY, WS Champ, redefined the SS position, played the toughest defensive position (after catcher) for a million consecutive games AND played it almost flawlessly while posting consistent and solid offensive numbers. An ambassador to the game and an excellent mentor.

We can list guys all day long based on numbers, but I believe it take more than 500 or 700 HR's to define a player as "The Greatest". You have to have the personality, the passion and the absolute respect and love for the game and those qualities have to be felt by your teammates.

The best "total package" SS to ever play the game and the best ambassador the game has ever seen. Ripken gets my vote

Hard to argue against that. Sadly, Ripken really doesn't get the respect he deserves.

:tsk:

[CoachChaz]

Hard to argue against that. Sadly, Ripken really doesn't get the respect he deserves.

:tsk:

Not on a national basis, but I'd be willing to say he is loved more in Baltimore than even Elway is loved by us Bronco fans

[Timmy!]

Pretty tough argument there, and you know it.

I've respected Cal for a long, long time. Hell, when my dad had business in Baltimore back in the late 80's he brought back an Orioles cap (the one old ass one with the bird with the goofy ass smiley face), and told me about this Ripken guy he watched. I always played 3rd base in little league, but Cal was my baseball hero.

[lex]

I'll go with Cal Ripken. 2 MVP's, ROY, WS Champ, redefined the SS position, played the toughest defensive position (after catcher) for a million consecutive games AND played it almost flawlessly while posting consistent and solid offensive numbers. An ambassador to the game and an excellent mentor.

We can list guys all day long based on numbers, but I believe it take more than 500 or 700 HR's to define a player as "The Greatest". You have to have the personality, the passion and the absolute respect and love for the game and those qualities have to be felt by your teammates.

The best "total package" SS to ever play the game and the best ambassador the game has ever seen. Ripken gets my vote

...hurt his team by playing every day in order to break Lou Gehrigs record that only ended because he acquired a debilitating disease. Cals streak ended because he said "I dont feel like playing" one day. He had a real problem getting around on fastballs for the back half of his career which was why he kept toying with his stances. His window where he wasnt a liability defensively at SS was a fairly small one. Not the best total package at all considering how much of his career he was a liabiliy at SS, a position where defense is paramount.

[CoachChaz]

...hurt his team by playing every day in order to break Lou Gehrigs record that only ended because he acquired a debilitating disease. Cals streak ended because he said "I dont feel like playing" one day. He had a real problem getting around on fastballs for the back half of his career which was why he kept toying with his stances. His window where he wasnt a liability defensively at SS was a fairly small one. Not the best total package at all considering how much of his career he was a liabiliy at SS, a position where defense is paramount.

Hurt his team? Yeah, I can see where sitting the best player on your team could be a good thing. His managers could have benched him any time they wanted to, but they didnt. When baseball was at an all-time low in popularity due to the '94 strike, his streak helped bring fans back. he toyed with his swing every day from the time he was a rookie until he retired...EVERY ball player does. When he made the most dradtic change to it in '91...he won the MVP. Played 20 years with the SAME team and finished with a .276 career average with 431 HR and over 1600 RBI while playing a demanding position where he had a career .979 fielding percentage.

Omar Vizquel - .984
Cal Ripken - .979
Ozzie Smith - .978
Derek Jeter - .975
Lou Boudreau - .973
Louis Aparicio - .972
Ernie Banks - .969
Robin Yount - .964
Luke Appling - .948
Honus Wagner - .940

This is arguably the top 10 SS's to ever play the game. Now tell me again how "His window where he wasnt a liability defensively at SS was a fairly small one"

Try some research next time

[OrangeHoof]

Pitch speed wasn't even timed in Ruth's days. It wasn't even attempted until the 1940s with Bob Feller being the first. Any attempt to say pitchers didn't throw as fast back in Ruth's time is purely specualtive although pitchers likely didn't put as much into their pitches because they expected to be throwing all afternoon instead of expecting to pitch just one inning.

However, it is fact that pitchers were still able to throw spitballs, shineballs and other doctored pitches in Ruth's time. After Carl Mays killed Ray Chapman in 1920 with a pitch, the rules were changed to outlaw many doctored pitches *but* those who had already established themselves as pitchers of spitballs, etc were grandfathered in so they were still able to throw doctored pitches until their careers ended. Some of them didn't retired until well into the 1930s. Also, the practice of scuffing the ball was commonplace then and umps didn't throw out the balls. They just waited until the ball was fouled into the stands or hit for a home run.

BTW, there was also a rule in Ruth's time where players were not credited with a home run if it was a walk-off homer with a runner on base. For example, if Ruth hit a homer in the bottom of the ninth with a man on second and the score tied, he could hit the ball into the next borough and would only be credited with a double since the runner on second scored to end the game. Several events like this were not included in Ruth's official total of 714.

[lex]

Hurt his team? Yeah, I can see where sitting the best player on your team could be a good thing. His managers could have benched him any time they wanted to, but they didnt. When baseball was at an all-time low in popularity due to the '94 strike, his streak helped bring fans back. he toyed with his swing every day from the time he was a rookie until he retired...EVERY ball player does. When he made the most dradtic change to it in '91...he won the MVP. Played 20 years with the SAME team and finished with a .276 career average with 431 HR and over 1600 RBI while playing a demanding position where he had a career .979 fielding percentage.

Omar Vizquel - .984
Cal Ripken - .979
Ozzie Smith - .978
Derek Jeter - .975
Lou Boudreau - .973
Louis Aparicio - .972
Ernie Banks - .969
Robin Yount - .964
Luke Appling - .948
Honus Wagner - .940

This is arguably the top 10 SS's to ever play the game. Now tell me again how "His window where he wasnt a liability defensively at SS was a fairly small one"

Try some research next time

LOL. Lack of range isnt reflected in fielding %. Duh.

Sandberg used to have a really high fielding % but he wasnt as good defensively as some of the other second basemen. Ripkens range was laughable compared to several others on that list.

The best short stop of all time is Ozzie Smith...even with his lack of offense. He was so good on defense it compensated for any disparity in offense. Do you honestly believe Cal Ripken was remotely close to as good as Ozzie Smith at short stop?

What would those offensive numbers rate for a 3B? Because thats what Ripken should have played...but not every day. His lack of range made him a sub par shortstop and his offense doesnt come close to touching George Brett or Mike Schmidt.

Im not going to dispute that he was a popular player. But its easy to poke holes in any notion that he was the best SS of all time, let alone best player of all time.

