Bleacher Report - Articles by Michael W

History Unblurred: The 10 Best Starting Pitchers from the 1990s

Michael W — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 09:55:24 -0500

I recently wrote an article on the 10 best Starting Pitchers from the first decade of the 2000s. I thought it would be a good idea to write the same type of article on the 10 best from the last decade of the 1900s.

A minimum of 200 games is required to be considered for this list.

There were 84 starting pitchers from the 1990s that reached at least 200 games. That is more than any other decade in the history of Major League Baseball, other than the 1970s, 1980s and 2000s.

If a player does not appear on this list of 84, then they either didn’t reach 200 games or I consider them a starting pitcher from the 1980s or 2000s. The 1980s will be covered in a separate article and I just wrote my 2000s article, not long ago. Starting pitchers will only be in one decade. For example, Roger Clemens will appear in my 1990s article.

So, he did not appear in my 2000s article and he will NOT appear in my 1980s article, which I will write later.

An Explanation of the Stats

The statistics that I include will be Games Pitched, Games Started, Innings Pitched, ERA, ERA+, W%+, H/9 (OBA), WHIP (OOB%), SHO/40 (per 40 Games Started) and K/BB (ratio). I will also letter grade their length of career.

First, I will include their raw career numbers. These are simply their career numbers.

Second, I will include their adjusted career numbers, if they had a long career (which most have). Adjusted career is this: Let’s take Greg Maddux for example. Maddux had a long career. So in order to find his real numbers, I have to exclude some late seasons during his career to find the numbers that he really carried during his career, since he pitched past his prime.

With Maddux, I’d exclude his last six seasons. That is his adjusted career. Again, this can only be done with long career players. If I don’t list an adjusted career under a player’s raw career numbers, then it means they didn’t play long enough to adjust for their long career or it means they didn’t have any bad seasons.

Third, I will include peak career numbers. Many like short peaks; not me. I include the best seasons equaling at least 200 games for a peak. It takes away the possibility of a pitcher having one or two lucky seasons. The 200-game peak will let us how good the pitcher was at his best.

Note: W%+ is a statistic that I have invented. It takes the teams W% into account. It is very complicated as different weights go more or less on seasons depending on how many Games and Innings Pitched a Pitcher Pitched during a single season. Having said that, here’s the simple version.

If a starting pitcher has a career .500 W% during the 2000s and that pitcher pitched for the Yankees. Well, .500 is not good. But, if that pitcher pitched for the Royals, then .500 is good. This is the reasoning behind W%+. It is to W% what ERA is to ERA+. It’s not full proof, but either is ERA+, just another piece of the puzzle and far, far more important than raw W%. OK.

The 84 Starting Pitchers

Here are the 84 Starting Pitchers from the 1990s that reached at least 200 games (listed in alphabetical order): Jim Abbott, Wilson Alvarez, Brian Anderson, Kevin Appier, Andy Ashby, Pedro Astacio, Steve Avery, Tim Belcher, Andy Benes, Jason Bere, Mike Bielecki, Brian Bohanon, Chris Bosio, Shawn Boskie, Kevin Brown, Tom Browning, John Burkett, Tom Candiotti, Frank Castillo, Mark Clark, Roger Clemens, David Cone, Jim Deshaies, Kelly Downs, Doug Drabek, Cal Eldred, Scott Erickson, Alex Fernandez, Sid Fernandez, Chuck Finley, Mark Gardner, Tom Glavine, Doc Gooden, Mark Gubicza, Kevin Gross, Juan Guzman, Joey Hamilton, Erik Hanson, Pete Harnisch, Pat Hentgen, Orel Hershiser, Teddy Higuera, Ken Hill, Sterling Hitchcock, Danny Jackson, Bobby Jones, Scott Kamieniecki, Jimmy Key, Darryl Kile, Mark Langston, Al Leiter, Greg Maddux, Ramon Martinez, Kirk McCaskill, Ben McDonald, Jack McDowell, Dave Mlicki, Charles Nagy, Jamie Navarro, Denny Neagle, Omar Olivares, Melido Perez, Robert Person, Mark Portugal, Pat Rapp, Rick Reed, Shane Reynolds, Jose Rijo, Kenny Rogers, Kirk Rueter, Bret Saberhagen, Curt Schilling, Pete Schourek, John Smiley, Pete Smith, Zane Smith, Todd Stottlemyre, Bill Swift, Kevin Tapani, Bob Tewksbury, Allen Watson, Bill Wegman, David Wells and Bobby Witt.

The Honorable Mentions

Here are the 10 Starting Pitchers that just missed the top 10 for various reasons. I will list them in alphabetical order: Kevin Appier, Tom Candiotti, Doug Drabek, Sid Fernandez, Chuck Finley, Doc Gooden, Jimmy Key, Mark Langston, Al Leiter and David Wells.

The Top 10

10. Kenny Rogers (1989-2008) Career Length Grade: A

Raw Career: 762 G, 474 GS, 3,302.2 IP, 4.27 ERA, 108 ERA+, 114 W%+, 9.4 H/9, 1.40 WHIP, 0.8 SHO/40 and 1.7 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 681 G, 402 GS, 2,863.1 IP, 4.04 ERA, 114 ERA+, 118 W%+, 9.2 H/9, 1.37 WHIP, 0.9 SHO/40 and 1.8 K/BB (exclude his 1997, 2001 and 2008 seasons)

Peak Career: 237 G, 98 GS, 813.1 IP, 3.26 ERA, 138 ERA+, 130 W%+, 8.5 H/9, 1.29 WHIP, 1.2 SHO/40 and 1.8 K/BB (include his 1989, 1990, 1995, 1998 and 2005 seasons)

Rogers had a large arsenal of pitches. He threw three or four different types of fastballs which all had very good movement. Sinking fastballs, cutters, two seam fastballs, etc...his fastball arsenal was impressive by itself. But he also threw an extremely good curveball and change-up.

The 10th spot was tough to choose because there are some on the HM list that were really higher caliber pitchers than Rogers, but the difference is merely academic. Rogers gets the nod over these pitchers, in large part, because of his long career. He was extremely good and he pitched forever.

9. Jose Rijo (1984-2002) Career Length Grade: D

Raw Career: 376 G, 269 GS, 1,880 IP, 3.24 ERA, 121 ERA+, 112 W%+, 8.2 H/9, 1.26 WHIP, 0.6 SHO/40 and 2.4 K/BB

Peak Career: 216 G, 173 GS, 1,221 IP, 2.60 ERA, 150 ERA+, 125 W%+, 7.6 H/9, 1.15 WHIP, 0.7 SHO/40 and 2.9 K/BB (include his 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 2001 seasons)

Rijo has the shortest career of any pitcher in my top 10, as he’s a “D” in the length of career category. He was basically injured from the time he fell out of the nest and played injured until the end of his career. The injuries were the main reason his career was shorter than it should have been.

I can only begin to imagine the numbers he would have put up if he had been healthy. The fact is, he put up incredibly good numbers, hurt. Some don’t, but many forget, that Rijo was arguably the best starting pitcher in Major League Baseball during the first five seasons of the 1990s...period.

He started pitching in MLB as a high-school aged 18 year old in 1984. He pitched OK, but really learned how to pitch during his first three or four seasons in the league.

In 1988, he was traded to Cincinnati and pitched the rest of his career for the Reds. He was a dominant pitcher by the time he reached the Reds and really remained so for the rest of his career, injury plagued as it was.

His numbers are great, his peak career and raw career. It’s why he’s in the top 10, even with his “D” length of career.

8. Orel Hershiser (1983-2000) Career Length Grade: C+

Raw Career: 510 G, 466 GS, 3,130.1 IP, 3.48 ERA, 112 ERA+, 108 W%+, 8.4 H/9, 1.26 WHIP, 2.1 SHO/40 and 2.0 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 434 G, 394 GS, 2,724.2 IP, 3.25 ERA, 118 ERA+, 113 W%+, 8.3 H/9, 1.23 WHIP, 2.5 SHO/40 and 2.2 K/BB (exclude his last 3 seasons)

Peak Career: 214 G, 182 GS, 1,385 IP, 2.63 ERA, 140 ERA+, 118 W%+, 7.6 H/9, 1.13 WHIP, 5.0 SHO/40 and 2.5 K/BB (include his 1984, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989 and 1995 seasons)

Hershiser was a dominant pitcher during the first half of his career and a good pitcher during the second half of his career. Check out his peak, a 2.63 ERA and 5.0 SHO/40. Those are dominant numbers.

I enjoy watching Hershiser commentate games. He brings fun and intelligence to the booth, just like he brought those things to the pitching mound when he played. I’ve always thought there was a parallel to Hershiser and Buddy Holly, as Holly brought some intelligence and intellect to 1950s music. Hershiser was a thinking pitcher and made it a habit to outthink his opponents. He was the real deal.

He’s arguably one of the 20 best starting pitchers in the history of MLB that is not in the HOF.

7. Bret Saberhagen (1984-2001) Career Length Grade: C-

Raw Career: 399 G, 371 GS, 2,562.2 IP, 3.34 ERA, 126 ERA+, 116 W%+, 8.6 H/9, 1.14 WHIP, 1.7 SHO/40 and 3.6 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 396 G, 368 GS, 2,547.2 IP, 3.33 ERA, 126 ERA+, 117 W%+, 8.6 H/9, 1.14 WHIP, 1.7 SHO/40 and 3.6 K/BB (exclude his last season)

Peak Career: 225 G, 224 GS, 1,561.2 IP, 3.01 ERA, 143 ERA+, 132 W%+, 8.3 H/9, 1.08 WHIP, 2.1 SHO/40 and 4.3 K/BB (include his 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1998 and 1999 seasons)

Saberhagen started pitching as a teenager for the Kansas City Royals in 1984, and he actually pitched well during his first season. He basically never let up, had a great career.

He was plagued by injuries during his career, but not before he won the Cy Young award two times. He was a Hall of Fame caliber pitcher with a “C-“ length of career, largely due to those injuries.

Even with his injury plagued short career, he’s arguably one of the 20 best starting pitchers in the history of MLB that is not in the HOF.

6. David Cone (1986-2003) Career Length Grade: C+

Raw Career: 450 G, 419 GS, 2,898.2 IP, 3.46 ERA, 120 ERA+, 110 W%+, 7.8 H/9, 1.26 WHIP, 2.1 SHO/40 and 2.4 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 390 G, 361 GS, 2,590 IP, 3.19 ERA, 129 ERA+, 115 W%+, 7.5 H/9, 1.21 WHIP, 2.4 SHO/40 and 2.5 K/BB (exclude his last 3 seasons)

Peak Career: 228 G, 220 GS, 1,596.1 IP, 3.01 ERA, 144 ERA+, 119 W%+, 7.2 H/9, 1.21 WHIP, 2.9 SHO/40 and 2.2 K/BB (include his 1988, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1999 seasons)

Cone had a great fastball, slider and splitter. His pitch arsenal and competitive will were unbelievable.

“David Cone had one of the best repertoires I’ve ever seen a pitcher possess. He had phenomenal natural stuff. He never looked like a classic power pitcher, he wasn’t a big guy, but he had a mid-90s fastball with about 8 different arm angles. He threw a Frisbee slider that started out behind right handed hitters, yet he could paint the outside corner with it.”---Tom Candiotti, Respected Starting Pitcher from the 1990s

Cone was finally eligible for the HOF last year. It’s amazing how few votes he got. He didn’t get the respect of the voters that he deserved. The fact is, he’s easily one of the 20 best starting pitchers in the history of MLB that is not in the HOF. This guy was really an Ace, really had Ace numbers, but didn’t get Ace respect by the voters.

5. Tom Glavine (1987-2008) Career Length Grade: A

Raw Career: 682 G, 682 GS, 4,413.1 IP, 3.54 ERA, 118 ERA+, 111 W%+, 8.8 H/9, 1.31 WHIP, 1.5 SHO/40 and 1.7 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 603 G, 603 GS, 3,965.4 IP, 3.51 ERA, 122 ERA+, 111 W%+, 8.6 H/9, 1.30 WHIP, 1.6 SHO/40 and 1.8 K/BB (exclude his 2003, 2007 and 2008 seasons)

Peak Career: 201 G, 201 GS, 1,374.2 IP, 2.83 ERA, 147 ERA+, 108 W%+, 7.9 H/9, 1.21 WHIP, 1.6 SHO/40 and 2.1 K/BB (include his 1991, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 2002 seasons)

Glavine is easily one of the 20 best Left Handed starting pitchers in the history of MLB. With his long career, he’ll get into the HOF, probably first ballot. He won the Cy Young award two times.

He helped lead his Atlanta Braves to the playoffs in 11 of 12 seasons between 1991 to 2002. That’s incredible. What a rotation, he had Greg Maddux and John Smoltz as teammates for most of those seasons.

He always looked good, but not great. He often appeared that way because he wasn’t usually overpowering. He didn’t appear to be great, but he was. Didn’t appear to be great until the game was over...and you lost 4-1. That’s what Glavine did. What a pitcher.

4. Curt Schilling (1988-2007) Career Length Grade: B+

Raw Career: 569 G, 436 GS, 3,261 IP, 3.46 ERA, 127 ERA+, 118 W%+, 8.3 H/9, 1.14 WHIP, 1.8 SHO/40 and 4.4 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 537 G, 425 G, 3.167.2 IP, 3.39 ERA, 130 ERA+, 120 W%+, 8.2 H/9, 1.12 WHIP, 1.9 SHO/40 and 4.4 K/BB (exclude his 2005 season)

Peak Career: 203 G, 152 GS, 1,176.6 IP, 2.89 ERA, 151 ERA+, 129 W%+, 7.7 H/9, 1.05 WHIP, 2.4 SHO/40 and 5.4 K/BB (include his 1990, 1992, 1997, 2001, 2003 and 2004 seasons)

Schilling should get into the HOF when he’s eligible in 2013. They may make him wait until the second or third ballot. They would put Glavine in right now, if they could. I don’t have a problem with Glavine getting into the HOF.

That’s why Schilling should get into the HOF when he’s eligible, he was better than Glavine, even though Glavine had a longer career.

Schilling was a competitor who would make you beat him (which usually didn’t happen). He hardly ever walked anyone. In fact, his 4.4 K/BB is first all time in the history of MLB. You weren’t going to get on base against Schilling for free. Competitive wasn’t even the word for this guy, Smoltz is the only starting pitcher that is still pitching that has nearly the competitive will of Schilling.

3. Kevin Brown (1986-2005) Career Length Grade: B

Raw Career: 486 G, 476 GS, 3,256.1 IP, 3.28 ERA, 127 ERA+, 112 W%+, 8.5 H/9, 1.22 WHIP, 1.4 SHO/40 and 2.7 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 434 G, 431 GS, 2,987.1 IP, 3.13 ERA, 133 ERA+, 117 W%+, 8.4 H/9, 1.20 WHIP, 1.6 SHO/40 and 2.7 K/BB (exclude his 2002, 2004 and 2005 seasons)

Peak Career: 221 G, 219 GS, 1,536.1 IP, 2.51 ERA, 164 ERA+, 124 W%+, 7.6 H/9, 1.07 WHIP, 1.8 SHO/40 and 3.9 K/BB (include his 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2003 seasons)

Brown was an interesting phenomenon as a starting pitcher. He was a good starting pitcher during the first half of his career, but not necessarily great. But the second half of his career, he was dominant and certainly and arguably the best starting pitcher in the League during the second half of his career, as he aged.

You just don’t see that much, a starting pitcher that was better as he got older. That’s what we got with Brown. He was good during the first half of his career, from 1986-1994. But from 1995-2004, those 10 seasons, the second half of his career, dominant. All of his peak is during the second half of his career, hardly ever see that.

Brown will get into the HOF. He’ll quietly go in. He wasn’t as famous as some of the greats of the era, like Schilling and Glavine, but he was better than either of them, even with the slightly longer career’s they had.

He should be a first ballot HOFer, for sure, but they may make him wait until the second, third, or fourth ballot because of his lack of fame. But he’ll get in because of his dominant numbers.

Check out his peak, a 2.51 ERA, 164 ERA+, 124 W%+, 1.07 WHIP and 3.9 K/BB. That’s a heck of a peak and it’s, more or less, the entire second half of his career.

2. Greg Maddux (1986-2008) Career Length Grade: A+

Raw Career: 744 G, 740 GS, 5,008.1 IP, 3.16 ERA, 132 ERA+, 110 W%+, 8.5 H/9, 1.14 WHIP, 1.9 SHO/40 and 3.4 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 539 G, 535 GS, 3,750.1 IP, 2.83 ERA, 146 ERA+, 113 W%+, 8.2 H/9, 1.12 WHIP, 2.5 SHO/40 and 3.3 K/BB (exclude his last 6 seasons)

Peak Career: 226 G, 226 GS, 1,675.1 IP, 2.15 ERA, 191 ERA+, 117 W%+, 7.3 H/9, 0.97 WHIP, 3.3 SHO/40 and 4.8 K/BB (include his 1992-1998 seasons)

He’s easily 1 of the 20 best starting pitchers in the history of MLB...period.

