Bleacher Report - Articles by Ben Feldman

MLB History: 11 Greatest Shortstops of All Time, Part 2

Ben Feldman — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:50:25 -0500

Lou Boudreau, Barry Larkin, Joe Cronin, Honus Wagner, Arky Vaughan, Ernie Banks, Cal Ripken Jr. Ozzie Smith, Luke Appling, Bill Dahlen, and Gorgeous George Davis.

To catch up, here are our top 11, in no particular order, with their career WARP totals:

Boudreau (108), Larkin, (110), Cronin (120), Wagner (240), Vaughan (134), Banks (115), Ripken (127), Ozzie (127), Appling (130), Dahlen (180), Davis (170).

As impressive as they appear here, remember that Bill Dahlen and George Davis were doing this before baseball was baseball. Other than Honus Wagner, there is not that much immediately separating these shortstops form one another.

Here are their best 5-year WARP totals, some measure of their level of peak play:

Boudreau (60.5), Larkin (49.5), Cronin (59), Wagner (79.6)!!!, Vaughan, (69.4), Banks (59.4), Ripken (57.9), Ozzie (47.7), Appling (53.4), Dahlen (59.9), Davis (58.5).

Here are their best 10 year WARP totals, some measure of how long they were able to sustain these peaks.:

Boudreau (101.6), Larkin (83), Cronin (88.2), Wagner (146.7), Vaughan (118), Banks (91), Ripken (92.4), Ozzie (88), Appling (93.8), Dahlen (111.6), Davis (109.7).

Things look pretty even, with two notable exceptions.

1. Honus Wagner

Honus Wagner is very clearly the greatest shortstop in the annals of the game, and quite possibly (Babe Ruth included), the most dominant performer at any point in baseball history. Looking at the above numbers, it is shocking the level to which Wagner exceeds the other shortstops on this list. He was worth 240 wins-above- replacement-player in his career, none of the others were within 60 points of that. His 5- year peak exceeded the 2nd place finisher by 10, 3rd place by almost 20. His 10-year totals were even more impressive. His 1908 season may be the best ever, where he put up the following line:

AB-568 H-201 D-39 T-19 HR-10 R-100 RBI-109 SB-53 BB-54 .354/.415/.542/.957

This looks pretty spectacular, and then you realize that 1908 was the lowest offensive point of the twentieth century, the deadest of the dead ball seasons. Baseball Prospectus translates this 1908 season into contemporary numbers. Prepare to be blow away, and remember, he is also one of the game’s 3-4 greatest defensive shortstops.

AB-609 H-226 D-54 T-14 HR-57 BB-70 SB-54 R-150 RBI-177 .371/.440.787/1.227

From a gold glove shortstop, this is beyond belief. This season was worth 19 wins above a replacement player. This means that, given an average team that would finish the season with a record of 81-81, was starting a replacement level shortstop, replaced that shortstop with Wagner, and the team could expect to win 100 games.

Following is Wagner’s career line, as translated through Baseball Prospectus:

H-3640 D-855 T-138 HR-637 BB-1174 SB-640 R-2060 RBI-2257 .324/.394/.595

It’s like combining Albert Pujols and Ozzie Smith.

2. Arky Vaughan

A forgotten star, Bill James ranked him number two of all time, and its hard to disagree, even if putting him ahead of the rest of this list doesn’t quite feel right.

His numbers really are eye-popping, though. Check out his 1935 season, where hit batted .385/.491/.607. He comes in second to Wagner in almost anyway you try to look at the numbers. He also had some of the most impressive BB/K rations of all time, including seasons of 97/18, and 104/21.

His career numbers would be more impressive had he not missed all of ’44, ’45, and ’46 due to serving in the Second World War. Had he been permitted to play out those three seasons, his career batting line would resemble something like this:

H-2503, D-446, T-138, HR-108, R-1456, RBI-1108, SB-140, BB-1088 .318/.406/.453/.859, he would have had a career WARP of at least 150.

3. Cal Ripken Jr.

It’s funny, all people think about when they think about Cal Ripken Jr. are the games played, forgetting how unbelievably good he was. Despite his lack of speed, Cal was a remarkable defensive player, worth 113 fielding runs above average during his career (this is more than Omar Vizquel, for example).

His positioning, instincts, and incredible throwing arm made him one of the best shortstops of his time, although his frame and lack of foot-speed kept him from feeling like a great defender. His 1983, 1984, 1986, and 1991 seasons rank among the best ever from the position.

His offensive numbers do not look quite so impressive compared to the big shortstops of the late 1990’s, but they are fantastic remembering that his offensive peak came from 1982-1991, before the offensive explosion of the “steroid era." He was one of the dominant offensive players at the time (easily the dominant offensive player of 1991, and perhaps in ’83 and ’84 as well), and did so while being a gold glove quality shortstop.

Beyond all this, the consecutive games record is not just ceremonial. Their is remarkable talent in being able to take the field every day, and incredible value as well.

4. Ozzie Smith

I am having a lot of trouble figuring out a way to differentiate between the rest of the men on the list. Davis and Dahlen have by far the most impressive statistics, until on realizes that they played the majority of their careers in the 19th century, tailing into the dead-ball area.

Barry Larkin is one of those perfect players; every facet of his game was beyond reproach, even if he was not ever the best in any single way.

Ernie Banks and Lou Boudreau had the impressive peaks, but didn’t last long enough at the position. Given a combination of peak value and longevity, I think I am going to go with, in the number 4 spot...Ozzie Smith.

Obviously the greatest defensive shortstop in the game’s history; perhaps the single greatest defensive performer at any position. Ozzie, after spending the first eight years of his career as an offensive zero, became an asset with the bat as well. He hit for a reasonable average, drew a great deal of walks, and stole bases at a high success rate. His numbers are depressed somewhat by the low-offense ‘80’s, BP’s translations change his .262/.337/.328 line into .278/.356/.364.

Given his reasonable offensive contributions, his brilliant glovework, and the fact that he maintained positive value until the age of 41 (being worth 3.1 WARP in part time duty in 1996), I feel pretty good about having him in the 4 spot.

5. Luke Appling

Old Aches ‘n Pains. It was really between him and Joe Cronin for the 5 position, Appling eked it out due to a slightly longer career.

6. Joe Cronin

Superficially superior offensive stats to a lot of these players, but remember that he played in the 1930’s, and in Boston. Environments that tremendously increased his numbers, and probably added about .20-.30 points to his rate stats.

7. Ernie Banks

Started on a path that would have placed him higher than number 7, but he spent the second half of his career as a league average 1st baseman. It is truly a testament to his superior play at short that he is this high, given the 1259 games at 1st (actually more than he had at shortstop). He was worth 36.2 WARP in his time at 1st, and 79.8 WARP at short. His MVP seasons were well deserved, but he was just as valuable in 3 other seasons, and was, in fact, an excellent defender as well. Had he been physically able to play short in his 30’s, he’d rank higher, but he didn’t, and he doesn’t.

8. Barry Larkin

Superficially, his career is less impressive than the three men ranked below him. Again, however, he did this in the 1980’s, against far tougher competition.