[topscribe]

Hmmm . . . considering Ryno's 9 Golden Gloves during his 10 All-Star tenure, I
would think there would be some who would take issue with you, regarding your
allegations of defensive deficiencies . . .

-----

[lex]

Pitch speed wasn't even timed in Ruth's days. It wasn't even attempted until the 1940s with Bob Feller being the first. Any attempt to say pitchers didn't throw as fast back in Ruth's time is purely specualtive although pitchers likely didn't put as much into their pitches because they expected to be throwing all afternoon instead of expecting to pitch just one inning.

However, it is fact that pitchers were still able to throw spitballs, shineballs and other doctored pitches in Ruth's time. After Carl Mays killed Ray Chapman in 1920 with a pitch, the rules were changed to outlaw many doctored pitches *but* those who had already established themselves as pitchers of spitballs, etc were grandfathered in so they were still able to throw doctored pitches until their careers ended. Some of them didn't retired until well into the 1930s. Also, the practice of scuffing the ball was commonplace then and umps didn't throw out the balls. They just waited until the ball was fouled into the stands or hit for a home run.

BTW, there was also a rule in Ruth's time where players were not credited with a home run if it was a walk-off homer with a runner on base. For example, if Ruth hit a homer in the bottom of the ninth with a man on second and the score tied, he could hit the ball into the next borough and would only be credited with a double since the runner on second scored to end the game. Several events like this were not included in Ruth's official total of 714.


http://www.baseball-almanac.com/articles/fastest-pitcher-in-baseball.shtml

[lex]

Hmmm . . . considering Ryno's 9 Golden Gloves during his 10 All-Star tenure, I
would think there would be some who would take issue with you, regarding your
allegations of defensive deficiencies . . .

-----

I like Ryne as much as the next guy. He also had a high fielding %. If he could get to it, he would make the play. The only problem is (just as I explained before...apparently you didnt understand), he had very limited range compared to a lot of short stops and didnt make a lot of plays that others could. It didnt hurt my feelings when Ryne got those GGs but if I have to be honest about it, I cant honestly say he deserved them because I cant really say he was the best defensive second baseman all those times. Ryno was another popular player though. And when Derek Jeter wins a GG its the same thing.

[topscribe]

I like Ryne as much as the next guy. He also had a high fielding %. If he could get to it, he would make the play. The only problem is (just as I explained before...apparently you didnt understand), he had very limited range compared to a lot of short stops and didnt make a lot of plays that others could. It didnt hurt my feelings when Ryne got those GGs but if I have to be honest about it, I cant honestly say he deserved them because I cant really say he was the best defensive second baseman all those times. Ryno was another popular player though. And when Derek Jeter wins a GG its the same thing.

If you watched the Cubs much (I did: they were and are my favorite team), you
might have noticed that they had some real problems at shortstop in those days.

One of their shortstops (whose name slips my little mind at the moment) had a
cannon for an arm, but his range, compared to Ryno's, was like Patrick Ramsey's
mobility to Elway's.

I dunno . . . it always seemed that the first- and second-base areas were
locked down because of Sandberg and Mark Grace. Maybe you saw Ryno
trying to run down a ball at which the shortstop normally should have a shot?

But I was pretty much of a one-team fan (well, I watched the Dodgers, my
boyhood team, occasionally), so I really can't throw up much of an argument
with you here.

-----

[lex]

If you watched the Cubs much (I did: they were and are my favorite team), you
might have noticed that they had some real problems at shortstop in those days.

One of their shortstops (whose name slips my little mind at the moment) had a
cannon for an arm, but his range, compared to Ryno's, was like Patrick Ramsey's
mobility to Elway's.

I dunno . . . it always seemed that the first- and second-base areas were
locked down because of Sandberg and Mark Grace. Maybe you saw Ryno
trying to run down a ball at which the shortstop normally should have a shot?

But I was pretty much of a one-team fan (well, I watched the Dodgers, my
boyhood team, occasionally), so I really can't throw up much of an argument
with you here.

-----

Youre talking about Shawon Dunston and his range was actually decent. But he had epic arm strength.

One of the problems with the Cubs was that Mark Grace, though he was a good average hitter, didnt really hit for the kind of power that you would expect for a 1B who plays half of his games at Wrigley. Dont get me wrong. He could hit for average and he even compensated for his lack of power hitting some by being fairly clutch. But his lack of power, kind of made Rynes bat that much more necessary. While Grace didnt hit for a lot of power as far as 1B go, Ryne had very good power for a 2B. Its actually one of their problems this year with D Lee. He's too much of a paper tiger for someone who plays half his games at Wrigley. He is still getting a pass because he had a good year a few years ago and also because of his daughter, I think.

[topscribe]

Youre talking about Shawon Dunston and his range was actually decent. But he had epic arm strength.

One of the problems with the Cubs was that Mark Grace, though he was a good average hitter, didnt really hit for the kind of power that you would expect for a 1B who plays half of his games at Wrigley. Dont get me wrong. He could hit for average and he even compensated for his lack of power hitting some by being fairly clutch. But his lack of power, kind of made Rynes bat that much more necessary. While Grace didnt hit for a lot of power as far as 1B go, Ryne had very good power for a 2B. Its actually one of their problems this year with D Lee. He's too much of a paper tiger for someone who plays half his games at Wrigley. He is still getting a pass because he had a good year a few years ago and also because of his daughter, I think.

BTW, what do you think of the Cubs' first-rounder, Brett Jackson? If the kid
learns how to handle counts and cut down on the strike-outs, I think, with all
his tools, he has the makings of a superstar.

(Sorry this is slightly off-topic, but the thread is pretty dead right now, so I
didn't think anyone would mind, since there isn't much of anyone in here. :D )

-----

[lex]

BTW, what do you think of the Cubs' first-rounder, Brett Jackson? If the kid
learns how to handle counts and cut down on the strike-outs, I think, with all
his tools, he has the makings of a superstar.

-----

Im not really that familiar with him. I typically dont have overwhelmingly strong opinions on players in the amateur draft. There are sometimes guys I like but its not like I really know about a lot of the HS players that a team might take instead of a guy I like. I actually enjoy watching the college game though but I havent had a chance to watch it this year.

[topscribe]

Im not really that familiar with him. I typically dont have overwhelmingly strong opinions on players in the amateur draft. There are sometimes guys I like but its not like I really know about a lot of the HS players that a team might take instead of a guy I like. I actually enjoy watching the college game though but I havent had a chance to watch it this year.

Jackson came out of California, Berkeley. I guess that's why I am somewhat
familiar with him, being in PAC country.