He’s a four-time Cy Young award winner.

His adjusted career numbers look like most good pitchers peak numbers and his peak numbers are off the charts. Check out his peak, a 2.15 ERA, 191 ERA+, 0.97 WHIP and 4.8 K/BB. They don’t get much better than that, and he did it during a bad decade for starting pitcher numbers, the 1990s. That makes it even more impressive.

The 1990s is the fourth worst decade of the 14 decades in the history of MLB for starting pitcher numbers. The worst, other than the 1890s, 1920s, 1930s, and 2000s. Again, putting up these numbers in a bad decade is unbelievable.

He was with the Atlanta Braves for 11 seasons, from 1993-2003. He helped lead them to the playoffs during 10 of those 11 seasons. That’s incredible. He had both Glavine and Smoltz in the rotation with him for many of those seasons, what a pitching staff.

Maddux always reminded me of a starting pitcher from the 1970s, like Tom Seaver, because the game wasn’t all about overpowering you. It was also about outthinking you, like Seaver did. Well, Maddux was like that, too.

When Maddux was at his peak, he had seasons that he’d go 19-2, 19-4. Many would watch him pitch and wonder how he lost those two games. What an amazing pitcher. Obviously, he’ll be a first ballot HOFer.

1. Roger Clemens (1984-2007) Career Length Grade: A+

Raw Career: 709 G, 707 GS, 4,916.2 IP, 3.12 ERA, 143 ERA+, 122 W%+, 7.7 H/9, 1.17 WHIP, 2.6 SHO/40 and 3.0 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 566 G, 565 GS, 4,018 IP, 2.91 ERA, 153 ERA+, 125 W%+, 7.4 H/9, 1.14 WHIP, 3.1 SHO/40 and 3.0 K/BB (exclude his 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2007 seasons)

Peak Career: 205 G, 205 GS, 1,469 IP, 2.27 ERA, 195 ERA+, 135 W%+, 6.9 H/9, 1.07 WHIP, 3.1 SHO/40 and 3.3 K/BB (include his 1990, 1992, 1994, 1997, 1998, 2005 and 2006 seasons)

Clemens is the only seven-time Cy Young award winner in the history of MLB and his numbers are great and his peak is off the charts, even better than Maddux peak.

It’s why Clemens is one of the 10 best starting pitchers in the history of MLB and it’s why he’ll be in the HOF.

The fact that he was better than Maddux doesn’t really bother me.

But the possible reasons as to why he was better...that’s what bothers me.

There you go. The 10 best starting pitchers from the 1990s.

History Unblurred: The 10 Best Starting Pitchers from the 2000s

Michael W — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:25:02 -0500

Now that the decade of the 2000s has just ended, I thought it would be a good time to make a list of the best starting pitchers from this era.

Now keep in mind, this list is a list of the best careers, so far. Pedro Martinez is certainly and obviously the best starting pitcher from this era. However, he's NOT the best right now, as he's past his prime. This needs to be kept in mind while reading this list.

A minimum of 200 games is required to be considered for this list. There are easily a good half dozen that have not yet reached 200 games that appear to be on their way to great careers. Having not yet reached 200 games, they will not be considered for this list.

There were 98 starting pitchers from the 2000s that reached at least 200 games. That is more than any other era.

Some are still Pitching, some aren't. If a player does not appear on this list of 98, then they either haven't reached 200 games or I consider them a starting pitcher from the 1990s. The 1990s will be covered in a separate article. Starting pitchers will only be in one decade. For example, Pedro Martinez will appear in my 2000s article. So, he will NOT appear in my 1990s article, which I will write later.

An Explanation of the Stats

First , I will include their raw career numbers first. These are simply their career numbers, to this point.

Second , I will include their adjusted career numbers, if they have had a long career (which most haven't). Adjusted career is this: Let's take Jamie Moyer for example. Moyer has had a long career. So in order to find his real numbers, I have to exclude some late seasons during his career to find the numbers that he really carried during his career, since he has pitched past his prime.

With Moyer, I'd exclude his 2004, 2007 and 2009 seasons. That is his adjusted career. Again, this can only be done with long career players. If I don't list an adjusted career under a player's raw career numbers, then it means they haven't played long enough to adjust for their long career or it means they haven't had any bad seasons yet.

Third , I will include peak career numbers. Many like short peaks, not me. I include the best seasons equalling at least 200 games for a peak. It takes away the possibility of a pitcher having one or two lucky seasons. The 200-game peak will tell us how good the pitcher was at his best.

If a starting pitcher has a career .500 W% and that Pitcher Pitched for the Yankees. Well, .500 is not good. But, if that pitcher pitched for the Royals, then .500 is good. This is the reasoning behind W%+. It is to W% what ERA is to ERA+. It's not full proof, but either is ERA+, just another piece of the puzzle and far, far more important then raw W%. OK.

The 98 Starting Pitchers

Here are the 98 Starting Pitchers from the 2000s that reached at least 200 games (listed in alphabetical order): Bronson Arroyo, James Baldwin, Josh Beckett, Kris Benson, Mark Buehrle, A.J. Burnett, Paul Byrd, Chris Carpenter, Matt Clement, Bartolo Colon, Doug Davis, Ryan Dempster, Adam Eaton, Scott Elarton, Shawn Estes, Josh Fogg, Casey Fossum, Freddy Garcia, Jon Garland, Roy Halladay, Mike Hampton, Aaron Harang, Jimmy Haynes, Rick Helling, Mark Hendrickson, Dustin Hermanson, Livan Hernandez, Orlando Hernandez, Tim Hudson, Jason Jennings, Jason Johnson, Randy Johnson, Joe Kennedy, John Lackey, Cory Lidle, Jon Lieber, Ted Lilly, Jose Lima, Esteban Loaiza, Kyle Lohse, Derek Lowe, Jason Marquis, Pedro Martinez, Joe Mays, Gil Meche, Kevin Millwood, Eric Milton, Brian Moehler, Matt Morris, Jamie Moyer, Mark Mulder, Mike Mussina, Brett Myers, Hideo Nomo, Tomo Ohka, Ramon Ortiz, Russ Ortiz, Roy Oswalt, Vicente Padilla, Chan Ho Park, Carl Pavano, Jake Peavy, Brad Penny , Odalis Perez, Andy Pettitte, Joel Pineiro, Sidney Ponson, Brad Radke, Mark Redman, Nate Robertson, Glendon Rusch, C.C. Sabathia, Johan Santana, Jason Schmidt, Aaron Sele, Ben Sheets, Carlos Silva, John Smoltz, Steve Sparks, Jeff Suppan, John Thomson, Brett Tomko, Steve Trachsel, Ismael Valdez, Claudio Vargas, Javier Vazquez, Tim Wakefield, Jarrod Washburn, Jeff Weaver, Kip Wells, Jake Westbrook, Woody Williams, Randy Wolf, Kerry Wood, Jamey Wright, Jaret Wright, Carlos Zambrano and Barry Zito.

The Honorable Mentions

Here are the 10 Starting Pitchers that just missed the top 10 for various reasons. I will list them in alphabetical order: Mark Buehrle, Bartolo Colon, Jake Peavy, Andy Pettitte, C.C. Sabathia, Jason Schmidt, Javier Vazquez, Kerry Wood, Carlos Zambrano and Barry Zito.

The Top 10

10. Tim Hudson (1999-Present) Career Length Grade: D+ (so far)

Raw Career: 311 G, 310 GS, 2,059.2 IP, 3.49 ERA, 126 ERA+, 118 W%+, 8.6 H/9, 1.26 WHIP, 1.4 SHO/40 and 2.2 K/BB

Peak Career: 208 G, 207 GS, 1,404.2 IP, 3.17 ERA, 139 ERA+, 119 W%+, 8.4 H/9, 1.21 WHIP, 1.5 SHO/40 and 2.4 K/BB (exclude his 2000, 2005, 2006 and 2009 seasons)

Between Oakland and Atlanta, Hudson has quietly had a great career to this point. He was injured for much of last season, but he'll be back and in form next season. That is the hope. He pitched less than 10 games last season.

We'll see what happens next season. Hudson has a great sinker ball, split fingered fast ball, and change up. These three pitches are the main reasons that he makes $15.5 million per season, and he's worth it.

This final spot was tough because the difference between Hudson and some of the HM players was purely academic and it came down to length of career against some of them. Sabathia and Peavy have had shorter career's than Hudson, to this point, but they are arguably just as good, just a shorter career. We'll see how long and how good they pitch in the future.

Hudson's 126 ERA+ and 118 W%+ are great numbers for any decade. He helped lead his teams to the playoffs during five of the first six seasons of this decade. Led the league with 20 wins and a .769 W% during the 2000 season. He's a winner.

In fact, he has never had a losing season. He's had at least a .520 W% during all 11 of his seasons to this point. He also led the League in SHO during the 2003 and 2004 seasons.

He's the real deal, quietly.

9. Jamie Moyer (1986-Present) Career Length Grade: A+

Raw Career: 667 G, 609 GS, 3,908.2 IP, 4.22 ERA, 105 ERA+, 109 W%+, 9.3 H/9, 1.32 WHIP, 0.6 SHO/40 and 2.1 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 570 G, 518 GS, 3,344.4 IP, 4.07 ERA, 109 ERA+, 111 W%+, 9.3 H/9, 1.31 WHIP, 0.7 SHO/40 and 2.1 K/BB (exclude his 2004, 2007 and 2009 seasons)

Peak Career: 225 G, 212 GS, 1,429.4 IP, 3.54 ERA, 128 ERA+, 123 W%+, 8.7 H/9, 1.20 WHIP, 1.1 SHO/40 and 2.7 K/BB (include his 1993, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002 and 2003 seasons)

I have hills in my backyard that are younger than Moyer. He's been playing forever and will likely pitch next season. 2009 was one of the worst seasons of his career. But so was 2007, and he came back in 2008 and pitched fine. The same thing could happen again. 2009 was bad, but he still went 12-10 with a .545 W%. A lot of starting pitchers would have taken those numbers.

Here's a quick little story about Moyer that I like. I'll give you the quick condensed version. After the 1991 season, he'd pitched in just under 150 games at that point in his career. Many around him told him to hang it up. They said you're OK, but really not that good, maybe you could coach or something.

Moyer didn't pitch in 1992. He came back and pitched one of the best seasons of his career in 1993, and, between 1993 and 2003, he was quietly one of the best pitchers in the league. That's the quick condensed version. I've always wondered if people telling him he didn't quite have it motivated him. Either way, he was a great starting pitcher when he came back in 1993, and really has been ever since.

Moyer is a great attitude in the club house. He's an "A+" length of career pitcher, but he'll do what the team needs. He's a starter, but he'll pitch a game in relief here and there, whatever the team needs, and he won't complain about it, really. It's the kind of guy Moyer is, a class act. An old school pitcher in a new school league.

His numbers have slipped ever so slightly because of his long career. You can see, his adjusted numbers are a bit better than his raw numbers. He was really never the calibre starting pitcher that Tim Hudson in 10th is, but that "A+" length of career puts him ahead of Hudson.

Though, when Moyer was at his peek, the calibre difference actually wasn't that much different.

What a career, so far, we'll see what he does in 2010.

8. Derek Lowe (1997-Present) Career Length Grade: C- (so far)

Raw Career: 567 G, 289 GS, 2,135 IP, 3.84 ERA, 117 ERA+, 101 W%+, 9.1 H/9, 1.29 WHIP, 0.4 SHO/40 and 2.3 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 533 G, 255 GS, 1,940.1 IP, 3.75 ERA, 121 ERA+, 100 W%+, 8.9 H/9, 1.27 WHIP, 0.5 SHO/40 and 2.3 K/BB (exclude his last season)

Peak Career: 214 G, 66 GS, 631.1 IP, 2.81 ERA, 163 ERA+, 115 W%+, 7.6 H/9, 1.07 WHIP, 0.6 SHO/40 and 3.1 K/BB (include his 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2008 seasons)

Lowe just had arguably the worst season of his career last year, we'll see what happens. I think he'll bounce back. He still went 15-10 with a .600 W%, guess it wasn't that bad. But most of his other numbers were down. But the season before, 2008, was arguably the best season of his career. We'll see what happens in 2010.

He was mostly a relief pitcher during his first five or six seasons. He's been a starter ever since. He's now pitched 13 seasons. Spring chickens are certainly younger than Lowe and he likely only has one or two good seasons left in him. So he needs to bounce back from his subpar season and quickly.

How about his peek career. His peak is two seasons of relief and two seasons as a starter. Check out those numbers. A 2.81 ERA, 163 ERA+, 115 W%+, 7.6 H/9, 1.07 WHIP and 3.1 K/BB. Those numbers are nearly off the charts. Obviously, when he's on, he's among the best of the decade.

He's a two-time All Star, including his 2000 season as a relief pitcher when he led the league with 42 saves. He also led the league in Wins in 2006. Really, he should have made the All Star team four or five times. He's always kind of fallen under the radar with many casual fans.

But managers and owners know he's the real deal; it's why he's making $15 million out there in Atlanta right now. Though, they didn't pay him $15 million to pitch like he did last year, we'll see what happens.

7. Roy Oswalt (2001-Present) Career Length Grade: D- (so far)

Raw Career: 283 G, 271 GS, 1,803.1 IP, 3.23 ERA, 135 ERA+, 127 W%+, 8.8 H/9, 1.20 WHIP, 0.9 SHO/40 and 3.6 K/BB

Peak Career: 221 G, 209 GS, 1,413.1 IP, 3.07 ERA, 143 ERA+, 128 W%+, 8.7 H/9, 1.20 WHIP, 0.8 SHO/40 and 3.6 K/BB (exclude his last 2 seasons)

His 135 ERA+ is 13th all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher. He's tied in 13th with the Hall of Fame starting pitchers Christy Mathewson, Grover Alexander, and Rube Waddell. Need I say more. ERA+ is arguably the most important starting pitching stat that exists, and he is tied in 13th with three of the most respected and highly rated starters ever.

This is what you can not say about starters like CC Sabathia. Sabathia is great, don't get me wrong, but Oswalt is better, it's just the way it is. It's why Sabathia is on the HM list and Oswalt is in the top 10. Sabathia is more famous, but Oswalt, well...he's more better, as my three-year-old niece would say.

It's not just his ERA+ that is great. They're all good, his W%+, WHIP and K/BB, they're great too.

Having said that, Oswalt has just had the two worst seasons of his career during his last two seasons. He's still good, but the numbers are down relative to Oswalt numbers. He had a dismal 119 ERA plus in 2008. That's amazing, bad for Oswalt is a 119 ERA+, great for most Starters. He needs to turn it around and put up the old Oswalt numbers.

6. Mike Mussina (1991-2008 ) Career Length Grade: B+

Raw Career: 537 G, 536 GS, 3,562.2 IP, 3.68 ERA, 123 ERA+, 116 W%+, 8.7 H/9, 1.19 WHIP, 1.7 SHO/40 and 3.6 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 479 G, 479 GS, 3,231 IP, 3.57 ERA, 127 ERA+, 118 W%+, 8.6 H/9, 1.17 WHIP, 1.8 SHO/40 and 3.7 K/BB (exclude his 2005 and 2007 seasons)

Peak Career: 232 G, 232 GS, 1,583.2 IP, 3.13 ERA, 143 ERA+, 129 W%+, 8.3 H/9, 1.14 WHIP, 2.1 SHO/40 and 3.5 K/BB (include his 1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001 and 2008 seasons)

Many fans were surprised after Mussina retired after the 2008 season. He had a nice long career, but the surprise was because he Pitched arguably the best season of his career in 2008, his last season. He hung it up while he was still on top.

He pitched arguably the worst season of his career in 2007 and many were begging him to retire after the 2007 season. Came back and arguably had the best season of his career in 2008 and those same fans were begging him not to retire. It's the way the fans are, huh?

Mussina was a work horse with an arsenal of pitches. He threw three or four different types of fastballs, which were all good, two seamers, four seamers, cutters. And he threw twp or three different types of curveballs, which were all good, too.

One of his curveballs was held, more or less, like a knuckleball, but it acted as a curveball. His pitch arsenal was incredible, just his fast and curve ball arsenal, and he threw other pitches, too.

I already miss watching him pitch; what a player.

5. Roy Halladay (1998-Present) Career Length Grade: D+ (so far)

Raw Career: 313 G, 287 GS, 2,046.2 IP, 3.43 ERA, 133 ERA+, 132 W%+, 8.8 H/9, 1.20 WHIP, 2.1 SHO/40 and 3.3 K/BB

Peak Career: 206 G, 204 GS, 1,471.1 IP, 2.94 ERA, 153 ERA+, 140 W%+, 8.3 H/9, 1.09 WHIP, 2.4 SHO/40 and 4.6 K/BB (exclude his 1999, 2000, 2004 and 2007 seasons)

Halladay is a Hall of Fame Starting Pitcher, as long as he Pitches a bit longer. And he should, he should have a good five or six seasons left. His 133 ERA+ is 18th all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher. It amazed me that the Yankees picked up his teammate, A.J. Burnett because they could have gotten Halladay.