As mentioned above, he is on the shortlist with Mays, Bonds, Amos Otis, Robbie Alomar, and others, of men who played utterly absent any flaws. Often compared to Derek Jeter, this is less apt given how much better Larkin was defensively (saving 73 fielding runs above average for his career). He won the MVP award in 1995, but was significantly better in ’96, ’90, ’91, ’88, ’92, and maybe ’98 and ’99 as well, which has to be historically unusual.

Great percentage player, walking more than he struck out, stealing bases without being caught. Fun to watch, he should coast into the HOF (whether or not he will is another question).

9. Lou Boudreau

Had a peak to compare with anyone above (excepting Honus Wagner). He didn’t log enough games to rank any higher. Additionally, his most impressive season, an incredible 14.7 win 1944, can be, in part, explained by a weakening of the competition due to the war. Given a normal decline period he might rank as high as number 4, but he was basically done at 31.

10. Bill Dahlen

Both he and Davis gave me a lot of trouble, they have bizarrely impressive totals, but they did it way before the game was the game that we know today. Dahlan’s defensive statistics are superior to Ozzie Smith’s, although that must be taken with an enormous grain of salt.

11. George Davis

MLB History: 11 Greatest Shortstops of All Time, Part 1

Ben Feldman — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:47:46 -0500

Honus Wagner (240), Alex Rodriguez (109), Derek Jeter (73), Allan Trammel (102), Ozzie Smith (127), Omar Vizquel (72), Luke Appling (130), Ernie Banks (115), Lou Boudreau (108), Joe Cronin (120), George Davis(170), Pee Wee Reese (98), Phil Rizutto (75) , Joe Sewell (107), Arky Vaughan (134), Robin Yount (112), Barry Larkin (110), Cal Ripken Jr. (127), Joe Tinker (121), Dave Bancroft (116), Dave Concepcion (98), Luis Aparicio (91), Bert Campaneris (91), Bill Dahlen (180).

The first round: Clearly, there is one shortstop who is far and away ahead of the class, and that is Honus Wagner. According to WARP, Wagner was literally twice as valuable to his team as most of the rest of the list.

I included a number of these, not because I consider them in the Top 10, but more to prove a point. While I understand that shortstop has historically been a position of defensive specialists, all of the top contenders (with the arguable exception of Ozzie Smith), brought a fair amount of offense to the position as well.

Luis Aparicio, for example, really does not deserve the status he has been accorded as a baseball legend, and in fact, seems no more deserving than Bert Campaneris, or Dave Concepcion, other defensive minded speedsters who brought a great deal of value to their teams, if not enough to put them over the top.

Bill Dahlen and George Davis's stats are clearly less impressive than they appear, due to the conditions in which they played (less organized baseball, no black players, etc). Nevertheless, their numbers are impressive enough that they must be put into the Top 10.

Phil Rizzuto, I know he missed time due to war, but he still only had 75 WARP, Pee Wee missed the same years, and had 97 WARP. The Scooter was great, but not quite great enough.

Without thinking too much about it, I imagine we can all agree that the Top 10, beyond Wagner, Dahlen, and Davis, absolutely must include Ozzie Smith, Ernie Banks and Cal Ripken Jr. as well. The Same is true for Arky Vaughan, who has largely been forgotten by history, but who Bill James considered the second greatest shortstop (after Wagner), in the history of the game.

Omar Vizquel. Vizquel is absolutely not a candidate for Top 10 all time status, and I included him in the discussion mainly to illustrate the point that, comparisons between Vizquel and Ozzie Smith are entirely unfounded. Vizquel has saved 99 runs above average in his career, this is a fantastic total. He has also been 155 runs below average at the plate, (it is easy to forget, given his late '90's offensive contributions, that he was once labeled "Omar the outmaker").

Ozzie Smith was 33 runs above average at bat. This is not so impressive, but is, as you can easily figure out, 188 runs more than what Vizquel was able to produce. Ozzie stole more bases (by far), and did so with a much better success rate. Ozzie drew more walks, and produced a similar batting line in an era of much lighter offense.

Defensively, he saved an astonishing 268 runs over the average shortstop. This is an earth-shattering figure, and it absolutely blows Vizquel out of the water. Saying that Vizquel is comparable to Ozzie Smith is like saying Eddie Murray is just as good as Lou Gehrig.

They were both the best first basemen of their day, but that does not mean that they are equivalents.

This leaves us with 3 spots to be filled. The contenders for those 3 spots are as follows: Alex Rodriguez, Luke Appling, Alan Trammel, Derek Jeter, Barry Larkin, Lou Boudreau, Joe Cronin, Pee Wee Reese, Joe Sewell, Robin Yount, Joe Tinker, and Dave Bancroft.

Jeter gets cut first. He may eventually rank in the Top 10, but he is only 33, has probably 5-7 years ahead of him, and, lest we forget, is an absolutely brutal defensive shortstop, no matter what gold glove voters say. And before I hear any shit about how he is the cap'n of the Yankees, and a team leader, look who he is up against.

The others include Boudreau, who won the MVP as a player manager, Pee Wee Reese, who was unquestionably a team leader, Barry Larkin, and Ernie Banks ("let's play two!"). Shortstop is THE position for team leaders.

Anyway, just for fun, before saying goodbye, here is a rough projection of Derek Jeter's career numbers, assuming he lasts around, at least in part time duty until the age of 41, declining at a normal rate for a player of his caliber.

H-3403, D-557, T-78, HR-283, R-1992, RBI-1434, SB-374, BB-1099.

This would give him a career WARP of 106. Add in his postseason record, and he would certainly merit inclusion (although people will probably be trying to tell you that he was the best there ever was, which is clearly bullshit). It should also be noted, that this is a fairly modest projection, it is not hard to imagine Jeter breaking the 4000 hit barrier, scoring well over 2000 runs, etc. The more he is able to avoid injury, and the longer he wants to keep playing, he may end up very high on this list.

I'm sort of at a loss with what to do with A-Rod. He already has 109 career WARP, and will almost certainly end up with more than anyone on this list excepting Wagner…but he hasn't been a shortstop since 2003.

Giving proper regard to peak value, he is as good as anyone on the list, but still…I think, in a selfish attempt to make my own life easier, I am just going to pretend that he doesn't exist for now. When I update this lists in 2019 I will give him proper consideration.

Suffice to say, A-Rod will retire as one of the 10 best players in the history of the game, but it is unclear whether he will be chiefly remembered as a shortstop, third baseman, or even a first baseman. If he continues to play 3^rd for the rest of his career, he will have spent more time there than at short, so I'm leaving him out for now. Sorry.

Ok, that made things a little easier. Again, here are the career WARPs for the players we have left to fill these three spots:

Appling (130), Trammel (102), Larkin (110), Lou Boudreau (108), Cronin (119), Sewell (107), Bancroft (116), Tinker (121), Reese (98).

These are all pretty closely bunched together, Appling's is noticeably higher than the others, he's in.

Reese, obviously is the only one without 100 career WARP. However, as I have mentioned in previous articles, I do tend to give credit to time lost to war. If a player is productive the year before war, and the year after, it stands to reason he would have been productive during.