-----

[CoachChaz]

LOL. Lack of range isnt reflected in fielding %. Duh.

Sandberg used to have a really high fielding % but he wasnt as good defensively as some of the other second basemen. Ripkens range was laughable compared to several others on that list.

The best short stop of all time is Ozzie Smith...even with his lack of offense. He was so good on defense it compensated for any disparity in offense. Do you honestly believe Cal Ripken was remotely close to as good as Ozzie Smith at short stop?

What would those offensive numbers rate for a 3B? Because thats what Ripken should have played...but not every day. His lack of range made him a sub par shortstop and his offense doesnt come close to touching George Brett or Mike Schmidt.

Im not going to dispute that he was a popular player. But its easy to poke holes in any notion that he was the best SS of all time, let alone best player of all time.

You obviously didnt watch him much. One of the great things ALWAYS discussed when concerning Ripken was how he learned where to play against certain guys and make up for whatever minor limitations his size had on his range. The articles and discussions on this talent have been publicized quite a bit throughout his career.

You can always find a better offensive or defensive shortstop. No one will argue that guys like Ozzie or Vizquel or Tony Fernandez were better defensively, but where is their offense? When you are going to discuss the best player ata a position EVER, you have no choice but to include their offensive abilities as well. As far as SS's go on overall ability...you wont find one that comes close to Cal and I dare you to find too many people that dont agree.

[CoachChaz]

BTW, what do you think of the Cubs' first-rounder, Brett Jackson? If the kid
learns how to handle counts and cut down on the strike-outs, I think, with all
his tools, he has the makings of a superstar.

(Sorry this is slightly off-topic, but the thread is pretty dead right now, so I
didn't think anyone would mind, since there isn't much of anyone in here. :D )

-----

Jackson can be a decent outfielder. His power isn't great, but could be excellent for a lead-off guy...which he could be if he could cut down on the K's. His swing jusy needs alot of work. It sometimes looks like he's doing some sort of new dance when he's at the plate. Too much body motion.

[lex]

You obviously didnt watch him much. One of the great things ALWAYS discussed when concerning Ripken was how he learned where to play against certain guys and make up for whatever minor limitations his size had on his range. The articles and discussions on this talent have been publicized quite a bit throughout his career.

No, I saw him plenty. Im just not buying your nonsense. He was really good in his first couple of years and then was kind of disappointng after that. And like I said, he should have also changed positions and taken an occasional day off.



You can always find a better offensive or defensive shortstop. No one will argue that guys like Ozzie or Vizquel or Tony Fernandez were better defensively, but where is their offense? When you are going to discuss the best player ata a position EVER, you have no choice but to include their offensive abilities as well. As far as SS's go on overall ability...you wont find one that comes close to Cal and I dare you to find too many people that dont agree.

SS is a position that has a premium on defense (you must have missed that when I said that before)...meaning that defense means more to the SS position than offense. For that reason, you can largely ignore offense if you have SSs that were a lot better at defense.

[topscribe]

The best short stop of all time is Ozzie Smith

You don't know that unless you're 150 years old and have studied baseball all
that time. Someone even my age wouldn't know that, even were he an expert
(which I'm not). Now, saying Ozzie Smith was one of the greatest, I'll buy that . . .
or maybe has an argument for G.O.A.T. I saw him play and certainly have no
argument with that.

-----

[lex]

You don't know that unless you're 150 years old and have studied baseball all
that time. Someone even my age wouldn't know that, even were he an expert
(which I'm not). Now, saying Ozzie Smith was one of the greatest, I'll buy that . . .
or maybe has an argument for G.O.A.T. I saw him play and certainly have no
argument with that.

-----

Its something that is rarely disputed even by old timers. But also according to your logic, only about 2% of the population can say that Babe Ruth was the best player of all time (or whatever the % that saw him play).

[CoachChaz]

No, I saw him plenty. Im just not buying your nonsense. He was really good in his first couple of years and then was kind of disappointng after that. And like I said, he should have also changed positions and taken an occasional day off.




SS is a position that has a premium on defense (you must have missed that when I said that before)...meaning that defense means more to the SS position than offense. For that reason, you can largely ignore offense if you have SSs that were a lot better at defense.

Well, like you do with EVERYONE else, you can disagree...and that's fine. but You can't be a mediocre defensive SS and win a few gold gloves or even have a season where you commit only 3 errors...all of which occured AFTER his first couple of seasons. No one will argue that Fernandez and Vizquel were the better defensive players in the Ripken era, but when looking for the all-time best overall SS, you'd be far-fetched to find too many people that would shoose either of them over Ripken. Sorry, but if you are willing to give up a middle of the lineup hitter with a .975 fielding percentage for a .980 that is an automatic out...your team won't win too many games.

Show me a SS anywhere in history that even comes remotely close to the offense/defense combination that Rupken offered. Then make sure he is an ambassador to the game and a total class act. Find me that guy and then I'll be impressed.

Maybe I'm alone on this, but when it comes to discussing the best players ever, I think about more than just the numbers on the back of a baseball card.

[Poet]

Coach, I am a Cincinnati Reds fan, I won't lie. But I think Barry Larken could be argued to be better than Ripken.

I understand what you are saying, but it is hard for me to take a guy who has less than 500 homers over anyone who has 600 or more dingers in their life.

Ripken was an iron man, but so was Aaron. I think a lot of love that Ripken gets is that he was a big part in saving baseball, there is no doubt about it. That being said, the home run race between Sosa and McGwire helped a lot (yes it was further down the line) and to top it all off Hank Aaron's numbers were a lot better overall.

I think Ted Williams as a player outclasses Ripken. I think the same could be said about Ty Cobb, Willie Mays, and even Ken Griffey Jr.

[topscribe]

Its something that is rarely disputed even by old timers. But also according to your logic, only about 2% of the population can say that Babe Ruth was the best player of all time (or whatever the % that saw him play).

Did baseball exist before Babe Ruth? When did Ty Cobb play? All I am saying is
if a given player is your greatest, then that is what he is: your greatest. But
as to the greatest, it is all guesswork. We'll never know for sure.

Shoot, we don't even know for sure among the players we have seen. Check
out King's post above.

-----

[CoachChaz]

Coach, I am a Cincinnati Reds fan, I won't lie. But I think Barry Larken could be argued to be better than Ripken.

I understand what you are saying, but it is hard for me to take a guy who has less than 500 homers over anyone who has 600 or more dingers in their life.