Burnett and Halladay are the same age. They payed Burnett $16 million, Halladay make $14 million. Burnett is good, but not nearly as good as Halladay. Who's complaining, the Yankees won the World Series with Burnett. With that Yankee offense, you don't need Halladay, Burnett will do.

Halladay has good numbers all around. Obviously, his ERA+ is one of the 20 best of all time and his W%+ is as good as they get, he's one of the greats of this era, unquestionably.

4. Johan Santana (2000-Present) Career Length Grade: D- (so far)

Raw Career: 310 G, 234 GS, 1,709.2 IP, 3.12 ERA, 143 ERA+, 128 W%+, 7.5 H/9, 1.11 WHIP, 1.0 SHO/40 and 3.7 K/BB

Peak Career: 207 G, 167 GS, 1,194.1 IP, 2.77 ERA, 161 ERA+, 129 W%+, 7.1 H/9, 1.04 WHIP, 1.2 SHO/40 and 4.1 K/BB (exclude his 2000, 2001, 2007 and 2009 seasons)

Easily one of the 20 best left-handed Starting Pitchers in the history of Major League Baseball. Right now, he's a "D-" in the length of career category. The longer he Pitches, the more you will hear historians talk about him. He'll likely move up to third on this list by the time it's all said and done.

He should have seven or eight seasons left. He did have an arm injury last season; I hope he recovers well. We'll see.

He's a two time Cy Young award winner and a four-time All Star.

His 143 ERA+ is sixth all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher. That's incredible.

He's actually tied in sixth with Roger Clemens, tied without the fancy vitamins! Sixth behind only these five Starting Pitchers: Walter Johnson, Ed Walsh, Pedro Martinez, Lefty Grove and Smoky Joe Wood. Those five are kind of a who's who of great starting pitchers. A litmus test that most fail.

His 1.11 WHIP is 16th all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher and his 7.5 H/9 is 20th all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher.

So, he's in the top 20 all time in three of the most important starting pitcher stats in history. And he's done it during the single worst decade in the history of Major League Baseball for starting pitcher stats, the 2000s.

It's why it amazes me when fans bad mouth Santana. What are they watching? What are they wanting?

He's led the league in WHIP four times, ERA three times, ERA+ three times, H/9 three times, Ks 3 times and Wins once.

Because of his dominance, he's fourth on my list, even with his short career thus far.

3. John Smoltz (1988-Present) Career Length Grade: A- (so far)

Raw Career: 723 G, 481 GS, 3,473 IP, 3.33 ERA, 125 ERA+, 103 W%+, 8.0 H/9, 1.18 WHIP, 1.3 SHO/40 and 3.1 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 708 G, 466 GS, 3,395 IP, 3.26 ERA, 127 ERA+, 105 W%+, 7.9 H/9, 1.17 WHIP, 1.4 SHO/40 and 3.0 K/BB (exclude his last season)

Peak Career: 202 G, 66 GS, 594.4 IP, 2.69 ERA, 163 ERA+, 119 W%+, 7.5 H/9, 1.04 WHIP, 2.4 SHO/40 and 5.3 K/BB (include his 1996, 1998, 2003, 2004 and 2008 seasons)

Smoltz has had a long career and it wasn't until this last season that he finally had a bad season. That's impressive. His peek career includes five seasons, three as a starter and two as a reliever. What an incredible peak. 2.69 ERA, 163 ERA+, 1.04 WHIP, and 5.3 K/BB. That's an amazing peak.

He's a former Cy Young award winner that has led the league twice in Wins, twice in W% and twice in Ks. An eight-time All Star and he'll be a Hall of Famer, too. The question is, will he pitch next season after finally having a bad season in 2009?

2. Randy Johnson (1988-Present) Career Length Grade: A (so far)

Raw Career: 618 G, 603 GS, 4,135.1 IP, 3.29 ERA, 136 ERA+, 124 W%+, 7.3 H/9, 1.17 WHIP, 2.5 SHO/40 and 3.3 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 481 G, 471 GS, 3,309.5 IP, 3.04 ERA, 147 ERA+, 130 W%+, 6.9 H/9, 1.16 WHIP, 3.1 SHO/40 and 3.3 K/BB (exclude his 2003, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2009 seasons)

Peak Career: 200 G, 198 GS, 1,457.1 IP, 2.45 ERA, 190 ERA+, 137 W%+, 6.8 H/9, 1.04 WHIP, 3.2 SHO/40 and 4.7 K/BB (include his 1995, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 seasons)

His peak career is off the charts, just look at it again. Wow.

Randy Johnson is the best left-handed starting pitcher in the history of Major League Baseball, even better than Lefty Grove and Sandy Koufax. I'll admit, never been a Johnson fan.

Never got over that Yankee/reporter fiasco when he signed in New York. I'm probably being unfairly hard on the guy. Funny, the things that stick with you. The things you forget and the things you don't.

Like him or not, he's the best lefty of all time and one of the 10 best starting pitchers ever...righty or lefty.

His 136 ERA+ is 12th all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher. The fact that he has put up these numbers during the single worst era in the history of Major League Baseball for starting pitcher numbers makes it even all the more impressive.

He hasn't pitched well during his last couple of seasons. I think he'll pitch next season and then hang it up. We'll see.

1. Pedro Martinez (1992-Present) Career Length Grade: C+ (so far)

Raw Career: 476 G, 409 GS, 2,827.1 IP, 2.93 ERA, 154 ERA+, 125 W%+, 7.1 H/9, 1.05 WHIP, 1.7 SHO/40 and 4.2 K/BB

Adjusted Career: 424 G, 357 GS, 2,541 IP, 2.72 ERA, 166 ERA+, 129 W%+, 6.8 H/9, 1.02 WHIP, 1.9 SHO/40 and 4.3 K/BB (exclude his 2006, 2008 and 2009 seasons)

Peak Career: 206 G, 204 GS, 1,436 IP, 2.21 ERA, 212 ERA+, 140 W%+, 6.5 H/9, 0.95 WHIP, 2.2 SHO/40 and 5.6 K/BB (include his 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2007 seasons)

His 154 ERA+ is the best ERA+ in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher. What else can you say? His 1.05 WHIP is fourth all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher and his 7.1 H/9 is eighth all time in the history of Major League Baseball for a starting pitcher.

So he's in the top 10 all time in three of the most important stats for a starting pitcher and he's done it during the single worst era in history for starting pitcher numbers.

His peak career is up there with the best of all time...period.

He's simply one of the ten best starting pitchers to ever grace the fields of Major League Baseball, even with his "C+" length of career, thus far.

He hasn't pitched well during his last couple of seasons and his days of dominance are likely over. He did go 5-1 last season, but his other numbers were down. He's still good, don't get me wrong, he's just not good compared to the Pedro of old. He'll likely pitch a couple more seasons and then hang it up.

There you go. The 10 best starting pitchers from the 2000s.

History Unblurred: Quotes About Smoky Joe Wood (Best Not In The HOF)

Michael W — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:21:26 -0400

I have spent the past two or three weeks in stat land, researching Starting Pitcher's. I have collected dozens of quotes on different players and I wanted to share the quotes about Smoky Joe Wood. One of the quotes is from Smoky Joe Wood.

Smoky Joe presents himself to the forefront of my mind as the highest calibre player in the history of MLB that is not in the HOF.

Most historians agree that he was an incredibly high calibre Starting Pitcher.

No one is arguing that point. I suppose the debates start about if he pitched long enough or not.

He pitched in 225 games during his career. Certainly a short career, though long enough for historians to rate him (or underrate him, in most cases).

A percentage of historians believe that even with his short career, he should be in the HOF because he was so dominant.

But a higher percentage believe that he should not get into the HOF with his short career, even with his dominance.

The fact is, there are only two Starting Pitcher's in the history of MLB that are in the HOF that finished their career with 200-299 games. Addie Joss and John Ward. Joss is in because he was dominant, arguably more so than Wood.

Ward is in not just because he was a great Starting Pitcher. He's also in because he had another short career as a Shortstop after he stopped Pitching and he was a damn good Shortstop. A third reason: he was a great ambassador for the game, while he played and after he retired.

It took all three pieces of that puzzle to put him in. But the fact is, he belongs. Other than Addie Joss and Smoky Joe Wood, Ward is the best Starting Pitcher in the history of MLB with 200-299 games.

So, only two Starting Pitcher's out of 251 with 200-299 games are in the HOF, one percent. Put Smoky Joe Wood in and that would be three of 251, still about one percent.

Now, there have only been 46 Starting Pitcher's that have reached 600 games or more. 25 of them are in the HOF. 25 of 46. So, if you reach 600 games, you have a 54 percent chance of making the HOF. 54% compared to one percent.

There SHOULD be a bigger weight on longer career players, but 54 percent to one percent is going a bit overboard. Either way, one more short career Starting Pitcher wouldn't hurt anything. Putting the best one that's not yet in would be a good idea, of course.

Got sidetracked.

Here are some of the quotes about Smoky Joe Wood that I've collected during the past couple of weeks, I hope you enjoy them.

"Can I throw harder than Joe Wood? Listen, my friend, there's no man alive can throw harder that Smoky Joe Wood."---Walter Johnson, HOF Starting Pitcher

"Although his candle was to burn out before too long, no Pitcher's ever burned brighter than Smoky Joe Wood's."---Henry Thomas, respected baseball historian

"Smoky Joe Wood. Was he ever something. I've seen a lot of great Pitching in my lifetime, but never anything to compare with him...I've never seen anything like Smoky Joe Wood."---Harry Hooper, HOF Right Fielder

"Smoky Joe Wood, who belongs in the HOF...if there was a better Pitcher than Wood in Baseball, even Walter Johnson or Christy Mathewson, the difference was merely academic."---James Farrell, respected baseball historian

"If you could time capsule back to 1915 and gather 100 of the most respected baseball historians alive. Gather them together one by one and ask all 100 of them who the five best Pitchers of the era are.

"One of the five names that all 100 would say is Smoky Joe Wood, all 100, not 99, all 100. Now, today, you ask 100 of the most respected baseball historians alive who the five best Pitchers from the era of the 1910s were. More times than not, Smoky Joe Wood is NOT one of the five names mentioned.

"I'm here to tell you, they were right then, we're wrong now. The fundamental problem with many respected historians today is they put too much weight on length of career. I'm not going to go so far as to say exactly what their definition of the word better should be.

"But I'll tell you this. Their definition of the word better should have less to do with the word longer and it should have more to do with the words higher caliber. Longer and higher caliber should both be in the equation, don't get me wrong, they just need to change the amount of weight they put on each.

"It's why even some of the most respected baseball historians today will rate George Uhle higher than Smoky Joe Wood. If you've never believed anything else I've ever written, believe this; George Uhle did not Pitch better than Smoky Joe Wood, he just Pitched longer than Smoky Joe Wood.

"For sakes, George Uhle's own Mother didn't think he was better than Smoky Joe Wood, but now historians are trying to tell you he was because he Pitched 500 games. That's twice as long as Smoky Joe Wood and half as good. Uhle wasn't bad, not trying to be hard on the old chap, but he was no Smoky Joe, few were."---Michael Weir, baseball historian

"There I was after the 1912 season---including the World Series I'd won 37 games and lost only six, struck out 279 men in days when the boys didn't strike out much, and I'd beaten Walter Johnson and Christy Mathewson one after the other.

And do you know how old I was? Well, I was 22 years old, that's all...and do you know something else? That was it...my arm went bad...and all my dreams came tumbling down around my ears like a damn house of cards.

"The next five years, seems like it was nothing but one long terrible nightmare...the old zip was gone from that fast ball. It didn't hop any more, like it used to...still, in 1915 I led the league with an ERA of 1.49...so in 1916 I didn't play at all.

"I retired. I stayed on the farm...only 26 years old and all washed up. A has been...I stayed on the farm all through the 1916 season. That fall, though, I began to get restless...I could hit and I could run and I could field, and if I couldn't Pitch why couldn't I do something else?...1917, I was sold to Cleveland...all of 27 years old and a relic from the distant pat.

"I'd hear fathers tell their kids, "See that guy over there? That's Smoky Joe Wood, used to be a great Pitcher long ago."...for five years I played in the Outfield for Cleveland. In 1921 I hit .366."---Smoky Joe Wood, the best player in the history of MLB that is not in the HOF

If you have good quotes on Smoky Joe Wood, I'd love to read them. Or any other comments you might have.

History Unblurred: Bill James, What Are You Thinking?

Michael W — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:08:58 -0400

Bill James has Joe McGinnity rated as the 38th best starting pitcher in the history of Major League Baseball. He has Addie Joss rated 75th.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

The main problem? They were both starting pitchers from the first decade of the 1900s, the same time period. So, I can pretty much compare apples to apples. When I do that, it becomes apparently obvious that Addie Joss was better...way better.

I had written an article on Bill James a few months ago. I love James and have a lot of respect for the guy, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws in his system. Many get bent out of shape when I bring this up.

Someone replied back on my first article, said something like, "I'm sorry if you and Bill James have a different definition of the word better."

I can tell you this, if Bill James says McGinnity is better than Joss (which is exactly what he says), then you're damn right we have a different definition of the word better.

McGinnity vs. Joss Comparison

First of all, the raw numbers.

Addie Joss Pitched from 1902-1910.

Joe McGinnity Pitched from 1899-1908.

Joss, seven of nine seasons overlapped McGinnity.

McGinnity, seven of 10 seasons overlapped Joss.

Either way, they both had seven seasons that they pitched together at the same time.

Side note: I've invented a stat called winning percentage-plus. It's kind of like ERA-plus.

It takes into account what the team was expected to win over a starting pitcher's career. It is a bit complicated because a different weight goes toward a team if the pitcher pitched in 200 innings one season or 85 innings the next. A much bigger weight would go toward the team's season of the 200 inning season, of course.

It's a great stat that many will use someday (I hope). It should NOT be used with relief pitchers and it should not be used for single seasons. But, for a career, it paints a good picture. It isn't the ending argument stat, but none are, not even ERA-plus.

It is, however, part of the formula and many have wanted to use win percentage as part of the formula, but they don't because it depends what team the Pitcher was on. You know, were they good or bad? How good? How bad? Well, this new stat will help us with that. I hope to use it when I get my rating book published, it's one of my three new invented stats. So, when you see me talking about win percentage-plus in this article, this is what I'm talking about.

First, their career numbers:

Addie Joss—1.89 ERA, 142 ERA-plus, 117 win percentage-plus, 0.97 WHIP, 7.3 H/9

Joe McGinnity—2.66 ERA, 120 ERA-plus, 108 win percentage-plus, 1.19 WHIP, 8.6 H/9

As you can see, it's not even close. Joss is better in everything, ERA, ERA-plus, win percentage plus, WHIP and H/9. McGinnity is better in nothing. I don't know any other way to say it.

Now, adjusting for McGinnity and his long career (well, kind of long):

What I will do here is take Joe McGinnity's best five seasons. So, I'll drop his worst five seasons. So, I'm only counting the best 50 percent of McGinnity's career. I'll see if it makes him better than Joss. I'll count 1899, 1900, 1902, 1903 and 1904 seasons—most would agree, his best five seasons. That means I'll drop his worst five seasons—1901, 1905, 1906, 1907, and 1908.

So, here I go, dropping the worst half of McGinnity and comparing it to Addie Joss' entire career. McGinnity has a huge advantage here, obviously.

Addie Joss—1.89 ERA, 142 ERA-plus, 117 win percentage-plus, 0.97 WHIP, 7.3 H/9

Joe McGinnity—2.47 ERA, 138 ERA-plus, 118 win percentage-plus, 1.17 WHIP, 8.3 H/9

Amazing.

As you can plainly see, it still doesn't make up the gap. Dropping the worst 50 percent of McGinnity's career and his numbers are still worse than Joss' raw numbers. That's incredible. McGinnity has a slightly better win percentage-plus than Joss after the adjustments for McGinnity. But, Joss is still better in every other area, ERA, ERA-plus, WHIP, and H/9.

Any questions so far?

You may be asking yourself, how can Bill James say McGinnity was better?

Good question.

Or you may be asking yourself, does Bill James have a flaw?

Good question.

McGinnity Pitched in 180 more games than Joss during his career, that's the reason he has him rated higher. It's not the way it should be. As we proved above, even dropping the worst 50 percent of McGinnity's career doesn't make him better than Joss. So, I don't care if he had Pitched in 180 games more or 280 games more than Joss. That's just 100 more games that he pitched that weren't as good as Joss. I love Bill James, but this is what we're buying? I mean, even dropping the worst 50 percent of McGinnity doesn't make him better than the whole Addie Joss. Come on.