In 1942 Pee Wee Reese was worth 10.2 WARP- an MVP total. He missed all of 1943, 1944, and 1945. In 1946, he was worth 10.6. Even assuming that '42 and '46 would have been the best of these years, he would certainly have been worth between 8-10 wins a season in the war years, especially considering he was worth 10.6, 8.0, 9.2, and 9.5 in the four years after his return.

Give him credit for those 24-30 WARP, and his total shoots up to somewhere around 122-128.

He might have put up the following career line:

H-2618, D-403, T-98, HR-150, R-1578, RBI-1086, SB-270.

We have two spots left, and 8 players to fill those two spots. They are all between (giving Reese credit for time lost), 102-124 WARP, so let's look at their peak totals. What follows are the players best five years WARP totals, to see if anyone jumps way out, or falls way behind, the rest of the pack.

Trammel (45.9), Larkin (48.6), Boudreau (60.5!!!!!!), Cronin (58), Sewell (54), Bancroft (52.3), Joe Tinker (54.2), Reese (47.5)

This doesn't tell us very much. Trammel, Larkin and Reese have the lowest, but Reese is unfairly hurt by missing peak time to war, and Trammel and Larkin played a much more difficult version of the game than the other players.

Even so, I have to drop Trammel, who is distinctly inferior, if not by much, to his contemporary Barry Larkin.

I'm afraid I have to get rid of Reese as well. As much as I want to help him out, there is still some question as to how he would have performed, and I think he is probably in the 10-14 all time slot.

OK. Larkin, Boudreau, Cronin, Sewell, Bancroft and Tinker.

Alright, to hell with it; I'm doing a Top 11. Tinker, Bancroft and Sewell are gone, they don't quite match up to the other pre war stars (Cronin and Boudreau). Barry Larkin did have the lowest peak score, but he played in the 1980's and 1990's, against far better competition, and was one of those rare players (like Collins and Morgan in the second base category), who did everything perfectly, and its my list.

So there it is, the Top 10 (in no particular order), are Lou Boudreau, Barry Larkin, Joe Cronin, Honus Wagner, Arky Vaughan, Ernie Banks, Cal Ripken Jr. Ozzie Smith, Luke Appling, Bill Dahlen, and Gorgeous George Davis.

The Great Glove Debate: How Do You Measure Defense?

Ben Feldman — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 06:16:58 -0500

I was thinking recently about defense.

Defense seems to be the thing that we know least about in baseball. I have been reading a number of articles on the site recently that discuss the defensive merits of various players.

I’ve have been surprised to see that the numbers quoted almost always begin (and sometimes end), with fielding percentage.

Simply put, fielding percentage is not a valuable way to judge someone's defensive ability.

First off, look at a list of the greatest fielding percentages of all time. You will notice that, both in terms of seasons and careers, the list is heavily, heavily skewed towards contemporary players.

Whenever something like this happens, it requires further investigation. Most of the guys in baseball history with the highest lifetime batting averages died 50+ years ago, so does this mean that they had an inherent ability to hit for higher averages?

No, it means something else. It’s most likely that in their day, the league was weaker in certain areas. This allowed for excellent players to take advantage in a way that isn’t possible when the general quality of the game improves.

Fielding percentage has increased over the years. Obviously it is false to assume that all of baseball's best defenders have played in the past couple of decades.

A big production was made of the Rockies team being "the best defenders ever" because they made the fewest errors. What was not often mentioned is that the records were set by recent incarnations of the Red Sox, Orioles, and Mets.

The most important part of defense is not the avoidance of errors, but the recording of outs. If player A makes 25 errors at short, but gets to 540 balls, he is certainly more valuable than player B, who made 15 errors but got to only 390 balls.

Player A would be significantly more valuable, although B's fielding percentage would be far better than player A.

The next part is a little trickier. There are those players who have a reputation of defensive greatness (Derek Jeter comes to mind, although if you watch him play a lot, you realize that he doesn't even LOOK like he is good out there, other than that one deep-throw-in-the-hole play, which is admittedly awesome looking).

This is why people suggest that Roberto Alomar was a better defender than Ryne Sandberg. He just LOOKS so damn good out there. He may have been better, but most of the metrics don't see players by what we see. This makes no sense if one thinks about it.

Is the man with the prettiest swing necessarily the best hitter? Of course not. Is the man who hit the farthest home run the best home run hitter? Not necessarily.

By the same token, why is the man who makes the prettiest play necessarily the best defensive player? He is not (although it should be noted that perception does often match reality).

When viewing defense, it’s important to pay attention to things like BP's FRAA, John Dewan's +/- numbers, range factor, etc., and to forget about who looks pretty or makes the fewest errors.

The Best 11 Second Basemen of All Time

Ben Feldman — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:20:46 -0500

I was going to move rationally around the diamond in my "greatest ten of all time" series, but I got frustrated with first base, and then with third, so I'll get to those later. For now, I have decided to focus on second.

Just off the top of my head, I will be considering, in no particular order, the following second basemen—accompanied by their career WARP (Wins Above Replacement Player):

Rod Carew (117), Eddie Collins (220), Bobby Doerr (113), Johnny Evers (113), Nellie Fox (95), Bobby Grich (113), Lou Whitaker (112), Bobby Lowe (91), Charlie Gehringer (155), Rogers Hornsby (201), Nap Lajoie (223), Bill Mazeroski(93), Joe Morgan (174), Jackie Robinson (89), Ryne Sandberg (118), Roberto Alomar (111), Craig Biggio (113), and Joe Gordon (84).

Several names immediately jump out as being far and away superior to the rest of the pack. The big pre-war three—Collins, Hornsby, and Lajoie—are all certainly in, as are Joe Morgan, Charlie Gehringer, and Jackie Robinson.

The justification for Robinson (who does in fact have the second lowest WARP of the group) is a no-brainer. Often lost in the shuffle of Jackie's more publicized role in baseball history is this—he was a truly sensational baseball player. Had he been white, Jackie Robinson absolutely, without question, would still have had a Hall of Fame career.

Normally, I don't like to give players credit for things they did not actually do. This is why I do not like to hear: "Tony Oliva would be in the Hall if it weren't for his bad knees, Mattingly would have been the best 1st baseman of the 1980's if it weren't for his bad back..."

This is crap. Oliva did have bad knees, and Mattingly did have a bad back. I imagine there are dozens upon dozens of players who would be in the HOF if it were not for some injury or mishap.

There are two exceptions to this rule that I find reasonable, racism and war. In the case of war, we can use Ted Williams as our example. Williams was the game's best hitter immediately before going to war, and the game's best hitter immediately following his return. It only stands to reason that he was also the game's best hitter in the intervening years, even if he wasn't on the field.

As for race: Jackie Robinson was 28 when he made his major league debut. The average major league quality player reaches their peak somewhere between the ages of 25-29. It is therefore, reasonable to assume that Jackie lost what would have been, at a minimum, two or three peak seasons, as well as several of a near-peak level.

When we imagine Jackie putting up these numbers, it is important to remember that he was, in fact, playing in a high quality league at this time. He put up numbers—just not numbers that we can see.