Ripken was an iron man, but so was Aaron. I think a lot of love that Ripken gets is that he was a big part in saving baseball, there is no doubt about it. That being said, the home run race between Sosa and McGwire helped a lot (yes it was further down the line) and to top it all off Hank Aaron's numbers were a lot better overall.

I think Ted Williams as a player outclasses Ripken. I think the same could be said about Ty Cobb, Willie Mays, and even Ken Griffey Jr.

I'm not saying Ripken definitively IS the best player ever, but it's an impossible argument to debate. I was going more for the best players at each position. No, Rip doesnt have the numbers that alot of guys have, but alot of guys didnt play shortstop EVERY DAY.

I liked Larkin alot, but none of his batting or fielding numbers approach what Ripken accomplished and he was injured ALL the time. he played more than 140 games only 5 times in 18 years. if he could have stayed healthy, then maybe I'd have in my top 10 SS's, but for now...maybe top 25

As far as Williams, Cobb, etc. OUT classing Rip...well, I wont say they weren't classy players, but I also cant say Rip isnt at least on par with them in that department.

[topscribe]

Well, like you do with EVERYONE else, you can disagree...and that's fine. but You can't be a mediocre defensive SS and win a few gold gloves or even have a season where you commit only 3 errors...all of which occured AFTER his first couple of seasons. No one will argue that Fernandez and Vizquel were the better defensive players in the Ripken era, but when looking for the all-time best overall SS, you'd be far-fetched to find too many people that would shoose either of them over Ripken. Sorry, but if you are willing to give up a middle of the lineup hitter with a .975 fielding percentage for a .980 that is an automatic out...your team won't win too many games.

Show me a SS anywhere in history that even comes remotely close to the offense/defense combination that Rupken offered. Then make sure he is an ambassador to the game and a total class act. Find me that guy and then I'll be impressed.

Maybe I'm alone on this, but when it comes to discussing the best players ever, I think about more than just the numbers on the back of a baseball card.

Offense/defense combination. Seems that's so often overlooked . . .

-----

[CoachChaz]

Offense/defense combination. Seems that's so often overlooked . . .

-----

It is...and it shouldnt be. The question is always who is the best "player". Not the best hitter or the best fielder. Last time I checked...defense and offense were equal parts of the game.

[lex]

Did baseball exist before Babe Ruth? When did Ty Cobb play? All I am saying is
if a given player is your greatest, then that is what he is: your greatest. But
as to the greatest, it is all guesswork. We'll never know for sure.

Shoot, we don't even know for sure among the players we have seen. Check
out King's post above.

-----

Its amazing that you feel compelled to remind yourself of this.

[Poet]

I'm not saying Ripken definitively IS the best player ever, but it's an impossible argument to debate. I was going more for the best players at each position. No, Rip doesnt have the numbers that alot of guys have, but alot of guys didnt play shortstop EVERY DAY.

I liked Larkin alot, but none of his batting or fielding numbers approach what Ripken accomplished and he was injured ALL the time. he played more than 140 games only 5 times in 18 years. if he could have stayed healthy, then maybe I'd have in my top 10 SS's, but for now...maybe top 25

As far as Williams, Cobb, etc. OUT classing Rip...well, I wont say they weren't classy players, but I also cant say Rip isnt at least on par with them in that department.

If memory serves correctly, the only reason Larkin had less gold gloves than most other guys was because Ozzie Smith played in his league.

I would argue tooth and nail that Larkin was a top ten SS of all time.

I think we just look at this differently. Williams hit 400. Cobb did as well. Mays played the most important fielding position, hit over 500 homers.

Those guys just made more of an impact that Ripken did. Who knows.

[CoachChaz]

If memory serves correctly, the only reason Larkin had less gold gloves than most other guys was because Ozzie Smith played in his league.

I would argue tooth and nail that Larkin was a top ten SS of all time.

I think we just look at this differently. Williams hit 400. Cobb did as well. Mays played the most important fielding position, hit over 500 homers.

Those guys just made more of an impact that Ripken did. Who knows.

Ripken's mark was as a SS. he redefined the position. I wont say that makes him the best player ever, but maybe the best SS. (BTW, Larkin had 3 gold gloves as well)

...and I'll argue all day long thatr catcher and shortstop are by far more important fielding positions than CF.

As far as all-time SS's go. Let me just throw out some names that I think were better than Larkin. In no particular order. I liked larkin, but I could easily find 10 of these guys that were better than him. I think most would.

Cal Ripken, Honus Wagner, Ozzie Smith, Lou Boudreau, Robin Yount, Luke Appling, Arky Vaughn, Derek Jeter, Joe Cronin, Alan Trammell, Pee Wee Reese, Luis Apparicio, Omar Vizquel, Dave Concepcion, Bert Campaneris, Garry Templeton, Jay Bell, Tony Fernandez, Joe Tinker, Miguel Tejada, Maury Wills

[Poet]

Ripken's mark was as a SS. he redefined the position. I wont say that makes him the best player ever, but maybe the best SS. (BTW, Larkin had 3 gold gloves as well)

...and I'll argue all day long thatr catcher and shortstop are by far more important fielding positions than CF.

As far as all-time SS's go. Let me just throw out some names that I think were better than Larkin. In no particular order. I liked larkin, but I could easily find 10 of these guys that were better than him. I think most would.

Cal Ripken, Honus Wagner, Ozzie Smith, Lou Boudreau, Robin Yount, Luke Appling, Arky Vaughn, Derek Jeter, Joe Cronin, Alan Trammell, Pee Wee Reese, Luis Apparicio, Omar Vizquel, Dave Concepcion, Bert Campaneris, Garry Templeton, Jay Bell, Tony Fernandez, Joe Tinker, Miguel Tejada, Maury Wills
Ozzie Smith is the most overrated SS ever. You know how he got most of his hits? Slapping it off the astro turf, hell it took him a long time to even be able to do that. Tejada was a steriods baby and should be honored to shake Larkin's hand, let alone have his name be mentioned in the same breath. Vizquel was all glove and no bat.

So maybe Smith, Jeter, Wagner, Reese, and after that no way in hell are any of those guys better than Larkin.

As far as redefining the position, I have seen Larkin get credit for that just as much as Ripken. Not talking from Cincinnati sports outlets or media guys either.

BTW, when catchers and shortstops can rob someone over a home run maybe I will think they are more importan that CF. I would argue that third base is harder and more important that SS. There is a reason why it's called the hot corner.

[CoachChaz]

Ozzie Smith is the most overrated SS ever. You know how he got most of his hits? Slapping it off the astro turf, hell it took him a long time to even be able to do that. Tejada was a steriods baby and should be honored to shake Larkin's hand, let alone have his name be mentioned in the same breath. Vizquel was all glove and no bat.