Now, I'll compare all seven of their seasons that they pitched together:

1902

Addie Joss—2.77 ERA, 124 ERA-plus, 1.11 WHIP, 7.5 H/9

Joe McGinnity—2.84 ERA, 118 ERA-plus, 1.19 WHIP, 8.7 H/9

Joss is again better in everything. McGinnity in nothing. And it was Joss' worst season of his career, still better than McGinnity. Joss takes 1902.

1903

Addie Joss—2.19 ERA, 130 ERA-plus, 0.95 WHIP, 7.4 H/9

Joe McGinnity—2.43 ERA, 138 ERA-plus, 1.15 WHIP, 8.1 H/9

Overall, Joss had a better 1903 season. McGinnity had a better ERA+, but Joss had a better ERA, WHIP, and H/9. Joss takes 1902 and 1903. 2 for 2, so far.

1904

Addie Joss—1.59 ERA, 159 ERA-plus, 0.99 WHIP, 7.5 H/9

Joe McGinnity—1.61 ERA, 169 ERA-plus, 0.96 WHIP, 6.8 H/9

Finally, I've done it. McGinnity had a better season than Joss in 1904. Of course, it was the best season of McGinnity's career, but he was better than Joss that season. McGinnity had a better ERA-plus, WHIP, and H/9. Joss just had a better ERA, but the season still goes to McGinnity. That's now two for Joss, one for McGinnity.

1905

Addie Joss—2.01 ERA, 131 ERA-plus, 1.02 WHIP, 7.7 H/9

Joe McGinnity—2.87 ERA, 102 ERA-plus, 1.12 WHIP, 8.1 H/9

Again, Joss is better in everything. McGinnity in nothing. That's now three for Joss, one for McGinnity.

1906

Addie Joss—1.71 ERA, 152 ERA-plus, 0.93 WHIP, 7.0 H/9

Joe McGinnity—2.25 ERA, 116 ERA-plus, 1.14 WHIP, 8.4 H/9

Again, Joss is better in everything. McGinnity in nothing. That's now four for Joss, one for McGinnity.

1907

Addie Joss—1.83 ERA, 137 ERA-plus, 0.98 WHIP, 7.4 H/9

Joe McGinnity—3.16 ERA, 78 ERA-plus, 1.22 WHIP, 9.3 H/9

Again, Joss is better in everything. McGinnity in nothing. That's now five for Joss, one for McGinnity.

1908

Addie Joss—1.16 ERA, 205 ERA-plus, 0.81 WHIP, 6.4 H/9

Joe McGinnity—2.27 ERA, 106 ERA-plus, 1.23 WHIP, 9.3 H/9

Again, Joss is better in everything. McGinnity in nothing. That's all seven seasons: six for Joss and just one for McGinnity.

Was Joe McGinnity Better than Addie Joss?

It almost seems laughable now, doesn't it?

It's not even close, Joss was way better. McGinnity was a heck of a starting pitcher, don't get me wrong. But he wasn't Joss material, obviously.

I've made adjustments to make McGinnity better than he really was and it still doesn't make him nearly as good as Joss. What else can I say?

Again, I'm not trying to attack Bill James. I love the guy, think he's a genius. Even geniuses sometimes have flaws in their formulas. Hawkins found flaws in some of Einstein's theories, doesn't mean Einstein wasn't a genius.

Some may ask this question: How did McGinnity pitch in 180 games more than Joss, while only pitching one more season?

Here's the quick condensed answer to that question—for the most part—McGinnity pitched on teams with a three man rotation. Joss Pitched on teams with a four man rotation. That's how McGinnity pitched 10 seasons (but 465 games) and Joss pitched nine seasons (but only 284 games). So, historians are generally going to overrate McGinnity and underrate Joss because the managers that they played for chose different rotations.

What? Are you kidding? This is what we take as Gospel? It's time to re-evaluate. It's time to put less weight on who pitched more games. It's time to put more weight on who was better...period.

Again, if James says that Joe McGinnity is better than Addie Joss, then yes, we certainly have a different definition of the word better. Maybe you're reading too much into the "wrong" things. Maybe you should, you know, read less.

I love James and most other respected historians, but let's start telling it like it was.

Let's let it be known that Joss was better than McGinnity. After we tell it like it was, then we can tell them that McGinnity Pitched on a three man rotation and pitched more career games than Joss. Let's do that, not the other way around. Let's unblur history, not blur it.

Thank goodness that the Hall-of-Fame inducted Joss. At least they had since enough to do that.

Thank you HOF.

History Unblurred: The 10 Best Defensive Second Basemen in MLB History

Michael W — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 20:16:55 -0400

The econd base position is one of the most important defensive positions on the field. In fact, other than the pitcher, catcher and shortstop positions, it is probably the most important defensive position on the field.

Let's talk about who the best ever were at that position, defensively speaking.

note-next to each player I will also list an offensive letter grade, so you know where they stand in that category, the way I see it (we can assume they are all an "A +" defensively, since they are among the top 10 all time, defensively).

Here we go. History unblurred. The way it really is.

10. Frankie Frisch (1920s) offensive Rating: A +

Frisch had 641 assists during the 1927 season and it still stands as the MLB record for a Second Baseman.

He was, by far and away, the best defensive second baseman from the 1920s.

"Frisch can knock down more balls with his elbows, knees, chest and head, and by dint of his fleet recovery throw out the runner, than any nine men we know"-Gordon Mackay, respected baseball historian, 1924

Frisch was also one of the 10 best offensive secondbasemen in the history of MLB. I suppose that makes him one of the 10 best overall second basemen in the history of MLB. It's why he's a top tier Hall of Famer at the position.

11-20: Here is a list of 10 other second basemen that were in serious contention of taking this 10th spot away from Frisch. I will list them in order, from oldest to newest: Fred Dunlap (1880s), Nap Lajoie (1900s), Lonny Frey (1940s), Eddie Mayo (1940s), Gil McDougald (1950s), Jackie Robinson (1950s), Red Schoendienst (1950s), Fernando Vina (1990s), Craig Counsell (2000s) and Pokey Reese (2000s)

9. Joe Gordon (1940s) offensive rating: A +

"Among modern second basemen, Joe Gordon, Billy Herman and Charlie Gehringer were the best on the double play pivot. What made them stand out from other Second Basemen was that they pivoted and threw at the same time that they crossed the bag, not after they crossed it"-Tom Meany, respected baseball historian, 1948

He's an A + offensive second baseman, too. I guess that makes him an A + overall at Second Base. He's finally in the Hall of Fame, where he belongs. Now that he's in the Hall of Fame, he's not only in, but he's a top tier second baseman. I'm glad he's in, but what took you so long, Veteran's Committee?

8. Hughie Critz (1930s) offensive rating: D -

"The New York Giant infield of Hughie Critz, Bill Terry, Travis Jackson and Freddie Lindstrom, the million dollar infield as it was called, and it used to perform up to its name...they were so deft, so quick, so breathtaking that the fans would sit, first in stunned silence, and then in gathered bedlam"-Arnold Hano, respected baseball historian

I just love that old quote from Hano. In fact, that entire infield made it into the Hall of Fame, except for Critz.

Critz didn't make it into the Hall of Fame because of his offense. He wasn't a failure offensively, but he was the next best thing. It just wasn't his forte, well below average, offensively.

7. Bobby Grich (1970s) offensive rating: A

"Grich won four Gold Gloves, and won them over stiff competition-Frank White"-Bill James, respected baseball historian/Godfather of Sabermetrics and the modern rating system, 2002

Of course, Grich won Gold Gloves back when they meant a bit more than they do today. You know, before we realized they would float if dropped into the Hudson River, like Derek Jeter's Gold Gloves float. That wasn't very nice of me to say, I like Jeter, offensively speaking.

Grich was a great offensive second baseman, an "A" offensively. He's one of the 20 best overall second basemen in the history of MLB when you mix his offense and his defense together. That's all there is, right? Offense and defense? Oh, Bill James and other respected historians will say there is a third part to the equation, Length of Career. Well, Grich has that, too. He played in over 2,000 games.

There are three second basemen that often present themselves before me as should-be Hall-of-Fame second basemen. The first is Bobby Grich. The other two are Cupid Childs (1890s) and Hardy Richardson (1880s). They are both missing that third part of the equation that so many respected historians like (Length of Career). Neither of them had short careers, but they didn't have long ones either. Childs played in just over 1,450 games and Richardson played in just over 1,300 games. Either way, Grich, Childs and Richardson are the three best second basemen in the history of MLB that are not in the Hall of Fame, with arguments from Davey Lopes (1970s) and Tom Daly (1890s).

6. Jeff Reboulet (1990s) offensive rating: D

A defensive specialist. When I was younger, I used to love to watch this guy play defense.

He wasn't a failure offensively, but he was certainly below average, unfortunately.

5. Bobby Doerr (1940s) offensive rating: A +

Doerr is an "A +" offensively and he's one of the five best defensive second basemen in the history of MLB. That's why he's a top-tier Hall-of-Fame second baseman, one of the 10 best ever, overall, at the position. Somehow, a quiet top-tier Hall-of-Fame second baseman because he was Ted Williams' teammate in Boston.

4. Glenn Hubbard (1980s) offensive rating: D +

Hubbard played much of his career for those Atlanta Braves teams that had an overabundant amount of ground ball pitchers on their team. Many historians point this out because it makes Hubbard's defensive numbers better than they should be. Of course, once they point this out, they then proceed to rate him an "A +" defensively and call him one of the best defensive second basemen of all time. It's always made me wonder, what the hell did you point it out for then?

Here's what happened with Hubbard, he DID play on ground ball teams (generally speaking). AND he was one of the best defensive second basemen ever. What do you get when you combine those two facts? You get Glenn Hubbard's defensive numbers, off the chart.

It's why almost every historian ever calls him an "A +" defensively. There was a historian once that just called him an "A" instead of an "A +". But he was immediately fired, beaten over the head with wiffle ball bats and called names because of it. He was then forced to apologize, he was allowed to call his Mother (upon his request) and then he was re-hired. The reason that I'm telling you this is so YOU don't make the same mistake as that guy did.

I got sidetracked there. Oh, offensively, Hubbard pretty much got the job done, but he was slightly below average.

3. Jody Reed (1990s) offensive rating: C -

I remember reading something that Bill James had written about Jody Reed. It was probably in his Win Shares book or his Baseball Historical Abstract book, I can't remember, forgive me. But Bill James presented this conclusion, Jody Reed is second all time in the history of MLB in defensive Win Shares per season for a second baseman, behind only Bill Mazeroski. That's a heck of a fact that Bill James presents. I guess that's why many historians say that Reed was among the best defensive second basemen that have ever graced the field, I agree with them on Reed.

He pretty much got the job done offensively, ever so slightly below average.

2. Bill Mazeroski (1960s) offensive rating: C -

I hate to bring up Bill James again (actually, I love it), but he came to an amazing conclusion on Bill Mazeroski, too. Again, I can't remember which of his books. Give me a break, he has so damn many of them now, who can keep them all straight?

Anyway, most of you know that Bill James pretty much invented the Win Shares system, which so many take as gospel. I think his system is flawless, except he puts too much weight on Length of Career, but that's another article. Either way, Bill James comes to this conclusion on Mazeroski: his 113 defensive career Win Shares is 1st all time in the history of MLB for a second baseman.

The fact is, if I did a cross section of the 100 most respected baseball histoians in the United States, I can almost guarantee you that Mazeroski would show up as the best defensive second baseman in the history of MLB. I almost agree. He was about as good as any second baseman that has ever taken the field.

He pretty much got the job done offensively, too. He was ever so slightly below average.

Should a below-average offensive player be in the Hall of Fame at any position other than the pitcher's?

Not if you ask me. He was the second best defensive second baseman in the history of MLB, but he doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame with that offense.

What a great defensive player, though.

1. Bid McPhee (1890s) offensive rating: A +

"McPhee never wore a glove until his last three seasons: he was one of the last players to play barehanded. He worked to toughen his hands, and felt that he was more sure handed without the leather. A broken finger finally forced him to wear a glove in 1896, and that year he fielded .978, a record fielding percentage for a second baseman until well into the 1900s. McPhee also recorded 529 putouts in 1886, a Major League record which still stands; no one else is within 40 putouts"-Bill James, respected baseball historian/Godfather of Sabermetrics and the modern rating system, 2002

Not all historians will call him the best defensive second baseman in history, but they will almost all call him one of the 10 best ever. I think he was the best ever, barehanded.

He was also an "A +" offensively. It's why he's a top-tier Hall-of-Fame second baseman, the earliest second baseman in the Hall of Fame and one of the 10 best second basemen in the history of MLB.

There it is. History unblurred. The way it really was.

History Unblurred: The Tip O'Neill HOF Argument and the Triple Crown

Michael W — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:06:09 -0400

During the last couple of months, I have read some articles on the Bleacher Report regarding the Triple Crown. Most of the articles were very good and well-researched. It got me thinking about Tip O'Neill. I wrote an article about six or seven months ago on the old chap and I wanted to revisit his history and accomplishments.

I always thought there was a good argument for him being in the HOF.

I will list all of the reasonS that he should be in the HOF first.

Then I will list the reasons that he is not in the HOF last.

Apparently, the reasons that he is not in the HOF winS the war against the reasons that he should be in the HOF, and it just shouldn't be working out that way. But it is. See what you think.

The reasons he SHOULD be in the Hall of Fame

REASON No. 1: He was the first player in the history of MLB to ever hit for the Triple Crown

There have only been 11 different players in the history of MLB to hit for the Triple Crown since O'Neill did it. And of course, he's the only one of the 12 to do it that is not in the HOF.

You probably know the other 11, but just to refresh your memory, here they are: (listed from oldest to newest): Nap Lajoie, Ty Cobb, Rogers Hornsby (twice), Jimmie Foxx, Chuck Klein, Lou Gehrig, Joe Medwick, Ted Williams (twice), Mickey Mantle, Frank Robinson, and Carl Yastrzemski.

The Triple Crown is supposed to be a shoo-in for the HOF and it is, except for O'Neill. The list of the other 11 players to do it, it's not just a list of HOF players, it's a list of "top-tier" HOF players; except for Joe Medwick, he belongs in the HOF and he was a great player, but I wouldn't consider him a top-tier player.

The year that O'Neill hit for the Triple Crown, he not only led the league in BA, HR, and RBI to capture the crown. He actually led the league in 10 of the 12 major statistical categories that year. What do you call that, the octagonagle crown? Hell, that's not even enough sides, is it?

That 1887 season, he led the league in BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, R, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, and hits.

The only two major categories that he didn't lead the league in were SB and FA, and he had 30 SB that season, which was great, but not enough to lead the league. And he didn't lead the league in FA, but he is historically an "A" to "B" grade defensive left fielder.

In fact, Bill James calls him an "A-plus" defensively in his Win Shares book. I don't think he was quite that high, but you get the point; he was a great defensive left fielder.

Here's his 1887 Triple Crown season: .435 BA, .490 OBP, .691 SLG, 205 OPS, 30 SB, 167 R, 52 2B, 19 3B, 14 HR and 123 RBI.

My point, he could be in the HOF just for capturing the Triple Crown, but he didn't just lead the league in those three categories, he led the league in 10 of the 12 categories.

REASON No. 2: He is the only player in the history of MLB to lead the league in 2B, 3B and HR during the same season

Most historians believe that it will never be achieved again because it takes such a brilliant mix of pure hitting, power-hitting, speed, great base running, etc...

When you pile this reason onto the the fact that he hit for the Triple Crown, it makes the argument that much stronger.

REASON No. 3: He had a career 140 OPS+ (and other statistical evidence)

To put it into perspective, Carl Yastrzmeski had about a career 130 OPS+ and he's considered, by many, as a top-tier HOF player. Yaz was a left fielder also. A 140 OPS is certainly a HOF number. The fact is, O'Neill had over a 100 OPS in each of his last nine seasons (every season during his career, except for his rookie season).

As most of you know, Bill James is arguably the most respected MLB historical rater in the world. He is the Godfather of Sabermetrics, and he simply revolutionized the way players are rated with his Win Shares system, which he uses in his Win Shares book and his Baseball Historical Abstract book.

Here's the fact that Bill James comes to with Tip O'Neill. In Win Shares per 162 games, O'Neill ranks fourth all-time in the history of MLB for left fielders, behind only Ted Williams, Barry Bonds, and Shoeless Joe Jackson.

That should tell us all something. That means that he averaged more Win Shares per season than almost every HOF left fielder in the history of MLB. And again, the Win Shares system that Bill James created is almost taken as gospel by many.

It is an obvious—and, apparently, an incredible—fact about O'Neill that Bill James presents in his books.

Another statistical fact: O'Neill and his .435 BA in 1887 still ranks as the second best single season BA in the history of MLB.

He ended his career with a .326 BA and he had over a .300 BA in seven consecutive seasons.

His 167 R during the 1887 season still ranks fourth on the all-time single season list. He scored over 100 R five times during his career.

He was a great base runner. He had at least 10 3B five times during his career and he had at least 25 SB in five consecutive seasons (they didn't keep SB during the first half of his career).