What follows is a rough imagining of what sort of career line Jackie might have put up, had he reached the majors at 22, when most of our HOF second basemen were already playing regularly.

H-2530, D-485, T-90, HR-244, R-1578, RBI-1223, SB-328, BB-1233 .311/.409/.474/.885

In addition to this, he would have had roughly 147 WARP, placing him in our upper echelon.

Also it seem that we can immediately drop Nellie Fox, Bobby Lowe, and Bill Mazeroski. Joe Gordon has only 84 WARP over his career, but he missed all of '44 and '45 to WWII, and took a full season back to adjust. It is reasonable to suggest that had it not been for war, he would rank much higher, given that he was worth 11.2 WARP in his last full year before duty, and 7.6 in his first full year back. We should expect him to have picked up roughly 24 WARP in the interim, which would give him about 110 for his career.

So, with our excisions, and our inclusions, we have, as definite: Nap, Rogers, Collins, Morgan, Jackie, and Gheringer.

This leaves four spots in the top 10 available for the following players: Joe Gordon, Bobby Doerr, Robbie Alomar, Craig Biggio, Lou Whitaker, Bobby Grich, Ryne Sandberg. Three of these seven must be cut, and that is what we will deal with next.

When looking at these players, what is most striking is how similar in value they all were. Unfortunately, I have to cut Joe Gordon first. With players grouped this tightly, I can't quite give him full credit for the unknown production of the war years.

Next, as much as it pains me, I am going to cut Lou Whitaker. While he amassed excellent career totals, at his best he was not quite as good as the other five players listed alongside of him. His best five-year (not consecutive) WARP production was 41.3. This is fantastic, however, it is not up to par with our other five contestants, whose best five-year WARP are: Alomar (47.8), Biggio (49.6), Ryne (57.3), Doerr (55.6), and Grich (49.2).

One more player has to get cut. This is hard. Too hard, so hard in fact, that I am not going to do it.

How about that!

Now, my top ten: clearly, from these WARP stats, it appears as though the three pre-war players are far and away the best. I am bit leery of this, particularly with Nap, as it was far easier to dominate in the 19th century, and he didn't have to play against black people. Taking that into consideration:

1. Eddie Collins

Even with the aforementioned disclaimer, Collins has to be the best second basemen in baseball history. He's basically Joe Morgan if Joe hit .335 every year. A Gold Glove second baseman who ran fast and with great success, who hit for power (given the era in which he played), was always on base, and played gold-glove defense. I'm sure that if he were transported to the present day, he would be out-conditioned and outplayed by contemporary athletes, but no one dominated the position the way Collins did.

2. Rogers Hornsby

An indifferent defender. He was clearly the greatest offensive threat of all time at the position, and arguably the best right-handed hitter in baseball history.

3. Joe Morgan

Here is where my bias toward more contemporary players comes in. Morgan did not have some of the numbers that Nap put up, but he did it under much more difficult circumstances. It's truly unfortunate that he has a career in journalism, as a potted plant could offer more intelligent analysis, but he was possibly the best baseball player of the 1970s, and certainly the best second basemen of the postwar period. A perfect ballplayer, he and Eddie Collins fit into the small category of players who did literally everything well.

4. Nap Lajoie

Truly mind-blowing stats. Even if he did do much of it before baseball was baseball.

5. Charlie Gehringer

The mechanical man. From 1928-1938, only once was he not worth at least 10 WARP. Unbelievable.

6. Jackie Robinson

See above for details.

7. Ryne Sandberg

Before doing this, I would have thought it would be Craig Biggio in the seventh spot, but Sandberg's superior defense, extra time at second base, higher peak, and lack of a miserable, unwatchable decline phase vaulted him into this position.

8. Bobby Doerr

To some degree his offensive statistics may have been inflated by Fenway, but he still played Gold Glove defense, hit .288/.362/.461/.823, and hit 223 homeruns. All that despite retiring at 33, and missing 1945 to serve in the Second World War. He could rank higher.

9. Craig Biggio

Do you ever think about how inherently racist conceptions of "scrappiness" are? Biggio is remembered for his hustle, his dirty helmet, all that shit…If he had been black, I wonder if his legacy would have been different. Think about all the players in baseball who come to mind when you think "scrappy", are they all white? Biggio was truly fantastic, and the only reasons he doesn't rank higher are the awful last few years, and his time spent in the outfield and behind the plate.

10. Bobby Grich

Easily one of the most frequently snubbed, and undervalued players in the history of the game. Bobby Grich was a truly phenomenal talent, but fell into the category of players who do the wrong things well. He played excellent defense, but because he was more of a slugger at the plate, is not remembered the way lighter-hitting, slicker-fielding, faster runners were. He never hit for a very high average, and played in an era relatively low offensive production, but he walked a tremendous amount, and had a career OBP of .371.

Furthermore, Grich was always overshadowed on his own team. He came up with the Orioles of Brooks and Frank Robinson, Boog Powell, and Jim Palmer—and then went off to the California Angels, who featured Nolan Ryan, Don Baylor, Rod Carew, Fred Lynn, and later Reggie Jackson. But he truly was an all time great, and deserves a place in the Hall of Fame.

11. Roberto Alomar

Fell off a cliff at the age of 34. Had he exhibited even a sub-normal, decline phase, he would easily have cleared 3000 hits, 600 doubles, 500 steals. As is, he is still an all-time great.

Don Mattingly vs. Keith Hernandez: Who was New York City's Best First Baseman?

Ben Feldman — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 05:31:18 -0500

I was about to start on a post about the finest first basemen in the history of baseball.

I had come up with a big list of the potential top ten candidates of the top of my head.

This list had included Don Mattingly, who isn’t really a candidate, but it felt weird not to have him on the first list.

Looking at the numbers, I got to thinking about something. Now Don Mattingly is not often seriously considered as a candidate for the Hall of Fame. It often seems that, even among those who support his candidacy, more wish he was viable than actually think he should be enshrined.

Certainly, at his best, Mattingly was a fantastic baseball player. Unfortunately, his best did not last past the age of 30, and with a peak that short, you have to be Sandy Koufax-good to be considered one of the best ever.

This is not what I was thinking about though. What I was thinking about was Keith Hernandez.

It is hard to understand, given the similarities in their profiles, how Mattingly is near-universally considered the more valuable of the two star New York first basemen of the 1980s.

Both Mattingly and Hernandez were fantastic defensive first basemen. However, while Mattingly was the best, in his prime, in his league—saving a career 31 runs more than the average first baseman—Hernandez was quite probably the best of all time, saving an astounding 211 runs above average.

Both won an MVP award. While Mattingly had the big, 35-home run season, neither was a big power guy for a first sacker, and both players hit a lot of doubles.

Mattingly had a career OPS of .859, Hernandez’s was .820. This difference is much smaller than it seems however, given that OPS does not give fair weight to On Base Percentage. While Mattingly, had more power than Hernandez (SLG of .471 and .436), Keith got on base much more, (.384 to .358).

There is not a question in my mind that, of the two, Keith Hernandez had the more valuable career. This may seem shocking, but look below at their total numbers.