So maybe Smith, Jeter, Wagner, Reese, and after that no way in hell are any of those guys better than Larkin.

As far as redefining the position, I have seen Larkin get credit for that just as much as Ripken. Not talking from Cincinnati sports outlets or media guys either.

BTW, when catchers and shortstops can rob someone over a home run maybe I will think they are more importan that CF. I would argue that third base is harder and more important that SS. There is a reason why it's called the hot corner.

All I can say is WOW to the bolded statement.


After that, let me ask you to go catch a few games and then play a few more in CF. You tell me which is easier and less physically demanding and plays a more prominent role in a game. Robbing a HR? That happens how often? But calling the right pitch, digging one out of the dirt, throwing out base-stealers, getting drilled on a play at the plate, taking a foul ball off the body (it hurts even with the equipment on).

3B requires a good glove and a strong arm, but SS demands both even more. Add the fact that range in both directions is required as well as making double plays and I really cant see how the two positions can even be compared.

[lex]

LOL @ all the talk of a SSs offense. You guys are brainwashed by the steroids era. A SSs worth begins with his ability to play defense. That eliminates Ripken off the top. Larkin was a lot better than Ripken on defense. Larkin even played on turf and didnt have the grass to slow the ball down. But even Larkin falls well short of Ozzie on defense. Id also take Tony Fernandez in his days with Toronto over Ripken, however. I think his defense was also better than Larkins.

[topscribe]

LOL @ all the talk of a SSs offense. You guys are brainwashed by the steroids era. A SSs worth begins with his ability to play defense. That eliminates Ripken off the top. Larkin was a lot better than Ripken on defense. Larkin even played on turf and didnt have the grass to slow the ball down. But even Larkin falls well short of Ozzie on defense. Id also take Tony Fernandez in his days with Toronto over Ripken, however. I think his defense was also better than Larkins.

Maybe so, but I still like Coach's point. I would rather have a SS who is still good
defensively and can be a strong hitter in the middle of the batting order. In that
case, although Ozzie may be the greatest SS ever, Ripken would be the man for
my team.

-----

[Poet]

LOL @ all the talk of a SSs offense. You guys are brainwashed by the steroids era. A SSs worth begins with his ability to play defense. That eliminates Ripken off the top. Larkin was a lot better than Ripken on defense. Larkin even played on turf and didnt have the grass to slow the ball down. But even Larkin falls well short of Ozzie on defense. Id also take Tony Fernandez in his days with Toronto over Ripken, however. I think his defense was also better than Larkins.

Ozzie Smith was more flash than anything else. He was a showman on the field and was a media darling. Barry Larkin was not much worse than him defensively, and was a much better offensive player. Larkin was the better player in regards to Ozzie Smith and Ripken.

[BroncoNut]

I concur that it is Ruth. He was a great pitcher before he was a great hitter yet he still set records far and away beyond anyone else for his time. He outhomered entire teams. He sold tickets and he saved the sport from the Black Sox scandal. There are only two athletes I think that even come close to Ruth's dominance of a sport - Muhammad Ali and Wayne Gretzky.

It was fortunate for him that Ruth played in a time when the media was not as pervasive and not as inclined to dig into a player's personal life as they are today. I think if Ruth were a Yankee in this era, he'd be treated little differently than A-Rod or Clemens.

Oh, and before anyone starts with that "yeah, but Ruth never had to face the top black pitchers of his day", let me ask you how many black pitchers of the 20s and 30s are in the Hall of Fame, even after all the revisionism of various committees to put more blacks from that era in the Hall? Great black pitchers largely did not exist in the Negro Leagues.

But then factor in things like an entire season of day games, train travel between cities, doctored pitches still legal, etc. that today's stars don't encounter and I think it balances out any alleged lack of black pitching talent in Ruth's time.

interesting post.

Ruth was a great ball hitter, no doubt, but he was not a great athete. He was more brute strength when it came to hitting a ball. He had some success at pitching, but I find it hard pressed to say he is the greatest of all time. It's like Tyson and Ali, Tyson would've killed Ali.

[Poet]

Tyson would have been slaughtered by Ali. You are stupid and should die.

Never post again.

TIA.

Idiot.

[topscribe]

Tyson would have been slaughtered by Ali. You are stupid and should die.

Never post again.

TIA.

Idiot.

You've got to stop being so bashful and start letting people know what you think, King.

You'll never get anywhere unless you speak up . . . :coffee:

-----

[Buff]

interesting post.

Ruth was a great ball hitter, no doubt, but he was not a great athete. He was more brute strength when it came to hitting a ball. He had some success at pitching, but I find it hard pressed to say he is the greatest of all time. It's like Tyson and Ali, Tyson would've killed Ali.

So, would Buster Douglas have also killed Ali?

[lex]

So, would Buster Douglas have also killed Ali?

I think he's talking about when Tyson was with Cayton/Jacobs. Once Don King entered the picture, Tyson was a shell of his former self. Tyson was watching cartoons during training sessions leading up to his Tokyo fight. The corner provided by King, not surprisingly was an absolute joke. I dont know who would have won but to suggest Tyson in his prime could take Ali in his prime is not at all far fetched. Before you launch into Ali faced other big hitters, most of them were bigger guys. Tyson was compact...he was quick and explosive.

[CoachChaz]

Ozzie Smith was more flash than anything else. He was a showman on the field and was a media darling. Barry Larkin was not much worse than him defensively, and was a much better offensive player. Larkin was the better player in regards to Ozzie Smith and Ripken.

I'm willing to bet 99% of the population outside of the Cincy area would never put Larkin ahead of Ripken. I can understand he was a very good player, but better overall than Ripken? None of his defensive numbers or offensive numbers are close to Rip's, he couldnt stay healthy, so comparing that aspect to the Iron man is a joke, Rip also has 2 MVP's and a ROY. The only thing they have in common is the three gold gloves. I cant even begin to see where anyone could possibly compare the two as equals...let alone put Larkin on top. Tony Fernandez? Give me a break.

As far as Rip's "defensive inadequacies", it's obvious anyone that says that didnt watch him often or pay attention to his game. Of course he didnt have the range that the most had, but he was always glorified for his ability to learn a hitter and his tendencies and to know what pitch was coming and what the odds were on how it would be hit and played. His mental grasp of the position was extreme and that explains why his fielding percentage is better than any of the others.