Here's another reason to pile onto the statistical evidence. He was the best player on arguably the best team in history.

It's arguable, but most historians will call the 1887 St. Louis team one of the 10 best teams in the history of MLB. Some of his teammates: Charlie Comiskey at first base (and manager), Yank Robinson at second base, Arlie Latham at third base, Bob Caruthers at starting pitcher, Dave Foutz at starting pitcher (and first base), Silver King at starting pitcher, just to name a few.

Side Note: the Tip O'Neill that was the Speaker of the House during the Reagan years was named after this Tip O'Neill. Has nothing to do with anything, just a neat tidbit.

Now, the reasons that he is NOT in the Hall of Fame (as you can see from the above references, it's damn sure not because he wasn't good enough). So here are the "real" reasons that he's not in the Hall of Fame, if you'll allow me to unblur history:

REASON No. 1: He had a fairly short career

Tip played in just over 1,050 games and 10 seasons. Historians and Hall of Fame voters hate fairly short careers. Well, the old Tipster had one of those.

So even though he's the fourth highest caliber left fielder in history, according to Bill James Win Shares per 162 games, and even though he is the first player in the history of MLB to hit for the Triple Crown—and the only one to do it and not be in the Hall of Fame—and even though he is the ONLY player in the history of MLB to lead the league in 2B, 3B, and HR during the same season...

Well, sorry about your luck old chap, we like long careers.

His fairly short career is a huge reason that he is not in the HOF, trust me.

REASON No. 2: He played most of his career in the American Association instead of the National League during the 1880s

Historians consider the American Association during the 1880s as an inferior League to the National League at that time. And Tip played more in the American Association than the National League during his career. Some people think that some historians didn't even consider the American Association of the 1880s a major league. That's simply NOT true.

Every (and I mean every) respected historian considers it a major league. So, if you have a book that says otherwise, throw it away, trust me. Having said that, most respected historians consider it inferior.

Here's how much historians hate the American Association from the 1880s: The fact that there is not one single player from the 1880s American Association in the Hall of Fame, except for Charlie Comiskey (who was Tip O'Neill's teammate—and probably the sixth or seventh best player on the team.)

But Comiskey is in as a pioneer of the game, not as a player.

Most are OK with that because he could have been inducted just as a manager.

So that should tell you something—not one player is in the HOF from the league's time period.

Also, there is not one left fielder from the 1880s that is in the Hall of Fame, American or National League. It's one of the only decades in the 140 year history of MLB that is not represented at left field, while some decades have five left fielders in the HOF.

And there's no question that Tip O'Neill was the best left fielder from the 1880s, American or National League. His only competition is Harry Stovey, but Stovey was really a first basemen.

So MLB, it's time to put a left fielder from the 1880s in the HOF; and if you do that, there's ONLY one real choice—Tip O'Neill.

Some also argue that HOF doesn't care about the old players; that's simply not true. In fact, there are plenty of players from the 1880s and the 1890s that are in the HOF that played other positions, just none from the 1880s at left field and none from the American Association during the 1880s at any position.

So, in a nutshell, the league that he played in, coupled with the fact that he only played in just over 1,050 games, overshadow the fact that he was the first player to ever hit for the Triple Crown; the fact that he's the only player to ever lead the league in 2B, 3B ,and HR during the same season; the fact that he's fourth all-time in Win Shares per season for a left fielder; the fact that his career 140 OPS+ is better than other top-tier HOF left fielders like Yaz; the fact that his 1887 .435 BA still remains second all-time, etc...

All wiped out because of a fairly short career and the league he played in.

It's almost tragic (baseball historically speaking) how he and many of the great players of the past have fallen into oblivion. Some of the greatest ball players ever, forgotten.

Here's to you, Tip, may you never be forgotten. Or should I say, may you start being remembered.

Any thoughts on Tip O'Neill?

Unblurring History: Ten Best Overall Shortstops In MLB History

Michael W — Fri, 15 May 2009 12:49:37 -0400

Each and every player in the top 10 is an A + offensively and overall. But, I will also list a defensive letter grade with each player so you know where they stand in that category, the way I see it.

Here it is. Unblurring history. The way it really was.

10. Arky Vaughan (1940s) defensive rating: C +

He finished his career with a .318 BA and a .406 OB%. The guy could flat out hit and he was certainly one of the best pure hitting Shortstops in history.

He had at least a .300 BA in each of his first 10 seasons. And he could run the bases very well. He had at least 10 3B in each of his first six seasons.

He got the job done defensively, slightly above average.

11-20. Here are 10 more that gave Arky Vaughan a serious run for this 10th spot. I will list them in order, from oldest to newest: Herman Long (1890s), Ed McKean (1890s), Ray Chapman (1910s), Joe Sewell (1920s), Glenn Wright (1920s), Lou Boudreau (1940s), Alan Trammell (1980s), Cal Ripken (1990s), Derek Jeter (2000s) and Miguel Tejada (2000s).

9. Vern Stephens (1940s) defensive rating: B -

One of only two Shortstops in the top 10 that is not in the HOF (of those eligible). He was an eight-time All Star, but he quickly fell into oblivion after he played. It's always amazed me that he's not in the HOF. I've always believed that his career .286 BA kept him out of the HOF. It's a good BA, but not mind blowing. The fact is, he was a WAY better offensive player than his .286 BA.

When he had things going, he was brilliant. His 1948, 1949 and 1950 seasons: he had over 25 HR each season, had over 135 RBI each season and scored over 110 R each season. Those are the kind of seasons he could have, back to back to back.

He got the job done defensively too. Definitely above average.

8. Bill Dahlen (1900s) defensive rating: A +

The only other Shortstop on this list that is NOT in the HOF. It's almost mind boggling that Dahlen is not in the HOF. He was an A + across the board, offensively, defensively and length of career. It's his long career that makes it so surprising that he's not in the HOF. I'm not saying it should be the criteria, in fact, I'm one of the few historians that believe that length of career is way overrated. But, most love long careers and it makes it all the more surprising that he's not in the HOF with that long career. Even putting his length of career aside, he's an A + offensively and defensively. Put him in for that. Honus Wagner is the only other Shortstop ever that is an A +/A +, offensively/defensively, in my opinion. That's saying a lot. Shouldn't he be in just for that?

Dahlen was a brilliant base runner, to me it was his best offensive attribute. He had at least 20 SB in eight consecutive seasons, he had at least 10 3B in each of his first 6 seasons and he scored over 105 R in each of his first six seasons. A great base runner.

They didn't get much better than him defensively. An A + on defense.

7. Nomar Garciaparra (2000s) defensive rating: C -

Let's face it, the first half of his career is what puts him on this list. He hasn't been the same during the second half of his career and if he keeps it up, he could drop himself off of this list soon. We'll see if he turns it around.

A reminder what he did. His 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000 seasons: had over a .305 BA each season, had over 20 HR each season and scored over 100 R each season.

The question is, will he ever do it again?

He gets the job done defensively, slightly below average.

6. George Davis (1900s) defensive rating: A -

A natural right-handed throwing switch-hitter. He could hit and run the bases. He had over 20 SB in each of his first 13 seasons. And he had over a .300 BA in nine consecutive seasons.

A great defensive Shortstop to go along with his incredible offensive abilities.

5. Joe Cronin (1930s) defensive rating: A

A career .301 BA. He was a great offensive player for a Shortstop and he was great at defense. What else can we say about Cronin. He was an A +/ A guy, offensively/defensively. It's why he's in the HOF.

4. Barry Larkin (1990s) defensive rating: A -

He did it all. An A +/A - guy, offensively/defensively. He should and probably will be a first ballot HOFer when he's eligible next year. You gotta love this guy, born in Cincy, played his entire career in Cincy. Don't see that much anymore, do you? The hometown kid playing for the hometown team. See tonight on the MLB network.

3. Hughie Jennnings (1900s) defensive rating: A

Had a career .312 BA and had over a .405 OB% in six consecutive seasons. He was part of those incredible mid-late 1890s Baltimore teams that historians bring up as arguably the best team in history. On those teams, he had John McGraw and Joe Kelley as teammates, to name a few.

He arguably had 2 of the best seasons in the history of MLB for a Shortstop. Here they are:

1895-.386 BA, .444 OB%, 53 SB, 159 R, 41 2B, 125 RBI and led the league in FA.

1896-.401 BA, .472 OB%, 70 SB, 125 R, 121 RBI and led the league in FA.

Not bad back to back seasons, huh?

A great defensive player, too.

2. Honus Wagner (1990s) defensive rating: A +

Most of us already know his numbers. But I'll refresh our memories. Had a career .328 BA. Had at least 20 SB in each of his first 19 seasons. Had at least a .300 BA in 15 consecutive seasons. Had over 10 3b in seven consecutive seasons. His 252 career 3B is 3rd all time. Had over a .405 OB% in seven consecutive seasons. Someone tell me to stop. I could go on and on with Wagner, he was an amazing offensive player.

And almost as amazing on defense. One of the 10 best defensive Shortstops ever.

1. Alex Rodriguez (2000s) defensive rating: C

I'll tell you right now, I'm not an A-Roid fan. But he's the best Shortstop ever, in my opinion. Of course, now we know that he did steroids. Where we he be without them, we'll never know. Maybe he'd still be first, maybe not. We'll never know.

Without being good or bad, gets the job done defensively.

There you go. History unblurred. The way it really was.

Unblurring History: 10 Best Defensive Shortstops in MLB History

Michael W — Thu, 14 May 2009 12:08:24 -0400

The Shortstop position is the important defensive position on the field, other than the Pitcher's and Catcher. That makes this an important defensive list.

It amazes me how much "respected" historians differ on defensive ratings. We all know that "offensively" speaking, historians are pretty much on the same page. We can't say the same about defense.

Another thing that I like about rating defense: Historians don't care about Length of Career like they do offensively. It's the way it should be offensively, too. But it doesn't work out that way.

Note: Next to each player I will assign a letter grade to each player offensively, the way I see it. We can assume they are all an "A +" defensively, since they're in the top 10 all time defensively for a Shortstop.

Here I go. Unblurring history. The way it really is.

10. Art Fletcher (1910s) offensive rating: B +

Fletcher was certainly the best defensive Shortstop from the last decade of the dead ball era. But there were others that were great, too. Notably, Mickey Doolan, Roger Peckinpaugh and Terry Turner.

But Fletcher takes the cake and there were almost no flaws in his game defensively. He was also a heck of an offensive player for a Shortstop.

11-20 here are 10 more Shortstop's that gave Fletcher a run for his money for the No. 10 spot.

I will list them from oldest to newest: Bill Dahlen (1900s), Roger Peckinpaugh (1910s), Terry Turner (1910s), Rabbit Maranville (1920s), Everett Scott (1920s), Marty Marion (1940s), Phil Rizzuto (1940s), Dave Concepcion (1970s), Neifi Perez (2000s) and Jack Wilson (2000s)

9. Dal Maxvill (1960s) offensive rating: F

Maxvill was the best defensive Shortstop from the 1960s. But there were other great one's, like Ron Hansen. Unfortunately, Maxvill was a defensive expert, but he was a failure offensively, even for a Shortstop.

8. Honus Wagner (1900s) offensive rating: A +

What can I say about Wagner that hasn't already been said. Arguably, other than Alex Rodriguez, he's the best offensive Shortstop in the history of MLB. And some either forget (or never knew) that he was arguably one of the 10 best defensive Shortstop's in the history of MLB.

7. Mike Benjamin (1990s) offensive rating: D

A defensive expert that was the best defensive Shortstop from the 1990s. There were other great defensive Shortstop's from the 1990s, like Tony Fernandez and Rey Sanchez, but Benjamin gets the nod, defensively. Benjamin wasn't a failure offensively, but he was certainly below average, unfortunately.

6. Mark Belanger (1970s) offensive rating: D +

The best defensive Shortstop from the 1970s, with arguments from Dave Concepcion. Some players are better than they look. But Belanger looked great...and he was. Pretty much got the job done offensively, but he was slightly below average.

5. Joe Tinker (1900s) offensive rating: B

Tinker was the best defensive Shortstop from the first 50 seasons of MLB.

There were plenty of other greats during that time, like Herman Long, Bill Dahlen, Hughie Jennings, Honus Wagner, Art Fletcher, Mickey Doolan, Roger Peckinpaugh, Terry Turner, Dave Bancroft, Rabbit Maranville and Everett Scott. But Tinker outdid all of them. Tinker was also a good solid offensive player for a Shortstop.

4. Rick Burleson (1980s) offensive rating: B -

One of the best decision makers in the history of MLB for a Shortstop. Of course, I have no statistical evidence of this, it just seems like he always made the right decision, mentally. A truly great defensive Shortstop. He got the job done offensively, too. He was slightly above average, offensively.

3. Billy Rogell (1930s) offensive rating: B +

He was an incredible defensive Shortstop and a heck of an offensive player for a Shortstop. Don't know what else to say about Rogell, he's not talked about enough for his overall play.

2. Ozzie Smith (1980s) offensive rating: B +

This is the guy that almost "every" historian has in the top three. And he's usually first. What you saw is what you got. He looked brilliant, and he was as good as he looked. They didn't call him the "Wizard" because he could click his heels and return to Kansas.

They called him the Wizard because of his defense. Smith was also a heck of an offensive player. Many are (and were) hard on him offensively. Many forget what a brilliant base runner he was. And because of his brilliant base running, he's a B + offensively.

1. Lou Boudreau (1940s) offensive rating: A

He's in the HOF where he belongs, but at the same time, he seems to have fallen into oblivion with the common fan.

It surprises some, but almost every "respected" historian that you run across that has the guts to assign defensive letter grades will call Boudreau an "A +" defensively. If you run across a pessimistic one, they might just call him an "A". But somehow he's in the HOF and no one seems to bring up his defense.

He was an interesting phenomenon on defense, because he seemed to be slow of foot. But somehow he would get to balls that others couldn't get to. His arm appeared to be average, but he always seemed to throw fast base runners out on close plays.

My point is, he looked fairly good, but he was much better than he looked, how about the best ever defensive Shortstop.

He was also an amazing offensive player for a Shortstop.

So, he's seemingly fallen into oblivion with the common fan. But he's in the HOF where he belongs because he was an "A +" defensively and an "A" offensively.

There you go. History unblurred. The way it really was.

Bill Lange: Best Player in History Not in the HOF?

Michael W — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:52:17 -0400

A Quick history

I realize that Bill Lange will likely never get into the HOF because he had a fairly short career. He only played in @ 800 games. But putting length of career aside, he was the best player in the history of MLB that is not in the HOF, with arguments from Smokey Joe Wood at Starting Pitcher, if you ask me.

Why did Bill Lange have such a short career?

Here's the short condensed answer to that question: Lange was a Center Fielder during the 1890s and played for Cap Anson for Chicago. You have to remember that not only did MLB players not make a lot of $ back then, they were also looked at by the general public as-what's the word-low life's.

Lange fell in love with a woman from a well to do family and her father made it apparently clear that she could not associate with a lowly MLB player. Lange was at a crossroads, he walked away from the game and never returned so he could marry her. Despite lucrative offers to return to the game after he was married, he refused.

The offers were so high that they would have made him the highest paid player in history at the time (even higher than Honus Wagner), that's how good Lange was. But he refused the offers, never returned to the game. Unfortunately, the marriage ended in divorce, some years later. That's the quick condensed answer anyway.

Lange was the caliber player as many of the all time great Center Fielders, no question. He just had a fairly short career. Lange was, at least arguably, one of the three best defensive Center Fielders in the history of MLB, an A + defensively, for sure.

He was also an A + offensively. A .330 career BA and he had a .389 BA during the 1895 season, which is still the Chicago Cubs single season BA record. No question he was a great pure hitter and he was also a powerful hitter during the 1890s.

Lange was also nothing less than a brilliant base runner. In just @ 800 career games, he compiled 400 SB.

It's an incredible fact. The fact of the matter, Lange is fifth all time in the history of MLB in SB per AB, behind only Billy Hamilton, Rickey Henderson, Otis Nixon and Vince Coleman. Certainly one of the best and most prolific base runners the game has ever seen.

What can you say, he did it all offensively, he was certainly an A + offensively and an A + defensively. He just gets a D - in the length of career category.