Mattingly:

AB-7003, H-2153, D-443, T-20, HR-222, R-1007, RBI-1099, SB-14, .307/.358/.471/.859

Hernandez:

AB-7370, H-2182, D-426, T-60, HR-162, R-1124, RBI-1071, SB-98, .296/.384/.436/.820

These lines are pretty similar, with perhaps a slight edge to Mattingly, although this advantage disappears when considering Keith’s vastly superior defensive work. However, there is one statistic I have not mentioned: walks.

Don Mattingly drew 588 walks in his career. Hernandez drew 1070. This is an enormous difference. Keith Hernandez (if we include HBP—a fairly insignificant 32 for Keith vs 21 for Don), reached base 522 more times than Mattingly, in only 860 more plate appearances. This creates a massive difference in career value.

In large part due to these 522 extra times on base, and in large part due to the aforementioned difference in defensive performance, Keith Hernandez was—according to Baseball Prospectus—worth 113 wins above replacement player (WARP) in his career, far surpassing Mattingly’s 70.

Obviously, first basemen are not generally judged primarily on their defensive ability. Because first is a traditional source of offense, the importance of a brilliant defensive first-sacker is often ignored. Keith Hernandez was the Ozzie Smith of first baseman, and is quite possibly—judging by the statistical record—deserving of a place in the Hall of Fame.

As a postscript: I am not forgetting the cocaine, the sexism, the fact that Hernandez was known as a clubhouse cancer, that he was run out of town, and so forth. I am not actually promoting his real life place in the HOF (although I am not necessarily opposed to it).

I merely wish to compare the career records of the two men, and show that Hernandez has not received the credit he is due.

The 10 Greatest Catchers in Baseball History, Part 2

Ben Feldman — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:57:16 -0500

OK. We left off with the following as the ten best catchers in baseball history:

Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Buck Ewing, Mike Piazza, Ivan Rodriguez, Bill Dickey, Mickey Cochrane, Gary Carter, Carlton Fisk, and Roy Campanella.

Now to figure out what order they belong in.

Subjectively, I have a feeling it would look something like this: Bench, Berra, Carter, Fisk, Pudge, Dickey, Cochrane, Piazza, Campanella, Ewing.

1. Johnny Bench

Bench is almost certainly the greatest catcher in the history of baseball. His only competition for most dominant defensively at the position is Pudge Rodriguez, who was nowhere near as impressive offensively. The only man who was absolutely a better batter, Mike Piazza, could not hope to approximate his defense.

I cannot imagine anyone would argue with my assertion that Johnny Bench, with his 10 Gold Gloves and MVPs, was the best behind the dish.

2. Yogi Berra

There's really not that much separating Berra, Dickey, Carter and Fisk. I am basically separating them due to factors that don't show up in their career lines. Yogi gets the second spot due to his postseason record, and his part in one of a series of obnoxious Yankees dynasties. As well as his personality.

3. Gary Carter

He's one of the most underrated players in baseball history. It may shock you to learn that his career total of 121 WARP is barely second all-time to Johnny Bench among catchers. He played in the NL during an era dominated more by pitching then by offense, and was, after Bench, the best defensive catcher in his league.

He had five seasons where he was worth at least 10 runs above a replacement player, something no one else in the top 10 was able to do (Bench came in next with four).

4. Carlton Fisk

Superficially, Dickey has shinier numbers and at his very best was probably better than Fisk. Still, Fisk played forever and he did it against black people, so too bad for Bill Dickey.

5. Bill Dickey

6. Ivan Rodriguez

Quite possibly the greatest defensive catcher of all time. Although he has been constantly overrated at bat, due to a shiny batting average and an MVP award he didn't deserve. If he drew 50 walks a year, he would probably already be the greatest in history. As it stands, he only ranks this low because his career is not yet over.

What follows is a projected line, assuming he continues to decline at his current rate, and hangs around in part time duty until he is 40, averaging 350 at bats a year.

H-2905, D-622, T-54, HR-327, R-1441, RBI-1422, SB-119 .299/.338/.474/.812

All this with a projected career WARP total of 117. This would probably put him at least at number three. He may end up higher if he plays more (a distinct possibility).

7. Mike Piazza

As good as he is at the plate, that's how bad he is behind it. If he played even league-average defense, he would unquestionably be the greatest catcher in baseball history.

8. Roy Campanella

9. Mickey Cochrane

Mickey retired at the age of 34. Had he played until the age of 38, he would probably be ranked above Gary Carter. He was as good as anyone when he played, he just didn't do it for long enough.

10. Buck Ewing

The last man to make the cut.

The Ten Greatest Catchers in Baseball History

Ben Feldman — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:34:14 -0500

I'm starting a new series, best all time at each position, we are going to begin with catcher.

Because I do not have numbers available, I am going to leave out Negro League Players for now. I do not ignore their accomplishments, I do not doubt, for example, that Josh Gibson was the greatest catcher in baseball history.

However, because I cannot quanitfy their performances, I am not able to properly consider them here.

It is a shame, and it is regrettable, but please do not think I don't value their careers.

Catchers: I am going to start witht he following pool, if you feel I am neglecting someone, feel free to disagree, it isn't because I hate them, I'm just forgetful, that's all.

Okay: in no particular order, Mickey Chochrane, Bill Dickey, Yogi Berra, Johnny Bench, Gary Carter, Mike Piazza, Ivan Rodriguez, Ted Simmons, Jorge Posada, Roger Bresnahan, Roy Campanella, Ernie Lombardi, Wally Schang, Bill Freehan, Lance Parrish, Ernie Lombardi, Thurmon Munson, Carlton Fisk, Gabby Hartnett, Buck Ewing, Bob Boone, Jim Sundberg.

It should be noted that I am not considering anyone who has not put in at least 5 major league seasons; Joe Mauer for example, is obviously, is not a candidate under this restriction.

Rather than starting by trimming out the weaker links, I am going to move ahead to the players who are absolutely among the best all time at the position, and then see how many spots we have left.

Definately in top TEN (with WARP- Wins Above Replacement Player in parentheses): Bill Dickey (104), Johnny Bench (123), Yogi Berra (111), Gary Carter (121), Carlton Fisk (107), Ivan Rodriguez (106), and Mike Piazza (94)

Ok, that makes things a little simpler. That's 8 who seem certainly fit for top 10 status. By the way, even after his induction into the HOF, Gary Carter gets no respect.

This leaves us with two spots, and a field of: Simmons, Posada, Bresnahan, Campanella, Lombardi, Schang, Freehan, Parrish, Lombardi, Munson, Hartnett, Ewing, Boone, and Sundberg.

Here are their career WARP, courtesy of Baseball Prospectus:

Simmons (96), Posada (68), Bresnahan (75), Campanella (64), Lombardi (64), Schang (79), Freehan (76), Parrish (79), Munson (72), Hartnett (105), Ewing (99), Boone (68), Sundberg (66).

Again, that makes things easier, we can look at this and see that Hartnett, Simmons, and Ewing stand out far above the competition. Everyone else is out, with one exception. Roy Campanella's numbers were severely depressed by losing what could have been his first 4-6 seasons to racism.