[Poet]

Larkin has a MVP and the ROY is a retarded award. Go over the list of people who has won that award. You will find that half the guys on that list ended up sacking balls. He was a better defensive player, in fact he commited less errors than Ripken and less errors than Ozzie Smith.

Larkin was the better all around player. Ripken was a power hitter. He hit 431 dingers in his career. Larkin hit 198 which was still very good for his era. However, after that Larkin is by far the better player.

Ripken's career batting average was 276. Larkin's was 295. Larkin was also relevant on the basepath with 379 stolen bases. Ripken....had 36.

Larkin won the silver slugger award 9 times. Ripken won it 8 times.

Ripken struck out 1305 times, Larkin struck out 871 times.

Now, I am not going to just give Larkin's side because at that point it goes from a good conversation to spin doctoring.

Ripken is a member of the 3k hit club. I refuse to go by the old argument of "he only got it because he played a long time". That is stupid and honestly longevity is far more important than fans ever want to admit. The fact that Ripken could play at a high level for so long is amazing. Anyone who says otherwise has no clue as to what they are talking about.

Ripken's power numbers are pretty staggering. We know that he did it legitimately. But, when it comes to fielding the ball Larkin is not only underrated, but he blows Ripken out of the water.

Larkin's career fielding percentage is 975. Ripken's is 956. That is a pretty damn good amount of difference. Larkin's errors for his career is 225. Ripken's was at 294.


Factor in that Larkin could hit triples, still was a good power hitting SS, and it isn't close.

Larkin was the better player. He was more versatile, got on base more, could steal bases, and was a better fielder.

Larkin is one of the most underrated players of all-time.

Oh, for the record, I would take both guys over Ozzie Smith.

[BroncoNut]

So, would Buster Douglas have also killed Ali?

I'm talking about Tyson in his prime *******. Probably well before your time. Tyson would have clocked Ali. Ali would not have been able to withstand Tyson's hits on his rope and dope routine.

[BroncoNut]

I think he's talking about when Tyson was with Cayton/Jacobs. Once Don King entered the picture, Tyson was a shell of his former self. Tyson was watching cartoons during training sessions leading up to his Tokyo fight. The corner provided by King, not surprisingly was an absolute joke. I dont know who would have won but to suggest Tyson in his prime could take Ali in his prime is not at all far fetched. Before you launch into Ali faced other big hitters, most of them were bigger guys. Tyson was compact...he was quick and explosive.

Exactly. And also dangerously, he was full of hatred

[Poet]

Exactly. And also dangerously, he was full of hatred

And would get walked around the ring with nothing but Ali's jabs in his face.

It would be a beating. Basically imagine running into a brick wall. That would be how Tyson's face would feel as he kept making the same damn mistake over and over again. He was an idiot with knockout power.

Ali was a genius in the ring...with knockout power...and great speed and movement.

[BroncoNut]

And would get walked around the ring with nothing but Ali's jabs in his face.

It would be a beating. Basically imagine running into a brick wall. That would be how Tyson's face would feel as he kept making the same damn mistake over and over again. He was an idiot with knockout power.

Ali was a genius in the ring...with knockout power...and great speed and movement.

Don't get me wrong *******. Ali was great. But you just said it, ... Tyson was a knockout power. that would be a great fight to see. I still think Tyson would take that one.

[Poet]

Don't get me wrong *******. Ali was great. But you just said it, ... Tyson was a knockout power. that would be a great fight to see. I still think Tyson would take that one.

I would give a year off my life to see that fight. Both guys in their prime, that would be insane.

[BroncoNut]

I would give a year off my life to see that fight. Both guys in their prime, that would be insane.

it would be. I agree with you there coklover

[Poet]

it would be. I agree with you there coklover

Look Nut, on this site you are sort of like the lovable retard. So, kindly **** and leave this thread to the people who live in reality.

Don't choke on your meds. :beer:

[BroncoNut]

Look Nut, on this site you are sort of like the lovable retard. So, kindly **** and leave this thread to the people who live in reality.

Don't choke on your meds. :beer:

Sure. it's a deal as long as you dont' choke on that next cok

:beer:

[Poet]

Sure. it's a deal as long as you dont' choke on that next cok

:beer:

No problem, as long as you remove yours from that bunny.

[lex]

I'm willing to bet 99% of the population outside of the Cincy area would never put Larkin ahead of Ripken. I can understand he was a very good player, but better overall than Ripken? None of his defensive numbers or offensive numbers are close to Rip's, he couldnt stay healthy, so comparing that aspect to the Iron man is a joke, Rip also has 2 MVP's and a ROY. The only thing they have in common is the three gold gloves. I cant even begin to see where anyone could possibly compare the two as equals...let alone put Larkin on top. Tony Fernandez? Give me a break.

As far as Rip's "defensive inadequacies", it's obvious anyone that says that didnt watch him often or pay attention to his game. Of course he didnt have the range that the most had, but he was always glorified for his ability to learn a hitter and his tendencies and to know what pitch was coming and what the odds were on how it would be hit and played. His mental grasp of the position was extreme and that explains why his fielding percentage is better than any of the others.

Wrong. All fielding % shows is that you executed plays you were able to get to. But if you have limited range, there are fewer instances where you have to rush a throw because while Larkin is getting to a ball that Ripken could only dream of getting, the runner is hustling down the first base line.

[CoachChaz]

Wrong. All fielding % shows is that you executed plays you were able to get to. But if you have limited range, there are fewer instances where you have to rush a throw because while Larkin is getting to a ball that Ripken could only dream of getting, the runner is hustling down the first base line.

I guess you're completely missing my point. Anyone that has a clue about Ripken and his defense knows how he played the game mentally. He read the signs for the pitch, compared it to the batter and his tendencies and adjusted accordingly. Did he have as much range as some of the flashier shortstops? Of course not. But while Ozzie was doing a flip to get to a ball or Larkin was pulling a hamstring to make a play...Ripken was already there because he positioned himself accordingly.

I'm not even going to try to say he had similar range, but his defense wasnt so far behind other guys that his abilities should be completely ignored. That would be absolutely ignorant. If he was so bad, then why was he a perennial all-star at the position? Why wasn't he moved to 3rd earlier? Why didn't they move him to 1st when they were in their lean years there with the likes of Sam Horn and Randy Milligan?

Where is Tony Fernandez on the HOF list? Larkin is eligible next year...do you really think he'll make it on the first ballot...if ever? Only 3 guys to play the position in the last 20 years are in the Hall. Rip, Ozzie and Yount and Yount was so horrible there, they moved him to the outfield.