Five old quotes from those that saw him play (And one recent quote):

The five old quotes:

Quote One-"Ty Cobb and Bill Lange always present themselves before me for comparison, and, despite all the praise they lavish on Ty Cobb, I cannot see where Lange was his inferior...if ever two men, of strangely different physical and temperamental types, were to be counted as an equal, well matched pair, these two were Ty Cobb and Bill Lange...Bill Lange is one of the greats ballplayers the game has ever known."--Bill Phelon, respected writer for Baseball Magazine, 1915

Quote Two-"For my all time outfield, I take Ty Cobb, Bill Lange and Shoeless Joe Jackson."--Tim Murnane, respected writer for Boston Globe, 1914

Quote Three-"I have seen all the other great outfielders, Tris Speaker, Ty Cobb, Joe DiMaggio, I have seen them all in action and I consider Bill Lange the equal of, if not better than, all outfielders of all time."--Clark Griffith, respected baseball historian and HOFer, 1950

Quote Four-"Bill Lange is Ty Cobb enlarged, fully great in speed, batting skill and base running."--Al Spink, founder and editor of The Sporting News, 1920

Quote Five-"Bill Lange was in a class by himself as an outfielder. He was a better outfielder than Ty Cobb or Tris Speaker."--Cap Anson, HOF player and historian, 1917

The two recent quotes:

Quote One-"Bill Lange is a top tier Hall of Fame player...I personally place him in my Top 20 greatest all around players of all time."--Bill Burgess, respected baseball historian, 2005

Quote Two-"Bill Lange was probably the greatest all-around athlete to play Major League Baseball in the nineteenth century."--Bill James, respected baseball historian/godfather of the modern rating system and SABRmetrics, 2002

Of course, Bill James rates Lange @ the 60th best overall Center Fielder of all time after his great quote. He doesn't letter grade them, but we could safely call that a B+. Nothing could be further from the truth, Bill James.

Lange is an A + offensively AND an A + defensively, no question. I've never heard anyone argue withthat. Looks like Bill James is including that D - Length of Career in there, huh? A lot of historians do it.

But put length of career aside, Lange is the best ever. An A + offensively and Defensively. What else is there?

Again, I realize he will likely never get into the HOF with his fairly short career. But let's not forget that he was certainly a HOF "caliber" player, arguably 1 of the 10 best Center Fielders in the history of MLB.

Here's to you Bill Lange, may you never be forgotten. Or should I say, may you "start" being remembered.

Alex Rodriguez: Wiping His Butt With the Fabric of America

Michael W — Fri, 01 May 2009 13:46:36 -0400

It has often times been said that baseball is part of the fabric of America.

I'm not trying to pass quick judgement on Alex. But I will say this, if he DID tip Pitches off to opponents, then he has wiped his a*s with the fabric of America.

I hope that he didn't do it. We already know he did steroids, he's the highest paid baseball player that has ever walked, skipped, jumped, or crawled on the earth and some historians are already putting him ahead of the old greats like Honus Wagner as the best Shortstop in history.

It would be a shame if anyone did this, but being the highest paid player and (maybe) the best Shortstop ever makes it all the more disheartening.

"Purposely" tipping pitches is something that I have never heard of, it's obviously a slap in the face of baseball. A complete lack of respect for the game. And again, wiping his a*s with the very fabric of history that so many hold as precious.

I'm not trying to sensationalize the story, but there are still many players that play for the love of the game, many players from the past and today. It's "more than a game" to many of the past and present players and to many fans and historians (past and present).

Is it more than a game to Alex?

I hope it is, I don't know if he tipped Pitches or not and I'm not rushing to judgement. We all hope he didn't. But if he did, it's a sad time for baseball.

As for Selig.

It's time to start banning people from the game for steroids.

The era "continued" last month; it didn't "end" last month.

Trust me, it will become apparently obvious when the steroid era ends, you won't miss it.

The era not ending, that's a huge problem.

Mountain Landis cleaned up the game after the 1919 World Series with swift and harsh punishment. There's a reason that he didn't make it a 50 game suspension for "throwing games." Can you imagine? He made it a lifetime ban—then the era ended. That's how it works.

So Bud Selig, get your (base)balls out of your pocket and do what needs to be done.

Now I understand that the politics are different today than they were in Landis' day and that you may not have as much power as Landis had, but your job is to protect the integrity of the game.

Are you doing that?

Unblurring History: Ten Best Defensive Catchers In the History of MLB

Michael W — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:11:33 -0400

Other than the Pitchers, the Catcher position is the most important defensive position on the field.

I will include a letter grade next to each Catchers name to show their offensive grade (the way I see it). They are all an "A +" defensively, obviously.

Here it is. History unblurred. The way it really is.

10. Jim Sundberg (1980s) offensive grade: C -

Sundberg was a catcher that rarely made mistakes behind the plate or throwing. He also "managed" the game brilliantly behind the plate.

He was a slightly below average offensive player for a catcher, but he pretty much got the job done offensively, not bad.

9. Lance Parrish (1980s) offensive grade: A

In a way, a lot of historians give Parrish a hard time because he had a lot of passed balls. Though, it seems like he only let balls pass if there were no runners on base. He seemed to have a different approach when there were men on base. Of course, I have no statistical evidence of this, it just seems that way.

But after most respected historians give him a hard time about his passed balls, they them proceed to grade him in the "A" range defensively overall, where he belongs. So don't be surprised if you read people talking about passed balls if you look into Parrish.

Cherry on top: an amazing offensive player for a Catcher.

An "A" offensively and an "A +" defensively, that makes him one of the 20 best overall catchers in the history of MLB.

8. Gabby Hartnett (1930s) offensive grade: A +

Doesn't have much to do with his defense, but it's a neat historical fact: Hartnett was behind the plate when Babe Ruth "called his shot" during that famous HR.

An "A +" offensively and an "A +" defensively, that makes him one of the 20 best overall catchers in the history of MLB, also.

7. Gary Carter (1980s) offensive grade: A +

Carter had a great arm and he was brilliant behind the plate. Plus, he was magnificent at all the intangible things that a Catcher does, like calling the game and working with the Pitchers. Not many I'd rather have behind the plate than Carter.

Not many I'd rather have at the plate than Carter. He was an A+ offensive Catcher, too.

He's another "A +/A +" Catcher. He's one of the 10 best overall catchers in the history of MLB, in my opinion.

6. Ray Schalk (1920s) offensive grade: C +

A neat story about Schalk that doesn't have much to do with his defensive Catching abilities, but it's a neat fact about him that is sometimes forgotten: Schalk was the Catcher for the 1919 "Black Sox" team. He was obviously NOT involved in the throwing of the games. Don't get me wrong, I love the movie "Eight Men Out," but doesn't it severly downplay the greatness of Ray Schalk and Eddie Collins.

Schalk was the best defensive Catcher from the 1920s, by far. In my opinion, he was the best defensive Catcher during the first 60 seasons of MLB.

Schalk was slightly above average at the plate, got the job done.

5. Yogi Berra (1950s) offensive grade: A +

I'm trying to think of my favorite Yogi Berra quote, there's about 30 of them coming to mind, I can't cut it to one. I love his quotes.

Another "A +" offensive catcher and an "A +" defensive catcher.

He's 1 of the 5 best overall catchers in the history of MLB, in my opinion.

4. Ivan Rodriquez (1990s) offensive grade: A +

He's amazing behind the plate and he has a great arm.

Most don't, but some argue that he does NOT call a good game. I disagree, I think he calls a great game and manages the game with excellence. But some say he his too predictable with his pitch requests. They say, if it's a full count, Rodriguez will ask the pitcher for a fastball up almost every time.

I say, that is usually the correct pitch, so whats wrong with that. The truth is, those historians are few and far between. Most respected historians call him an "A +" or "A" defensively. I just thought I'd bring it up because I've actually run across some historians that are beginning to bad mouth him defensively.

Pudge is another catcher that is also an "A +" offensively. In my opinion, that makes him one of the 10 best overall catchers in the history of MLB.

3. Bill Dickey (1930s) offensive grade: A +

The great Catcher of those Babe Ruth/Lou Gehrig Yankee teams during the 1930s.

Again another "A +" offensive catcher that is also one of the five best overall catchers in the history of MLB, in my opinion.

2. Roy Campanella (1950s) offensive grade: A +

Other than Mickey Cochrane, Campanella is the best overall catcher in the history of MLB, in my opinion. An "A +" all the way around; offensively, defensively, intangibles, overall...what else can I say about him?

He doesn't get the reputation of some of the other greats when it comes to defense, but at the same time, most historians "quietly" rate him in the "A" range defensively. It's where he belongs.

1. Ron Karkovice (1990s) offensive grade: C

He's the best defensive catcher that the game has ever seen. They didn't get better than Karkovice, in my opinion. On defense, you name it—he did it as well or better than any other catcher in the game in the 1990s: throwing, glove, calling the game, managing the pitches, the intangibles, etc.

Some are hard on him offensively, but he was actually an average offensive catcher during the 1990s, and got the job done.

There it is. History unblurred. The way it really was.

Unblurring History: Bill James Puts Too Much Weight on Length of Career

Michael W — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 12:55:12 -0400

First of all, I want to let it be known that the respect that I have for Bill James is great.

He's arguably the most respected baseball historian alive and is the "godfather" of the modern rating system, saber metrics.

Having said that, in order to build upon what he started, we first must find the flaws in his system.

The major flaw that we will discuss in this article is the weight he puts on length of career.

To me, James rates the best "careers" of all time, but he doesn't always rate the best "players" of all time.

I understand we have to adjust for long careers when a player is no longer putting up the dominant numbers he might have early on.

Here it is, simplified: If a player appears in 2,000+ games, but dropped off in his last 200 games, we simply take out the last 200 games to find that player's "true" numbers.

That's career adjustment 101, I think we all understand that.

For example, Pete Rose ended his career with a .300 batting average, but if you adjust his career and take out some late seasons, we know that he was a .310 hitter. His other numbers also get better along with his average, including runs per at-bats, RBI per at-bats, etc.

At the same time, James' system makes it impossible to adjust for a player who had a shorter career, appearing in 1,000 games or less.

Here are two players, one with a long career and one with a short career, that we will use as examples of James and his weight on length of career.

Brooks Robinson

James calls Robinson an A- defensively in his Win Shares book. I think he's an A +, but we'll stick with James' grade.

Most call him a B- offensively, while some would argue he wasn't even that good. Again, I think he was better than most give him credit for, but we will stick with that grade as well.

Robinson is an A + in length of career, and thus James calls him the fifth best overall third baseman in the history of MLB—an A+ overall.

So, without length of career: A- (defensively) plus B- (offensively)= A + (overall)

Doesn't jive without length of career, does it? Now if you throw in length of career, then it starts making sense.

A- (defensively) plus B- (offensively) plus A+ (LOC) = A + (overall)

That makes more sense. But that's not telling us who the best players were, right?

It's telling us who had the best career. There's a difference.

Bill Lange

James calls Lange an A + defensively in his Win Shares book. I agree, most do.

Lange was one of the best defensive center fielders in history, no argument here.

Lange was also an A+ offensively. With all the knowledge of the game that James possesses, he'd call him an A+, too.

But James rates him about the 60th best overall center fielder in history—about a B+ overall.

Unfortunately, Lange only played in just over 800 career games, an F in the length of career category.

So without length of career: A+ (defensively) plus A+ (offensively) = B+ (overall)

Again, it doesn't jive without length of career. But if you throw in length of career, it starts making sense.

A+ (defensively) plus A+ (offensively) plus F (LOC) = B+ (overall)

That makes more sense.

James ranks the best career ever, not the best player ever. It's not what we were trying to tell people right?

It's not what I wanted to know when I read his book.

What's amazing is that most historians follow these same guidelines. It's the "accepted" way to rate players, and we need to change that.

Again, I love and respect James' work, but he can't tell me a guy like Ray Lankford was a better overall center fielder than Bill Lange.

I don't think James even believes that to be true, but the length of career puts Lankford ahead of Lange in most rating systems.

Did Lankford have a better "career" than Lange? Yeah, maybe so.

Was Lankford a better overall player than Lange? No.

Lankford was a heck of a player, but it's unfair to call him the better center fielder simply because he played more games than Lange.

There are dozens of position players like this that we could bring up, and that's not even mentioning starting pitchers like Smokey Joe Wood with short careers.

Many historians will rate Burleigh Grimes higher than Wood. Again, historians don't believe Grimes was better than Smokey Joe, they just think he had a better "career.”

What are we doing blurring history like this?

Change the names of these books to the best "careers" ever, because they're sure as hell not the best "players" ever.

Respectfully yours.

Unblurring History: 10 Best Defensive Third Basemen in History

Michael W — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 10:01:28 -0400

I will make a list of the 10 best defensive Third Basemen in the history of MLB. Unlike offense, many historians are all over the map defensively. It's time to set it straight.

All 10 Third Basemen are obviously an A + defensively. But I will letter grade each of them offensively, so you know where they stand in that category, the way I see it.

Other than the Starting Pitcher and Relief Pitcher, the Third Base position is probably the fourth most important defensive position on the field--after Catcher, Shortstop and Second Base.

Here it is. History unblurred. The way it really was:

10. Gary Gaetti (1990s) B offensively

Hands down, the best defensive Third Baseman of the 1990s. Guys like Terry Pendleton and Robin Ventura were also great at the position defensively, but Gaetti was a bit better than them. The cherry on top, Gaetti was also a solid offensive player.

11-20. Here are 10 more Third Basemen that were in serious contention of taking this 10th spot away from Gary Gaetti. I will list them in order from oldest to newest: Ed Williamson (1880s), Bernie Friberg (1920s), Willie Kamm (1920s), Brooks Robinson (1960s), Buddy Bell (1980s), Tim Wallach (1980s), Jeff Cirillo (2000s), Pedro Feliz (2000s), Brandon Inge (2000s) and Scott Rolen (2000s)

9. Mark Christman (1940s) F offensively

A defensive expert, by far the best defensive Third Baseman from the 1940s. Unfortunately, he was a failure offensively.

8. Heinie Groh (1920s) B offensively

Fielding Averages can be misleading, but sometimes they do tell the correct tale. Groh still holds the NL FA record with a .983 in 1924. In this case, the FA tells the correct tale. It's an amazing fact, a player of the 1920s still holds the NL Third Base FA single season record.

We all know it's amazing because FA keeps going up and up and up as time goes on. All the more amazing that the NL FA single season record is from 1924.

A cherry on top for Groh also, he was a solid offensive player.

7. Billy Clingman (1890s) F offensively

The best defensive Third Baseman from the first 30 seasons of MLB (1870s, 1880s and 1890s). The best from the 1800s, there were other great defensive Third Basemen from the 1800s—notably, Lave Cross (1890s), Billy Nash (1890s), Billy Shindle (1890s) and Ed Williamson (1880s)--but Clingman takes the cake, he's the one.

Unfortunately, he was a failure offensively.

6. Art Devlin (1900s) B + offensively

Devln was a fiery tempered Third Baseman that did the job as well as any Third Baseman in history, defensively. His temper seemed to fit right in, playing for the legendary John McGraw on the Giants.

Devlin was also a heck of an offensive player.

5. Ossie Vitt (1910s) D - offensively

Vitt was obviously and apparently the best defensive Third Baseman from the 1910s. Though there were other good ones, like Charlie Deal. But Vitt was better defensively.

Vitt wasn't a failure offensively, but he was dern close, unfortunately.

4. Jimmy Collins (1900s) A offensively

An "A" grade offensively makes him one of the 20 best "overall" Third Basemen in the history of MLB, in my opinion. That's why he's in the HOF where he belongs.

"He completely revolutionized Third Base play...he had the agility of a cat."--Edward Barrow

"He had a great knack of coming up with the ball between hops."--HOF Manager Connie Mack

"I select Jimmy Collins for his general excellence as a fielder...he was the real pioneer of the modern style of playing Third Base."--HOF Manager/Third Baseman John McGraw

What else can I say, Collins was the real deal—offensively and defensively.

3. Mike Schmidt (1980s) A + offensively

Was he better offensively or defensively? That is the question. One of the best ever at each, in my opinion. I guess he's one of the best ever "overall". I would say that he is the best overall Third Baseman in the history of MLB, other than John McGraw.

McGraw is the best offensive Third Baseman in history and he's a "B" grade defensively.

But Schmidt is the ONLY Third Baseman in the history of MLB that is an "A +" grade offensively AND defensively. What else can I say, Schmidt is on my "all time" team at Third Base with John McGraw.

2. Lee Tannehill (1900s) F offensively

Absolutely one of the best defensive Third Basemen that the game has ever seen (or ever will).

Unfortunately, he was a failure offensively. Not only a failure—he's the worst offensive Third Baseman in the history of MLB that played in at least 800 games, in my opinion.

Ironic, the second best defensive Third Baseman in history—the worst offensive Third Baseman in history.

1. Clete Boyer (1960s) D offensively

"Brooks Robinson got established a year or two before Clete Boyer...so Brooks got the Gold Gloves, but Clete Boyer was every bit as good at Third. Boyer would dive for a ball, knock it down, then throw the runner out at first from his knees. I've seen other people do it, but Clete did it all the time.

"He could throw from his knees as well as anybody else could throw standing up."--The godfather of the modern rating system/ saber metrics/respected baseball historian Bill James

Clete Boyer was not a failure offensively, but he was certainly below average. His brother Ken Boyer was a better "overall" Third Baseman from the same era. Ken Boyer was an "A +" grade offensively and an "A -" grade defensively.

Other than Eddie Mathews and Ron Santo, Ken Boyer was the best "overall" Third Baseman from the 1960s. It's why many historians complain that Santo and Ken Boyer are not in the HOF—and they both had nice long careers.

But Clete—the best the game has ever seen at Third Base defensively.