Campanella did not reach the majors until he was 26, even then (1948), only arriving in time to play half of a season. Below, is his career batting line.

AB-4205, H-1161, D-178, T-18, HR-242, R-627, RBI-826, BB-533, 276/360/500/860

He also lost 3 years of "stat-padding" at the end of his career to a car accident.

Had he reached the majors when he was ready-let's say at...22, he would have almost certainly totalled an extra 1800 at bats. If this was the case, he would have the following career line.

AB-6005, H-1660, D-255, T-24, HR-346, R-897, RBI-1223, BB-763

Looking much better. Now if we give him credit for three stat padding, end of career type seasons (this still assumes that he is done before the age of 39).

AB-6905, H-1900, D-276, T-25, HR-385, R-986, RBI-1376, BB-822

We would also see his WARP change from the above 64 to a much more robust 100. Coupling this, with his three MVP awards, role on the Brooklyn Dodgers, part in integration, and excellent defense, there is no question that he belongs in the top ten.

Simmons, as good as he was, was a fairly indifferent defensive player. Beyond that, he played 447 games at DH, OF, 1B and 3B (none of them well), I am removing him from top ten consideration.

This leaves us with Buck Ewing and Gabby Hartnett for the final spots. Both played games of baseball far different from one another, and even more different from the game of today. BaseballProspectus has translated batting lines, providing a guess at what a player would have produced, playing in an environment resembling the baseball of the past few years, here I have each players "adjusted" career batting line.

Hartnett:

6461 1776  313    2  455  809  46 1311   21    8  4790  898 1181 .275 .360 .535

Ewing:

6831 2032  407  120  344  620  10  671  221  119  4923 1159 1061 .297 .357 .543

Pretty tough to choose, especially given that both had excellent defensive reputations. I suppose the only way to go is Ewing. Given that he produced his totals in 400 more at bats.

There it is, the top ten catchers of all time: Pudge Rodriguez, Carlton Fisk, Mike Piazza, Mickey Cochrane,Gary Carter, Bill Dickey, Buck Ewing, Roy Campanella, Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra. So that's the top ten, next up, putting them in order.

MLB Shortstops: Who Would You Build a Team Around?

Ben Feldman — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:50:16 -0500

So ESPN is doing a sort of "Vs." series. Topics like which right handed starter would you most like to start for your team, which player is better: Pujols or A-Rod, etc.

At the same time, Rob Neyer is writing blog posts on the top ten players at each position for the next five years. Today, ESPN asked the question, which shortstop under 25 would you most like to start a team with: Troy Tulowitzki or Hanley Ramirez?

Let's bring the discussion to bleacherreport, but open it up a little bit. The obvious problem with ESPN's question is the possibility that you would choose someone like Jose Reyes or Jimmy Rollins.

So let's go for the next five years and ask, which shortstop would you most like to have starting for your team? Thanks to Rob Neyer for the idea. I imagine I won't be stealing much of his thunder, as his readership may exceed my own.

Again, we are talking about choosing a shortstop for the next 5 years. This means that someone like, say, Derek Jeter, is probably not part of the discussion, as he is a bit long in the tooth relative to these younger shortstop stars.

Also, I am not including hot prospects. As incredible as projections for Jay Bruce might be, and while many teams probably would pick him as their centerfielder for the next five years, I am only looking at players with some MLB experience.

It is probably fairly uncontroversial to suggest that the most appealing 5 shortstops in baseball for the next five years are, in no particular order: Hanley Ramirez, Jimmy Rollins, Troy Tulowitzki, Jose Reyes, and Rafael Furcal.

Beneath are each of the players lines from 2007, along with their 162 game averages, (thanks BaseballReference.com).

Hanley Ramirez:

2007 23 FLA NL 154 639 125 212 48 6 29 81 51 14 52 95 .332 .386 .562 145 359

162 Game Avg        657  126  205  48  9  24   72  53 15  56 116  .312  .369  .520  130  342

Jose Reyes:

2007 24 NYM NL 160  681  119  191  36 12  12   57  78 21  77  78  .280  .354  .421  103  287

162 Game Avg          684  114  194  32 14  12   66  64 16  48  83  .284  .330  .426   97  291

Jimmy Rollins:

2007 28 PHI NL 162  716  139  212  38 20  30   94  41  6  49  85  .296  .344  .531  118  380

162 Game Avg         685  112  190  39 12  17   71  36  8  54  93  .277  .331  .441   98  302

Troy Tulowitzki:

2007 22 COL NL 155  609  104  177  33  5  24   99   7  6  57 130  .291  .359  .479  108  292

Rafael Furcal:

007 29 LAD NL 138  581   87  157  23  4   6   47  25  6  55  68  .270  .333  .355   76  206

162 Game Avg        653  110  186  31  7  11   58  37 10  65  93  .284  .349  .407   94  266

I think we can all agree right off the top that Rafael Furcal is not quite up to par with the others. His poor performance in 2007 has taken much of the luster off of his career, but if you disagree with me, feel free to say so.

That leaves us with Tulowitzki, Rollins, Reyes, and Ramirez. Rollins, as good as he has been, is not in any way demonstrably better (MVP notwithstanding). He is also significantly older than the other four and presumably already at his peak.

I say take him out of the discussion.

We are left now with the youngest ones: Tulowitzki, Reyes, and Hanley Ramirez. Hanley is, by far, the best hitter of the three, and Tulowitzki is the best defender.

Tulowitzki's offense is superficially inflated by starting 81 games in Coors, but his bat is still a positive asset at the position. Troy's 2007 season was an astonishing one on defense.

However, given that it was only one full season, I would like to see a little more before believing that he can maintain this level of defensive play.

Hanley Ramirez is a brutal defensive shortstop, and much like Derek Jeter, should probably be moved to centerfield as soon as possible. Nevertheless, his bat is so far ahead of the other two that I am inclined to take him for the next five seasons.

As a side note, if Hanley Ramirez was even an adequate defensive shortstop, he would have certainly deserved the league's MVP.

So that's that, I'm going with Hanley. As exciting as Jose Reyes is, his extra steals do not come close to compensating for Hanley Ramirez's power.

Eric Davis: What Could Have Been

Ben Feldman — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:11:26 -0500

All this talk about the Hall of Fame has me thinking about the number of players who, for a variety of reasons (war, injury, racism, etc.) were denied what could have been hall of fame careers. Perhaps chief among these, is one of the most extraordinarily talented men to ever play the game: Eric Davis.

In his career over parts of 17 years, Davis was felled by a variety of bizarre and chronic ailments. He never exceeded 135 games played or 472 at bats, only surpassing 400 at bats 8 times.

I have taken his career batting statistics and pasted them below (thanks to Baseball Prospectus).