[In-com-plete]

I guess you're completely missing my point. Anyone that has a clue about Ripken and his defense knows how he played the game mentally. He read the signs for the pitch, compared it to the batter and his tendencies and adjusted accordingly. Did he have as much range as some of the flashier shortstops? Of course not. But while Ozzie was doing a flip to get to a ball or Larkin was pulling a hamstring to make a play...Ripken was already there because he positioned himself accordingly.

I'm not even going to try to say he had similar range, but his defense wasnt so far behind other guys that his abilities should be completely ignored. That would be absolutely ignorant. If he was so bad, then why was he a perennial all-star at the position? Why wasn't he moved to 3rd earlier? Why didn't they move him to 1st when they were in their lean years there with the likes of Sam Horn and Randy Milligan?

Where is Tony Fernandez on the HOF list? Larkin is eligible next year...do you really think he'll make it on the first ballot...if ever? Only 3 guys to play the position in the last 20 years are in the Hall. Rip, Ozzie and Yount and Yount was so horrible there, they moved him to the outfield.

Why is Jeter still at SS? Why haven't they moved him to 3rd?

And why does he make the all-star team every year when he's atleast the 5th best SS in the game (A-rod included).

[CoachChaz]

Why is Jeter still at SS? Why haven't they moved him to 3rd?

And why does he make the all-star team every year when he's atleast the 5th best SS in the game (A-rod included).

I'll agree Jeter isnt what he once was, and A-Rod may be the better option at SS, but I like Jeter at SS and A-Rod at 3B better than the other way around. Sometimes you make adjustments based on the players you have.

Michael Young is a great example. He was an awesome fielding 2B, but they wanted to make room for Soriano and eventually Kinsler, so they moved him to SS. he was a good SS, but they wanted to make room for Andrus. So far, Young has done okay at 3B, but he's been moved twice to make room for other guys and now the Rangers are in first. he's much better at 2B than Kinsler and thus far the highlight reel that is Andrus has been less than stellar, but it's for the benefit of the team in this scenario.

[Poet]

I guess you're completely missing my point. Anyone that has a clue about Ripken and his defense knows how he played the game mentally. He read the signs for the pitch, compared it to the batter and his tendencies and adjusted accordingly. Did he have as much range as some of the flashier shortstops? Of course not. But while Ozzie was doing a flip to get to a ball or Larkin was pulling a hamstring to make a play...Ripken was already there because he positioned himself accordingly.

I'm not even going to try to say he had similar range, but his defense wasnt so far behind other guys that his abilities should be completely ignored. That would be absolutely ignorant. If he was so bad, then why was he a perennial all-star at the position? Why wasn't he moved to 3rd earlier? Why didn't they move him to 1st when they were in their lean years there with the likes of Sam Horn and Randy Milligan?

Where is Tony Fernandez on the HOF list? Larkin is eligible next year...do you really think he'll make it on the first ballot...if ever? Only 3 guys to play the position in the last 20 years are in the Hall. Rip, Ozzie and Yount and Yount was so horrible there, they moved him to the outfield.
Larkin will get in his third go around. He still played when Cincinnati had some of it's luster.

Also, people in the media are a lot higher on him than you are, and I don't mean that to be insulting.

[CoachChaz]

Larkin will get in his third go around. He still played when Cincinnati had some of it's luster.

Also, people in the media are a lot higher on him than you are, and I don't mean that to be insulting.

No insult taken. Like I said..I loved Larkin. Hell, I even dropped $100 in Vegas that he's win the MVP in '95. It was 20-1 odds, so the 2G I made off that covered the hole I dug myself at the poker table.

Anyway, I thought he was a good SS and maybe he gets into the hall eventually. I think the biggest knock on him is no one could ever know just how good he could have been because he couldnt play a full season. His numbers were all over the place, too. You just never knew what kind of production you'd get from him on a year to year basis whether it be at the plate, on the basepaths or on the field or how many games he'd play

[Poet]

No insult taken. Like I said..I loved Larkin. Hell, I even dropped $100 in Vegas that he's win the MVP in '95. It was 20-1 odds, so the 2G I made off that covered the hole I dug myself at the poker table.

Anyway, I thought he was a good SS and maybe he gets into the hall eventually. I think the biggest knock on him is no one could ever know just how good he could have been because he couldnt play a full season. His numbers were all over the place, too. You just never knew what kind of production you'd get from him on a year to year basis whether it be at the plate, on the basepaths or on the field or how many games he'd play

Fair enough. I think the most inconsistent part about his numbers were in fact the stolen bases. I don't think you steal 40 bases and then forget how to do it. But, if you are banged up, and he was, it would be hard for the coaches to send that signal a lot.

I think he will end up being in the Hall. I think his silver sluggers, high fielding percentage, and gold gloves during the Ozzie era are going to get him in there. I have heard a lot of different HOF writers sing his praises. As unfortunate as it is, popularity matters. If the fans like you and the writers like you, you are going to get in unless your numbers really blow. You should be ok as long as you have one of the two.

I think Larkin does have the two. Who knows. I can't lie and act like I am not biased at all. Larkin was more than a great baseball player - he was a great man. His name is golden in Cincinnati. He has done a lot of good for the city with charities and he has donated his time as well as his money. He always was aware of the city's pulse.

If you prove yourself to the city of Cincinnati, it is VERY hard to lose the town. Guys like Joe Morgan, Anthony Munoz, Pete Rose (for better or worse, mind you) Barry Larkin, Sean Casey, and hell even Marvin Lewis are loved because they "get it" when it comes to Cincinnati fans.

So yeah, while I think I am more objective than most, I found myself arguing for Larkin harder than I normally would.

I love me some Barry Larkin.

[lex]

I guess you're completely missing my point. Anyone that has a clue about Ripken and his defense knows how he played the game mentally. He read the signs for the pitch, compared it to the batter and his tendencies and adjusted accordingly. Did he have as much range as some of the flashier shortstops? Of course not. But while Ozzie was doing a flip to get to a ball or Larkin was pulling a hamstring to make a play...Ripken was already there because he positioned himself accordingly.

I'm not even going to try to say he had similar range, but his defense wasnt so far behind other guys that his abilities should be completely ignored. That would be absolutely ignorant. If he was so bad, then why was he a perennial all-star at the position? Why wasn't he moved to 3rd earlier? Why didn't they move him to 1st when they were in their lean years there with the likes of Sam Horn and Randy Milligan?

Where is Tony Fernandez on the HOF list? Larkin is eligible next year...do you really think he'll make it on the first ballot...if ever? Only 3 guys to play the position in the last 20 years are in the Hall. Rip, Ozzie and Yount and Yount was so horrible there, they moved him to the outfield.