There it is. History Unblurred. The way it really is.

Unblurring History: MLB's All-Time Top 10 Third Basemen

Michael W — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:50:36 -0400

We will list the 10 best third basemen in the history of the major leagues.

All 10 third basemen are an A+ overall and an A+ offensively, so I won't need to include a letter grade for either area.

However, a letter grade will be given to each player defensively.

Many third basemen, like Al Rosen, are hihgly underrated by most historians because of their short careers.

I'm not afraid to put players like Rosen in the top 10 where they belong.

If you're interested in the best careers ever, read Bill James' books, he nails it.

Not what I wanted to know, Bill.

Anyway, here they are, the 10 best third basemen in the history of MLB, the way it really was.

10. George Brett (1980's): B+ Defensively

Brett was the real deal, a heck of a hitter day in and day out.

He ended his career with a .305 batting average, and most historians argue that he was an even better hitter than that. Brett was a great clutch performer who was also a heck of a defensive player.

His 665 career doubles is first all time for a third baseman, fifth all time for all players.

Here are the 10 players that were in serious contention of taking this spot from Brett. I'll list them in order from oldest to newest: Jimmy Collins (1900's), Frank Baker (1910's), Pie Traynor (1920's), Harlond Clift (1940's), Ron Santo (1960's), Bob Horner (1980's), Howard Johnson (1980's), Paul Molitor (1980's), Wade Boggs (1990's), and Troy Glaus (2000's)

9. Scott Rolen (2000's) A Defensively

Rolen is the entire package, offensively and defensively. We easily forget he had over 20 home runs in eight consecutive seasons.

Not to mention all the doubles he hits to go along with his big flies.

8. Al Rosen (1950s) B- Defensively

Rosen could hit the crud out of the ball, and if his career wasn't cut short by injuries, he would be a Hall of Famer for sure

When he was healthy, he had over 20 home runs in six consecutive seasons, and had over 100 RBI in five consecutive seasons.

Rosen is absolutely one of the most offensively productive third basemen in history.

Without being a Brooks Robinson, Rosen more than got the job done defensively. In fact, my B- defensive grade might be harsh.

7. Edgar Martinez (1990's) D+ Defensively

Martinez played a lot of DH because of his poor defense. He was still better defensively than guys like Chipper Jones, but his glove was certainly an issue.

Offensively, however, he was explosive, and one of the ten best third basemen in history.

6. Chipper Jones (2000's) F Defensively

Even with an F defensively, he's one of the 10 best third basemen in history because he is so dominant offensively.

Jones is first in slugging percentage for a third baseman, and has hit over 20 home run in 12 consecutive seasons.

5. Denny Lyons (1890's) D Defensively

Lyons scored runs like they were going out of style. He's in the top 20 all time in runs per at-bats.

His career .310 batting average was great, even for a third baseman of the 1890's. His .407 career on-base percentage was great, too—leading the league with a .461 on-base percentage in 1890.

A heck of a base runner for a third baseman, Lyons could steal bases and scored 135 runs during the 1889 season.

Defensively, he was not a failure, but he was below average.

4. Eddie Mathews (1960's) C+ Defensively

Mathews had over 20 home runs in 14 consecutive seasons!

He is absolutely one of the best and most explosive third basemen offensively. Without being great, got the job done defensively, too.

3. Bill Joyce (1890's) F Defensively

Offensively, one of the best third basemen the game has, or will ever, see.

Defensively, one of the worst third basemen the game has, or will ever, see.

Even with his F defensive rating though, Joyce is one of the best ever. His .435 on-base percentage is seventh all time among all players, and he is third all time in runs per at-bats.

Joyce is also third all time in triples per at-bats, drilling over 10 triples every season of his career, except for his last season.

Joyce had seasons in which he had less than 250 at-bats and still hit 15 triples.

One of the great base-running third basemen in the history of the game, he had over 20 stolen bases every season of his career.

Had power too, leading the league in home runs in 1896.

Joyce was the entire package offensively, but played in just over 900 games during his career. His short career is the reason he is generally underrated by historians.

2. Mike Schmidt (1980's) A+ Defensively

Was he better offensively or defensively? It's a tough question.

Schmidt is definitely among the few third baseman who was great at each.

Like Mathews, Schmidt had over 20 home runs in 14 consecutive seasons, and was a better offensive player than his .267 career batting average lets on.

Offensively, one of the most explosive third basemen in history. Defensively, one of the best third basemen in history.

What else can we say?

1. John McGraw (1890s) B Defensively

His .466 career on-base percentage is third all time, behind only Babe Ruth and Ted Williams, first all time for a third baseman.

McGraw had at least a .420 on-base percentage in 12 consecutive seasons, and his .547 on-base percentage in 1899 still ranks as the fourth best single season OBP in the history of MLB.

It was a record that stood for over 40 years, until Ted Williams broke it in 1941.

McGraw is seventh all time in stolen bases, first all time for a third baseman. He's also fourth all time in runs per at-bats among all players.

His .334 career batting average is first all time for a third baseman, and he had a batting average over .320 in nine consecutive seasons.

Probably the best offensive third baseman in history, McGraw belongs in the Hall of Fame. However, he only played in about 1,100 games, a fairly short career, and because of that he is sometimes rated as low as 15-20 on all-time third basemen lists.

But his short career is the only reason he is sometimes underrated.

When you unblur history and put less of a weight on length of career, McGraw clearly becomes the best third baseman of all time.

He was also one of the best managers in MLB history and a heck of a defensive player.

There it is, history unblurred. The way it really was.

Best Ever Defensive Center Fielders: Unblurring History

Michael W — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:50:30 -0400

Two or three weeks ago, I wrote an article that ranked every Center Fielder in the history of MLB, offensively. A letter grade was given to each player, and they were also put in order from 1-236.

I will do the same thing in this article, defensively—every Center Fielder in the history of MLB that played in at least 800 games.

At a later date, I will rank them overall, combining offensive and defense.

Defense is an area that respected historians seem to disagree on, in general. Offensively speaking, historians are generally on the same page. The same is certainly not true defensively.

My formula for ranking players is very complicated; it is as thorough as my offensive formula. Most historians all have a fairly complicated formula.

Here's what I like about rating defense: All Historians put a HUGE weight on players offensively that had long careers. But they don't seem to care defensively. I like that. It's the way it should be offensively also, but unfortunately, it usually doesn't work out that way.

My point: historians generally agree that Bill Lange was a better defensive Center Fielder than Andy Van Slyke, even though Lange had a short career. They just don't care about the short career when it comes to defense.

That's the way it should be; Lange was either better or he wasn't. And he was, of course, though Van Slyke was a heck of a defensive Center Fielder also, by the way.

But offensively, they will rank Van Slyke over Lange because of Lange's short career. The problem: Lange was also better than Van Slyke offensively, no question what-so-ever. Again, Van Slyke was also a heck of an offensive player for a Center Fielder, just not as good as Lange.

But that's what I like about rating defense, they generally tell you how it really was defensively, unlike they do offensively. But again, historians seem to disagree more defensively than they do offensively, because of the lack of statistical defensive stats, compared to offense.

So here it is. The best defensive Center Fielders in the history of MLB—the way it really was—unblurring history.

A +

1. Tris Speaker (1910s) 2. Andruw Jones (2000s) 3. Bill Lange (1890s) 4. Kirby Puckett (1980s) 5. Jim Edmonds (2000s) 6. Sam West (1930s) 7. Eddie Milner (1980s) 8. Willie Mays (1960s) 9. Vince DiMaggio (1940s) 10. Curt Welch (1880s) 11. Fielder Jones (1900s) 12. Max Carey (1920s) 13. Johnny Mostil (1920s) 14. Curt Flood (1960s) 15. Otis Nixon (1990s) 16. Terry Moore (1940s) 17. Mike Griffin (1890s) 18. Carlos Beltran (2000s)

19. Dom DiMaggio (1940s) 20. Paul Blair (1970s) 21. Lenny Dykstra (1990s) 22. Tommy Leach (1900s) 23. Jim Piersall (1950s) 24. Ty Cline (1960s) 25. Richie Ashburn (1950s) 26. Irv Noren (1950s) 27. Solly Hofman (1900s) 28. Doug Glanville (2000s) 29. Pop Corkhill (1880s) 30. Willie Wilson (1980s) 31. Jimmy Barrett (1900s) 32. Darren Lewis (1990s) 33. Amos Otis (1970s) 34. Kenny Lofton (1990s) 35. Devon White (1990s) 36. Garry Maddox (1970s)

A -

37. Jim Landis (1960s) 38. Gary Pettis (1980s) 39. Lloyd Waner (1930s) 40. Joe DiMaggio (1940s) 41. Ken Berry (1960s) 42. Steve Brodie (1890s) 43. Omar Moreno (1980s) 44. Henry Cotto (1980s) 45. Marquis Grissom (1990s) 46. Dwayne Murphy (1980s) 47. Mike Kreevich (1930s) 48. Fred Schulte (1930s) 49. Jim Busby (1950s) 50. Andy Van Slyke (1980s) 51. Oddibe McDowell (1980s) 52. Taylor Douthit (1920s) 53. Cesar Geronimo (1970s) 54. Cy Seymour (1900s)

B +

55. Darrin Jackson (1990s) 56. Bernie Williams (1990s) 57. Ira Flagstead (1920s) 58. Tony Scott (1970s) 59. Chet Lemon (1980s) 60. Pete Reiser (1940s) 61. Hy Myers (1910s) 62. Steve Finley (1990s) 63. Johnny Cooney (1930s) 64. Ty Cobb (1910s) 65. Bill Virdon (1960s) 66. Fred Snodgrass (1910s) 67. Ethan Allen (1930s) 68. George Gore (1880s) 69. Hugh Duffy (1890s) 70. Gary Geiger (1960s) 71. Earl Averill (1930s) 72. Jimmie Hall (1960s)

73. Doc Cramer (1930s) 74. Barney McCosky (1940s) 75. Gerald Williams (1990s) 76. Ken Griffey Jr (1990s) 77. Willie Davis (1960s) 78. Baby Doll Jacobson (1920s) 79. Dave Henderson (1980s) 80. Cesar Cedeno (1970s) 81. Tommie Agee (1960s) 82. Dode Paskert (1910s) 83. Brett Butler (1980s) 84. Johnny Lindell (1940s) 85. Jackie Brandt (1960s) 86. Mike Cameron (2000s) 87. Ruppert Jones (1980s) 88. Lance Johnson (1990s) 89. Mickey Rivers (1970s) 90. Mule Haas (1930s) 91. Jimmy McAleer (1890s)

B -

92. Mickey Stanley (1970s) 93. Marvin Benard (1990s) 94. Edd Roush (1920s) 95. Billy North (1970s) 96. Vada Pinson (1960s) 97. Sam Chapman (1940s) 98. Rick Miller (1970s) 99. Corey Patterson (2000s) 100. Jim McTamany (1880s) 101. Cy Williams (1920s) 102. Mike Kingery (1990s) 103. Benny Kauff (1910s) 104. Vic Davalillo (1970s) 105. Lloyd Moseby (1980s) 106. Cesar Tovar (1970s) 107. Bill Tuttle (1950s) 108. Jimmy Slagle (1900s) 109. Roy Thomas (1900s)

C +

110. Ben Chapman (1930s) 111. Al Bumbry (1970s) 112. Mike Devereaux (1990s) 113. Nemo Leibold (1910s) 114. Jimmy Ryan (1890s) 115. Mookie Wilson (1980s) 116. Larry Doby (1950s) 117. Wally Berger (1930s) 118. Andy Pafko (1950s) 119. Clyde Milan (1910s) 120. Elliott Maddox (1970s) 121. Duke Snider (1950s) 122. Del Unser (1970s) 123. Bill Bruton (1950s) 124. Chick Stahl (1900s) 125. Stan Spence (1940s) 126. Johnny Groth (1950s) 127. Carl Everett (2000s)

128. Fred Lynn (1980s) 129. Brian Hunter (1990s) 130. Darryl Hamilton (1990s) 131. Jimmy Wynn (1970s) 132. Dave Martinez (1990s) 133. Don Lock (1960s) 134. Billy Hamilton (1890s) 135. Jay Payton (2000s) 136. George Van Haltren (1890s) 137. Tom Goodwin (1990s) 138. Paul Hines (1880s) 139. Ollie Pickering (1900s) 140. Brian McRae (1990s) 141. Milt Thompson (1990s) 142. Bug Holliday (1890s) 143. Dummy Hoy (1890s) 144. Harry Rice (1920s) 145. Randy Winn (2000s) 146. Eric Davis (1990s)

C -

147. Harry Walker (1940s) 148. Tom Brown (1890s) 149. Ginger Beaumont (1900s) 150. John Shelby (1980s) 151. Gary Matthews Jr (2000s) 152. Danny Hoffman (1900s) 153. Ping Bodie (1910s) 154. Torii Hunter (2000s) 155. Don Demeter (1960s) 156. Amos Strunk (1910s) 157. Dave May (1970s) 158. Bobby Thomson (1950s) 159. Mickey Mantle (1950s) 160. Johnny Damon (2000s) 161. Roger Repoz (1960s) 162. Stan Javier (1990s) 163. Ray Lankford (1990s) 164. Vernon Wells (2000s)

D +

165. Jose Cardenal (1970s) 166. Marvell Wynne (1980s) 167. Al Oliver (1970s) 168. Aaron Rowand (2000s) 169. Bobby Tolan (1970s) 170. Bob Dernier (1980s) 171. Dale Murphy (1980s) 172. Ron LeFlore (1970s) 173. Jerry Martin (1970s) 174. Mark Kotsay (2000s) 175. Gus Bell (1950s) 176. Ellis Burks (1990s) 177. Lee Mazzilli (1980s) 178. Johnny Frederick (1930s) 179. Rick Manning (1980s) 180. Lenny Green (1960s) 181. Roy Weatherly (1940s) 182. Jo-Jo White (1930s)

183. Tony Gonzalez (1960s) 184. Jerry Mumphrey (1980s) 185. Daryl Boston (1980s) 186. Rick Monday (1970s) 187. Gorman Thomas (1980s) 188. Ted Uhlaender (1960s) 189. Willie McGee (1990s) 190. Mitch Webster (1980s) 191. Ray Powell (1910s) 192. Albie Pearson (1960s) 193. Brady Anderson (1990s) 194. Jim Delsing (1950s) 195. Earle Combs (1920s) 196. Juan Pierre (2000s) 197. Johnny Bates (1910s) 198. Juan Beniquez (1980s) 199. Pete Hotaling (1880s) 200. Hal Jeffcoat (1950s)

D -

201. Chad Curtis (1990s) 202. Rebel Oakes (1910s) 203. Myril Hoag (1930s) 204. Catfish Metkovich (1940s) 205. Ken Henderson (1970s) 206. Jose Cruz (2000s) 207. Whitey Witt (1920s) 208. Roberto Kelly (1990s) 209. Ned Hanlon (1880s) 210. Rowland Office (1970s) 211. Larry Hisle (1970s) 212. Matty Alou (1960s) 213. Gary Thomasson (1970s) 214. Herm Winningham (1990s) 215. Ken Landreaux (1980s) 216. Gabe Kapler (2000s) 217. Hack Wilson (1920s) 218. Jack Smith (1920s)

219. Pete Browning (1880s) 220. Hank Leiber (1930s) 221. Marty Keough (1960s) 222. Rube Oldring (1910s) 223. Johnny Grubb (1980s) 224. Cito Gaston (1970s) 225. Chili Davis (1990s) 226. Mike Donlin (1900s) 227. Charlie Hemphill (1900s) 228. John Cangelosi (1990s) 229. Quinton McCracken (2000s) 230. Tuck Stainback (1940s) 231. Burt Shotton (1910s) 232. Mack Jones (1960s) 233. Von Joshua (1970s) 234. Steve Lyons (1980s) 235. Preston Wilson (2000s) 236. Terrence Long (2000s)

There it is, history unblurred. The way it really is.

Best Ever Offensive Center Fielders: Unblurring History

Michael W — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:49:13 -0500

There have been 236 center fielders in the history of MLB that have played in at least 800 games, and we will letter grade each and every one of them offensively. At a later date, we will rate them defensively.

My formula for rating players is very complicated, as most are. It is not merely an OPS+ rating—if you want that, watch the MLB network. It is an important stat, but there is much more to look at when finding the big picture.

If you're satisfied with Bill James' ratings, don't bother reading this. He'll tell you that Ray Lankford was a better overall center fielder than Bill Lange. But he rates Lange an "A+" defensively and Lankford a "B+" in his Win Shares book.

So, we know he thinks Lange was a better defensive center fielder than Lankford. I agree. Most do. Here's the problem: Lange was also a better offensive player than Lankford. Lange is an A+ and Lankford is an A. Yet still Bill James ranks Lankford higher than Lange in his historical abstract book, obviously because of Lange's short career.

Not what we wanted to know, Bill. We wanted to know who the best center fielder was.