AGE YEAR TEAM    G     AB    H  2B  3B  HR    R  RBI   SB   CS   SO   BB  HBP   SH   SF  IBB  GDP   BA   OBA    SLG
 22 1984 CIN-N   57   174   39  10   1  10   33   30   10    2   48   24    1    0    1    0    1  .224  .320  .466
 23 1985 CIN-N   56   122   30   3   3   8   26   18   16    3   39    7    0    2    0    0    1  .246  .287  .516
 24 1986 CIN-N  132   415  115  15   3  27   97   71   80   11  100   68    1    0    3    5    6  .277  .378  .523
 25 1987 CIN-N  129   474  139  23   4  37  120  100   50    6  134   84    1    0    3    8    6  .293  .399  .593
 26 1988 CIN-N  135   472  129  18   3  26   81   93   35    3  124   65    3    0    3   10   11  .273  .363  .489
 27 1989 CIN-N  131   462  130  14   2  34   74  101   21    7  116   68    1    0   11   12   16  .281  .367  .541
 28 1990 CIN-N  127   453  118  26   2  24   84   86   21    3  100   60    2    0    3    6    7  .260  .347  .486
 29 1991 CIN-N   89   285   67  10   0  11   39   33   14    2   92   48    5    0    2    5    4  .235  .353  .386
 30 1992 LA_-N   76   267   61   8   1   5   21   32   19    1   71   36    3    0    2    2    9  .228  .325  .322
 31 1993 LA_-N  108   376   88  17   0  14   57   53   33    5   88   41    1    0    4    6    8  .234  .308  .391
 31 1993 DET-A   23    75   19   1   1   6   14   15    2    2   18   14    0    0    0    1    4  .253  .371  .533
 32 1994 DET-A   37   120   22   4   0   3   19   13    5    0   45   18    0    0    0    0    4  .183  .290  .292
 34 1996 CIN-N  129   415  119  20   0  26   81   83   23    9  121   70    6    1    4    3    8  .287  .394  .523
 35 1997 BAL-A   42   158   48  11   0   8   29   25    6    0   47   14    1    0    3    0    2  .304  .358  .525
 36 1998 BAL-A  131   452  148  29   1  28   81   89    7    6  108   44    5    0    7    0   13  .327  .388  .582
 37 1999 STL-N   58   191   49   9   2   5   27   30    5    4   49   30    1    0    1    1    1  .257  .359  .403
 38 2000 STL-N   92   254   77  14   0   6   38   40    1    1   60   36    1    0    2    0    7  .303  .389  .429
 39 2001 SF_-N   74   156   32   7   3   4   17   22    1    1   38   13    1    0    1    0    4  .205  .269  .365
 
               1626  5321 1430 239  26 282  938  934  349   66 1398  740   33    3   50   59  112  .269  .359  .482

In 1986, Davis hit 27 home runs and stole 80 bases. The following season, in only 472 at bats (an eventual career high), he hit 37 home runs and stole 50 bases. He was 25 years old. At that point in his career, quite possibly the most exciting blend of speed and power in the history of baseball. Unfortunately, as stated above, injuries took a heavy toll; after the age of 28, Davis only exceeded 400 at bats 3 times, including years of 156, 158, 191, 267, and 285.

Let's assume, because it is fun to do so, that Davis was not quite so severe injury plagued. We do not need to go overboard, but let's pretend he had averaged...485 at bats a season, and had not taken the year off for temporary retirement in '95. What would his career look like? Below, is his career line, adjusted to an average of 485 at bats over 15 years (I have kept his AB's in '84 and '85 low, as he received limited playing time due to youth, rather than injury).

H-2019, D-339, T-40, HR-403, R-1279, RBI-1254, SB-502, K-1906, BB-1009

Imagine now Davis was perfectly healthy, averaging a robust 519 at bats. What would his career look like then?

H-2162, D-363, T-42, HR-431, R-1432, RBI- 1406, SB-537, K-2132, BB-1114

Given that his peak was in the relatively low-scoring period of 1984-1990, and that he was, before his injuries, a phenomenal defensive outfielder, it is not hard to imagine him in the Hall of Fame today. This is especially the case since his numbers were depressed beyond just his total at bats, and had he not sufferred from...let's say...Colon Cancer for example, his stats would probably have been higher as well.

According to BaseballProspectus.com, Davis, even in this aborted career, was worth roughly 70 Wins Above Replacement Player (WARP). Had he averaged 519 at bats per season, this number would be a much more impressive 107. With a few notable and controversial exceptions, every player above 100 WARP in their career is in the Hall of Fame (Jim Rice, for example, has 72...he has no business getting 72 percent of the vote).

Again, just for fun, I am going to use BaseballReference.com, translate Davis's career totals into a environment, and then adjust for a healthy career. Had he played his career in a 750-run p/team environment, he would have the following career numbers:

H-2250, D-377, T-42, HR-453, R-1508, RBI-1470, K-2160, BB-1160

with a rate line of .274/.365/.493/.858

He may not have been overwhelming candidate, but he certainly seems more appealing than Rice, or Dawson. None of this really means anything, but it would have been really great to see what a healthy Eric Davis could have done.

My Streamlined Baseball Hall of Fame

Ben Feldman — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:39:42 -0500

Here are my picks for the Baseball Hall of Fame.

I didn't spent that much time on this, so don't get too riled up. If you disagree with someone, point it out and tell me why. I may agree with you, I may disagree, but it can be open to debate without telling me I am insane or hate your favorite player or team or something.

Also, I didn't look up too many people who are already outside and deserve to be in—Trammel, Wes Ferrel maybe, etc. Also, remember that I am trying to redifine the criteria. Someone may be in relative to the current HOF, but not to a streamlined one.

Aaron, Hank

Alexander, Grover

Anson, Cap

Appling, Luke

Ashburn, Richie

Bake, Frank

Bancroft, Dave

Banks, Ernie

Beckeley, Jake

Bell, Cool Papa

Bench, Johnny

Berra, Yogi

Blylevan, Bert

Boggs, Wade

Boudreau, Lou

Brett, George

Brouthers, Dan

Brown, Mordecai

Brown, Ray

Brown, Willard

Burket, Jesse

Campanella, Roy

Carew, Rod

Carey, Max

Carlton, Steve

Carter, Gary

Chance, Frank (including managerial duties)