Someone deleted my reply...just so you know.

[sneakers]

It seems as though people need a little more convincing.

Babe Ruth as a pitcher was a career 94-46 with a 2.28 ERA.

We all know how great he was as a homerun hitter, but let's focus on some more little known statistics:

Ruth was a .342 career batting average (with a .474 on base %)
He had 136 career triples, and he stole home 10 times in his career and had 10 inside the park homeruns.

Oh and Ruth DID play against Negro Leagues and Japanese players (he did not stop playing baseball when the MLB season was over) He spent all winter playing in places such as Japan and in exhibitions with Negro League teams.

You may not think that they would have kept stats in these unofficial games...but you must remember that at that time New York had 12 newspapers covering the Yankees and Babe Ruth...so yes we do have a very good idea how he did in these games, and yes, he did do very well.

[Poet]

Ruth has a strong case. That being said, If someone were to say that he did not play against the best players of his time, they could have a point.

To be fair, until Bonds is 100% proven of steroid use, it would be pretty hard to tell me that he is not the greatest player of all time. That being said, if Bonds is somehow innocent and did not take any performance enhancing drugs I would be beyond shocked.

[CoachChaz]

It seems as though people need a little more convincing.

Babe Ruth as a pitcher was a career 94-46 with a 2.28 ERA.

We all know how great he was as a homerun hitter, but let's focus on some more little known statistics:

Ruth was a .342 career batting average (with a .474 on base %)
He had 136 career triples, and he stole home 10 times in his career and had 10 inside the park homeruns.

Oh and Ruth DID play against Negro Leagues and Japanese players (he did not stop playing baseball when the MLB season was over) He spent all winter playing in places such as Japan and in exhibitions with Negro League teams.

You may not think that they would have kept stats in these unofficial games...but you must remember that at that time New York had 12 newspapers covering the Yankees and Babe Ruth...so yes we do have a very good idea how he did in these games, and yes, he did do very well.

Yeah, but if his defense was even mediocre, it completely negates anything else he did...at least that's what I'm told.

[lex]

Yeah, but if his defense was even mediocre, it completely negates anything else he did...at least that's what I'm told.


No, as a position player he was a RF, not SS. There isnt the same emphasis on defense.

[CoachChaz]

No, as a position player he was a RF, not SS. There isnt the same emphasis on defense.

Nevertheless...defense is part of the game and according to you and anyone else with a clue...to be the best player, you have to be able to do all the facets well. Not be just the best fielder or just the best hitter.

[lex]

Nevertheless...defense is part of the game and according to you and anyone else with a clue...to be the best player, you have to be able to do all the facets well. Not be just the best fielder or just the best hitter.

Thats not true. Different facets are not and should not be weighted equally when evaluating players at various positions. Like i said, RF is a position that is more heavily relied on for offensive production. Same with 1B.

[Poet]

There are different standards for different positions.

In today's day and age, defense is losing its luster. There is no two ways about it.

[lex]

There are different standards for different positions.

In today's day and age, defense is losing its luster. There is no two ways about it.

No defense has always been important for SSs. It may have been underhyped during the steroid era but what does that mean exactly? If you can prevent a run, its worth as much as generating a run, plus it helps your pitcher.

[SoCalImport]

No defense has always been important for SSs. It may have been underhyped during the steroid era but what does that mean exactly? If you can prevent a run, its worth as much as generating a run, plus it helps your pitcher.

Right you are. My vote there-for is: Kenny Lofton!! (actually He's not that far out of the discussion if you based it on his best years)

[sneakers]

Ruth has a strong case. That being said, If someone were to say that he did not play against the best players of his time, they could have a point.

To be fair, until Bonds is 100% proven of steroid use, it would be pretty hard to tell me that he is not the greatest player of all time. That being said, if Bonds is somehow innocent and did not take any performance enhancing drugs I would be beyond shocked.

When Ruth played, there only 16 teams with 4 man pitching staffs.

Bonds went up against dilluted pitching staffs (guys who should be in AAA) on 30 teams with 5 man rotations.

[lex]

When Ruth played, there only 16 teams with 4 man pitching staffs.

Bonds went up against dilluted pitching staffs (guys who should be in AAA) on 30 teams with 5 man rotations.

Between, integration, HS sports, and globalization, the talent pool is a lot bigger now. Its probably even bigger when you look at it in relation to there being more MLB teams.

And it was actually harder for Bonds because Ruth faced 4 man rotations at 4 times a game. Specialization makes it a lot harder. You dont get to see the same pitcher, with the same arm angle, with the same action on pitches 4 times anymore. And even though some pitchers arent great, its not like Bonds faced those guys in critical situations. Plus, as I said before, there werent as many guys throwing as hard as what youve been seeing in recent years.

[lex]

Right you are. My vote there-for is: Kenny Lofton!! (actually He's not that far out of the discussion if you based it on his best years)


I liked Kenny Lofton but even more than him, I like Omar Vizquel from those Indian teams. Plus, Roberto Alomar might have been the best defensive second baseman since since Mazeroski. Jose Lind was up there though, too. Anyway, people think of offense when they think of those Indians teams (and rightfully so) but they had some guys who could really play defense up the middle. And in spite of that, their pitching was still sketchy.

But I gotta say, though I like Lofton as a player, there are a few guys who I liked more as defensive CFs.

[CoachChaz]

Mays, Griffey, Jones, Flood, Cobb immediately come to mind.

[lex]

Mays, Griffey, Jones, Flood, Cobb immediately come to mind.


Those guys were good. But there were also a lot of good guys in the 80s when speed was a bigger part of baseball.

[Broncospsycho77]

I liked Griffey in his prime a lot, as short as it was.

[BroncoAV06]

Yeah, but if his defense was even mediocre, it completely negates anything else he did...at least that's what I'm told.

Ruth did enjoy the food but it is over blown that he was a fat guy with a big bat. Sure he was not the best fielder from what I have read and researched but he was easily average to better in his younger years. He would show up early to spring training to run hills and get in shape, his base running shoud show that he was more then a fat guy.

It is a good point you make about the overall player. Would Ruth being the biggest star in the game, helping grow the game probably more then any other player, and being a stnad up guy for the fans play into the cards?

The overall body of work for Ruth is huge IMO.

I only hope that we can see some great "clean" players in the coming years. With the steroid era and the huge bombers tainted I hope that baseball can move on and get ahold of the situation. Being 20 years of age I sure hope I can see some great players during my time.