Charleston, Oscar

Clarke, Fred

Clarkson, John

Clemente, Roberto

Cobb, Ty

Cochrane, Mickey

Collins, Jimmy

Collins, Eddie

Connor, Roger

Cooper, Andy

Crawford, Sam

Cronin, Joe

Dandridge, Ray

Davis, George

Day, Leon

Delahanty, Ed

Dimaggio, Joe

Dickey, Bill

Dihigo, Martin

Doby, Larry

Doerr, Bobby

Duffy, Hugh

Eckersley, Dennis

Evers, Johnny

Ewing, Buck

Feller, Bob

Fisk, Carlton

Ford, Whitey

Foster, Bill

Foxx, Jimmie

Frisch, Frankie

Gherig, Lou

Gheringer, Charlie

Gibson, Bob

Gibson, Josh

Goslin, Goose

Grant, Frank

Greenberg, Hank

Grove, Lefty

Gwynn, Tony

Hamilton, Billy

Hartnett, Gabby,

Heilman, Harry

Herman, Billy

Hill, Pete

Hornsby, Rogers

Hubbell, Carl

Irvin, Monte

Jackson, Reggie

Jenkins, Fergie

Jennings, Hughie

Johnson, Judy

Johnson, Walter

Kaline, Al

Keefe, Tim

Keeler, Willie

Kelley, Joe

Killebrew, Harmon

Kelly, King

Koufax, Sandy

Lajoie, Nap

Lazeri, Tony

Lemon, Bob

Leonard, Buck

Lloyd, Pop

Lyons, Ted

Mackay, Biz

Mantle, Mickey

Marichal, Juan

Matthews, Eddie

Matthewson, Christy

Mays, Willie

McCovey, Willie

Mcphee, Bid

Mendez, Jose

Mize, Johnny

Molitor, Paul

Morgan, Joe

Murray, Eddie

Musial, Stan

Newhouser, Hal

Nichols, Kid

Niekro, Phil

O'Rourke, Jim

Ott, Mel

Paige, Satchel

Palmer, Jim

Perry, Gaylord

Plank, Eddie

Rice, Sam

Ripken, Cal

Roberts, Robin

Robinson, Brooks

Robinson, Frank

Robinson, Jackie

Rogan, Bullet

Rusie, Amos

Ruth, Babe

Ryan, Nolan

Sandberg, Ryne

Santop, Luis

Schmidt, Mike

Seaver, Tom

Sewell, Joe

Simmons, Al

Smith, Hilton

Smith, Ozzie

Snider, Duke

Spahn, Warren

Speaker, Tris

Stargell, Willie

Stearns, Turkey

Suttles, Mule

Sutton, Don

Taylor, Ben

Tinker, Joe

Torriente, Cristobal

Vance, Dazzy

Vaughan, Arky

Wagner, Honus

Wallace, Bobby

Waner, Paul

Walsh, Ed

Ward, John

Wellis, Willie

Wheat, Zack

Wilhelm, Hoyt

Williams, Billy

Williams, Joe

Williams, Ted

Wilson, Jud

Winfield, Dave

Wynn, Early

Yastrzemski, Carl

Young, Cy

Yount, Robin

Maybes and Nos

(Not necessarily unworthy, just not automatics like the above—they should all get in line behind Ron Santo and Bert Blyleven)

Averill Earl

Luis Aparicio

Bresnahan, Roger

Brock, Lou

Bender, Chief

Bottomley, Sunny Jim

Bunning, Jim

Brock, Lou

Cepeda, Orlando

Chesbro, Jack

Combs, Earle

Coveleski, Stan

Cuyler, Kiki

Dean, Dizzy

Drysdale, Don

Faber, Red

Ferrel, Rick

Fingers, Rollie

Flick, Elmer

Fox, Nellie

Galvin, Pud

Gomez, Lefty

Grimes, Burleigh

Hafey, Chick

Haines, Jesse

Hooper, Harry

Hoyt, Waite

Hunter, Catfish

Jackson, Travis

Joss, Addie

Kelly, George

Kell, George

Kiner, Ralph

Klein, Chuck

Lindstrom, Freddie

Lombardi, Ernie

Manush, Heinie

Maranville, Rabbit (really not sure about Rabbit)

Marquad, Rube

Mazeroski, Bill (having alot of trouble with Maz too)

Mccarthy, Tommy

Mcginnity, Joe

Medwick, Ducky

Pennock, Herb

Perez, Tony

Puckett, Kirby

Reese, Pee Wee

Radbourne, Charley

Rixey, Eppa

Rizzuto, Phil

Roush, Ed

Ruffing, Red

Schalk, Ray

Schoendienst, Red

Sisler, George

Slaughter, Enos

Sutter, Bruce

Terry, Bill

Thompson, Sam

Traynor, Pie

Waddel, Rube

Waner, LLoyd

Welch, Mickey

Willis, Vic

Wilson, Hack

Youngs, Ross

I'm not getting involved with:

Mark Mcgwire

Pete Rose

Joe Jackson

Jim Rice: The Final Word

Ben Feldman — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 05:12:40 -0500

The Jim Rice for HOF debate rages on, with the Neyers, Laws and Posnanskis of the world calmly stating their cases against, and the Peter Gammons's of the world refuting them by telling them they don't understand baseball because they haven't spent enough time cleaning tobacco juice and sunflower seeds out of their cleats. Jim Rice is not a hall of famer, that much seems fairly clear to me. However I am less concerned with building an argument against his enshrinement, than I am in refuting the arguments laid out by his supporters. As an aside, please not that I am NOT a Yankees fan or a Red Sox fan, I have no personal vendetta against Rice, I do not have a favorite player I want in, etc. I only want the issue to be treated with some logic and some reason.

"He was the most feared hitter of his day"

Obviously, this statement cannot be proved or disproved, which is one of the reasons it is so useful in convincing would-be voters and supporters. If indeed he was the most feared hitter of his day, one would imagine it would be somehow reflected in his IBB totals, which it is not, as his been written about time and again. What has not been discussed is, maybe he was the most feared hitter of his day...so what? Was Albert Belle the most feared hitter of his day? Very possibly. Jim Rice may have been the most scary plate presence from 1975-1987. However, just because people were scared of him, does not make them right. They may have misunderstood the statistics in the same way that the current voters do. Second, being feared for a decade doesn't necessarily make you a hall of famer if you are an indifferent defensive outfielder who doesn't walk and hits into too many double plays. I feel like I can think of many teams where the scariest player wasn't the best. The 1995 Mariners, Jay Buhner was scarier to me than Ken Griffey Jr. but he was not as good. This is just so silly, and so clearly an argument used due to a lack of legitimate ones.

1975-1987

Yes, he led the league in a number of offensive categories during this time. Runs, RBI, Hits, SLG, Total Bases. You can pick 10-12 year periods to prove a lot of things. Mark Grace led all of baseball in hits in the 90's, would anyone suggest that he was the best player in the 90's at getting hits? Of course not, he was one of the few players whose career worked out in such a way that he was a regular in 1990 and in 1999. Rice's 12 year period automatically excludes someone who played from..1969-1984, 1979-1992, etc. If you were to choose different 12 year periods overlapping Rice's career, you could make similar arguments for many other players.

Hits- Being first in hits does not matter to me. What about times on base? Rice was healthy a lot (which is an important skill), hit for a high average in a good hitters park, and rarely walked. Juan Pierre is routinely at the top of the standing in hits. He would have been far more valuable if he had replaced 15 of those hits a year with 40 walks, (come to think of, he would have been Dewey Evans).

RBI- This statistic is largely a result of lineup structure and what team you play for. Clearly it is not a consistent. If Rice had batted 8th for San Diego during this period, I very much doubt he would have been in the top 50. He batted in the middle of the lineup of the team with the best offense of this period. We should EXPECT him to lead the league in RBI.

Leading the league in SLG and total bases ARE impressive, they just don't make him a hall of famer.

My argument is not so much against Rice, as it is for other players. Ron Santo, Tim Raines, Blyleven, Alan Trammel, who are CLEARLY more deserving than Rice. And for the many, MANY players (Belle, Dwight Evans, George Foster, Dale Murphy, Bobby Grich, Fred Lynn, etc.,etc.) who seem just as deserving.