I've got news for you, Bill James: The center fielder that was better offensively AND defensively was better, no matter how long the worst player of the two played.

James ranks Bill Lange between 60-65 on his center field list. We could safely call that a B+. And we know Bill James calls Lange an A+ defensively because he published it in his win shares book. Trust me, Lange is an A+ offensively, too.

Haven't you ever wondered why Bill James doesn't letter grade players offensively and overall. Here's why: in a nutshell, he would say, Bill Lange A+ (defensively) plus A+ (offensively)= B+ (overall).

Doesn't make any sense does it. A+ plus A+ = B+. Huh?

Here's what Bill James basically does. Bill Lange--A+ (defensively) plus A+ (offensively) plus D- (length of career) = B+ (overall). Now that makes more sense, that's what he does.

Bill James, you're telling us who had the best "career". You're NOT telling us who the "best player" was. There's a huge difference. I don't have a huge problem with it, but change the name of your book to the best "careers" ever, because they are sure as hell not the "best players" ever. The Hall of Fame voting committee is looking for a guy like you.

Anyway, that's how and why Bill James ranks a center fielder like Ray Lankford ahead of Bill Lange. It's not that Lankford was better, it's that Lange gets a D- in the "length of career" category.

That's how history starts getting blurred. Luckily Ty Cobb had a long career. But if Cobb had only played 12 seasons, he'd be underrated too.

Don't get me wrong, I love the work that Bill James does. I don't tear down what Bill James built, I try to build upon what he already started.

The fundamental difference: I want to find the best "player", not the best "career." Don't get me wrong, you have to adjust for long careers. If a player plays 2,000 games and wasn't any good the last 200—then take out the last 200 games to find his numbers. But if a player only played in 1,100 games, don't fault his numbers for that.

You obviously can't adjust upward for that, but don't adjust downward either—don't adjust at all.

So here we go. Unblurring history. The way it really is.

The best offensive center fielders ever:

A+

1. Ty Cobb (1910s) 2. Mickey Mantle (1950s) 3. Joe DiMaggio (1940s) 4. Billy Hamilton (1890s) 5. Willie Mays (1960s) 6. Hugh Duffy (1890s) 7. Bill Lange (1890s) 8. Ken Griffey Jr. (1990s) 9. Tris Speaker (1910s) 10. Duke Snider (1950s) 11. Hack Wilson (1920s) 12. Earl Averill (1930s) 13. Benny Kauff (1910s) 14. Eric Davis (1990s) 15. Jim Edmonds (2000s) 16. Bernie Williams (1990s) 17. Carlos Beltran (2000s) 18. Larry Doby (1950s)

19. Bug Holliday (1890s) 20. Ben Chapman (1930s) 21. Cesar Cedeno (1970s) 22. Ellis Burks (1990s) 23. Mike Donlin (1900s) 24. Fred Lynn (1980s) 25. Mike Griffin (1890s) 26. Andruw Jones (2000s) 27. Ray Lankford (1990s) 28. Dale Murphy (1980s) 29. Pete Browning (1880s) 30. Jimmy Wynn (1970s) 31. Jimmy Ryan (1890s) 32. Larry Hisle (1970s) 33. Amos Otis (1970s) 34. Wally Berger (1930s) 35. George Van Haltren (1890s) 36. Kenny Lofton (1990s)

A-

37. Pete Reiser (1940s) 38. Earle Combs (1920s) 39. Kirby Puckett (1980s) 40. Edd Roush (1920s) 41. Hank Leiber (1930s) 42. Jim McTamany (1880s) 43. Andy Van Slyke (1980s) 44. George Gore (1880s) 45. Ron LeFlore (1970s) 46. Vada Pinson (1960s) 47. Lenny Dykstra (1990s) 48. Mack Jones (1960s) 49. Mike Cameron (2000s) 50. Brady Anderson (1990s) 51. Al Oliver (1970s) 52. Curt Welch (1880s) 53. Don Demeter (1960s) 54. Preston Wilson (2000s)

B+

55. Max Carey (1920s) 56. Johnny Damon (2000s) 57. Johnny Mostil (1920s) 58. Fred Snodgrass (1910s) 59. Dwayne Murphy (1980s) 60. Chili Davis (1990s) 61. Cy Williams (1920s) 62. Dom DiMaggio (1940s) 63. Bobby Thomson (1950s) 64. Lloyd Moseby (1980s) 65. Baby Doll Jacobson (1920s) 66. Andy Pafko (1950s) 67. Rick Monday (1970s) 68. Carl Everett (2000s) 69. Torii Hunter (2000s) 70. Chick Stahl (1900s) 71. Chet Lemon (1980s) 72. Willie Wilson (1980s)

73. Harry Rice (1920s) 74. Gorman Thomas (1980s) 75. Oddibe McDowell (1980s) 76. Steve Finley (1990s) 77. Roberto Kelly (1990s) 78. Ginger Beaumont (1900s) 79. Tommy Leach (1900s) 80. Johnny Frederick (1930s) 81. Brett Butler (1980s) 82. Tom Brown (1890s) 83. Billy North (1970s) 84. Dummy Hoy (1890s) 85. Vernon Wells (2000s) 86. Ruppert Jones (1980s) 87. Chad Curtis (1990s) 88. Stan Spence (1940s) 89. Jose Cardenal (1970s) 90. Steve Brodie (1890s) 91. Fred Schulte (1930s)

B-

92. Irv Noren (1950s) 93. Jimmie Hall (1960s) 94. Otis Nixon (1990s) 95. Aaron Rowand (2000s) 96. Garry Maddox (1970s) 97. Willie Davis (1960s) 98. Sam West (1930s) 99. Devon White (1990s) 100. Tommie Agee (1960s) 101. Johnny Lindell (1940s) 102. Tony Gonzalez (1960s) 103. Fielder Jones (1900s) 104. Lee Mazzilli (1980s) 105. Sam Chapman (1940s) 106. Johnny Bates (1910s) 107. Bobby Tolan (1970s) 108. Cy Seymour (1900s) 109. Gus Bell (1950s)

C+

110. Jerry Mumphrey (1980s) 111. Willie McGee (1990s) 112. Roy Thomas (1900s) 113. Marquis Grissom (1990s) 114. Jim Landis (1960s) 115. Al Bumbry (1970s) 116. Mitch Webster (1980s) 117. Eddie Milner (1980s) 118. Richie Ashburn (1950s) 119. Dave Henderson (1980s) 120. Gary Pettis (1980s) 121. Don Lock (1960s) 122. Mickey Rivers (1970s) 123. Jimmy Barrett (1900s) 124. Ken Henderson (1970s) 125. Darryl Hamilton (1990s) 126. Tom Goodwin (1990s) 127. Solly Hofman (1900s)

128. Jose Cruz (2000s) 129. Jack Smith (1920s) 130. Barney McCosky (1940s) 131. Bob Dernier (1980s) 132. Omar Moreno (1980s) 133. Mookie Wilson (1980s) 134. Randy Winn (2000s) 135. Gabe Kapler (2000s) 136. Lance Johnson (1990s) 137. Bill Bruton (1950s) 138. Johnny Grubb (1980s) 139. Juan Pierre (2000s) 140. Gerald Williams (1990s) 141. Paul Hines (1880s) 142. Mule Haas (1930s) 143. Stan Javier (1990s) 144. Cesar Tovar (1970s) 145. Marvin Benard (1990s) 146. Vince DiMaggio (1940s)

C-

147. Dode Paskert (1910s) 148. Gary Geiger (1960s) 149. Ira Flagstead (1920s) 150. Henry Cotto (1980s) 151. Jackie Brandt (1960s) 152. Corey Patterson (2000s) 153. Roy Weatherly (1940s) 154. Ping Bodie (1910s) 155. Clyde Milan (1910s) 156. Ken Landreaux (1980s) 157. Lenny Green (1960s) 158. Amos Strunk (1910s) 159. Albie Pearson (1960s) 160. Terry Moore (1940s) 161. Gary Thomasson (1970s) 162. Paul Blair (1970s) 163. Curt Flood (1960s) 164. Gary Matthews (2000s)

D+

165. Brian McRae (1990s) 166. Mike Devereaux (1990s) 167. Lloyd Waner (1930s) 168. Ned Hanlon (1880s) 169. Jim Piersall (1950s) 170. Dave Martinez (1990s) 171. Mike Kreevich (1930s) 172. Matty Alou (1960s) 173. Daryl Boston (1980s) 174. Ethan Allen (1930s) 175. Jerry Martin (1970s) 176. John Cangelosi (1990s) 177. Rebel Oakes (1910s) 178. Quinton McCracken (2000s) 179. Johnny Groth (1950s) 180. Dave May (1970s) 181. Rick Miller (1970s) 182. Jay Payton (2000s)

183. Milt Thompson (1990s) 184. Taylor Douthit (1920s) 185. Brian Hunter (1990s) 186. Juan Beniquez (1980s) 187. Ollie Pickering (1900s) 188. Vic Davalillo (1970s) 189. Terrence Long (2000s) 190. Mike Kingery (1990s) 191. Roger Repoz (1960s) 192. Mark Kotsay (2000s) 193. Jim Delsing (1950s) 194. Doug Glanville (2000s) 195. Rube Oldring (1910s) 196. Von Joshua (1970s) 197. Burt Shotton (1910s) 198. Elliott Maddox (1970s) 199. Jo-Jo White (1930s) 200. Harry Walker (1940s)

D-

201. Bill Tuttle (1950s) 202. Doc Cramer (1930s) 203. Myril Hoag (1930s) 204. Jimmy McAleer (1890s) 205. Rick Manning (1980s) 206. Cesar Geronimo (1970s) 207. Whitey Witt (1920s) 208. Jimmy Slagle (1900s) 209. Tony Scott (1970s) 210. Hy Myers (1910s) 211. Charlie Hemphill (1900s) 212. Jim Busby (1950s) 213. Marty Keough (1960s) 214. Pop Corkhill (1880s) 215. Cito Gaston (1970s) 216. Catfish Metkovich (1940s) 217. John Shelby (1980s) 218. Darren Lewis (1990s)

219. Mickey Stanley (1970s) 220. Danny Hoffman (1900s) 221. Darrin Jackson (1990s) 222. Nemo Leibold (1910s) 223. Ted Uhlaender (1960s) 224. Del Unser (1970s) 225. Ray Powell (1910s) 226. Herm Winningham (1980s) 227. Bill Virdon (1960s) 228. Pete Hotaling (1880s) 229. Rowland Office (1970s) 230. Marvell Wynne (1980s) 231. Steve Lyons (1980s) 232. Hal Jeffcoat (1950s) 233. Ty Cline (1960s) 234. Ken Berry (1960s) 235. Johnny Cooney (1930s) 236. Tuck Stainback (1940s)

There it is. History unblurred. The way it really was. Easy enough.

I'd love to hear your comments on who you think the best center fielders were, offensively speaking.

Best Ever Offensive Catchers: Unblurring History

Michael W — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:19:46 -0500

The catcher position is the most important defensive spot on the field, other than the pitcher. But let us focus on that position offensively.

There have been 215 catchers in the history of MLB that have played in at least 800 games, and we will letter grade each and every one of them. At a later date, we will rate each of them defensively in another article.

My formula for rating players is very complicated, as most are. It is NOT merely an OPS+ rating—if you want that, watch the MLB Network. Though OBP and SLG are important in rating a player, there is much more to look at when finding the big picture.

If you're satisfied with Bill James' ratings, don't bother reading this. He'll tell you that Ernie Lombardi was a better Cincinnati catcher than Bubbles Hargrave. But he rates Hargrave a "B" defensively and Lombardie a "D+" in his Win Shares book.

So, we know he thinks Hargrave was a better defensive catcher than Lombardi. I agree, most do. Here's the problem: Hargrave was also a better offensive player than Lombardi. Hargrave is an A+ and Lombardi is an A-. Someone could pretend that they are both an "A," but you still have the defense that puts Hargrave over Lombardi—yet still Bill James ranks Lombardi higher—obviously because of his long career.

Not what we wanted to know, Bill. We wanted to know who the best catcher was.

I've got news for you, Bill James: The catcher that was better offensively AND defensively was better; no matter how long the worst player of the two played. Don't get me wrong, Lombardi was a heck of a player over the length of his career, and Bill James is one of the best historians, but he just irks me. But we'll get to defense in a separate article later. I got ahead of myself.

So here we go. Unblurring history. The way it really is.

The best offensive catchers ever:

A+

1. Mike Piazza (2000s) 2. Mickey Cochrane (1930s) 3. Buck Ewing (1880s) 4. Roy Campanella (1950s) 5. Yogi Berra (1950s) 6. Bill Dickey (1930s) 7. Johnny Bench (1970s) 8. Carlton Fisk (1970s) 9. Jorge Posada (2000s) 10. Gary Carter (1980s) 11. Ivan Rodriguez (1990s) 12. Gabby Hartnett (1930s) 13. Mike Grady (1900s) 14. Chris Hoiles (1990s) 15. Ted Simmons (1970s) 16. Bubbles Hargrave (1920s)

17. Joe Torre (1960s) 18. Roger Bresnahan (1900s) 19. Mike Stanley (1990s) 20. Wally Schang (1920s) 21. Darren Daulton (1990s) 22. Gene Tenace (1970s) 23. Dave Nilsson (1990s) 24. Walker Cooper (1940s) 25. Johnny Romano (1960s) 26. Darrell Porter (1970s) 27. Mickey Tettleton (1990s) 28. Stan Lopata (1950s) 29. Joe Ferguson (1970s) 30. Lance Parrish (1980s) 31. Javy Lopez (1990s) 32. Smoky Burgess (1950s) 33. Jason Varitek (1980s)

A-

34. Ernie Lombardi (1930s) 35. Ed Bailey (1950s) 36. Thurman Munson (1970s) 37. Duke Farrell (1890s) 38. Jim Leyritz (1990s) 39. Chief Meyers (1910s) 40. Sherm Lollar (1950s) 41. Jack Clements (1890s) 42. John Stearns (1970s) 43. Andy Seminick (1950s) 44. Mike Lieberthal (2000s) 45. Matt Nokes (1990s) 46. Tom Haller (1960s) 47. Earl Williams (1970s) 48. Jim Pagliaroni (1960s) 49. Ed McFarland (1900s)

B+

50. Bill Freehan (1960s) 51. Elston Howard (1960s) 52. Jason Kendall (2000s) 53. Earl Smith (1920s) 54. Johnny Bassler (1920s) 55. Billy Sullivan (1930s) 56. Spud Davis (1930s) 57. Johnny Kling (1900s) 58. Mike MacFarlane (1990s) 59. Chief Zimmer (1890s) 60. Todd Hundley (1990s) 61. Ernie Whitt (1980s) 62. Bob O'Farrell (1920s) 63. Bob Brenly (1980s) 64. Frankie Hayes (1940s) 65. Ken O'Dea (1940s) 66. John Wathan (1980s)

67. Earl Battey (1960s) 68. Terry Steinbach (1990s) 69. Art Wilson (1910s) 70. Harry Danning (1930s) 71. Eddie Taubensee (1990s) 72. Brian Harper (1980s) 73. Paul LoDuca (2000s) 74. A.J. Piernski (2000s) 75. Ramon Hernandez (2000s) 76. Glenn Myatt (1920s) 77. Ron Hassey (1980s) 78. Duke Sims (1960s) 79. Charles Johnson (2000s) 80. Heinie Peitz (1900s) 81. Gus Triandos (1950s) 82. Manny Sanguillen (1970s) 83. Tim McCarver (1960s)

B-

84. Rick Ferrell (1930s) 85. Jack O'Connor (1890s) 86. Butch Wynegar (1980s) 87. Deacon McGuire (1890s) 88. Del Crandall (1950s) 89. Hank Severeid (1910s) 90. Wes Westrum (1950s) 91. Benito Santiago (1990s) 92. Doggie Miller (1890s) 93. Jimmie Wilson (1930s) 94. Wilbert Robinson (1890s) 95. Hank Gowdy (1910s) 96. Jody Davis (1980s) 97. Darrin Fletcher (1990s) 98. Bo Diaz (1980s) 99. Shanty Hogan (1930s)

C+

100. Sandy Alomar (1990s) 101. Phil Masi (1940s) 102. Johnny Roseboro (1960s) 103. Michael Barrett (2000s) 104. Muddy Ruel (1920s) 105. Don Slaught (1980s) 106. Ray Schalk (1920s) 107. Tony Pena (1980s) 108. Bengie Molina (2000s) 109. Gregg Zaun (2000s) 110. Charlie Bennett (1880s) 111. Dave Valle (1990s) 112. Hal Smith (1950s) 113. Al Todd (1930s) 114. Farmer Vaughn (1890s) 115. Jack Boyle (1890s) 116. Pop Schriver (1890s)

117. Greg Myers (1990s) 118. Birdie Tebbetts (1940s) 119. Charlie Moore (1980s) 120. Luke Sewell (1930s) 121. Ed Kirkpatrick (1960s) 122. Ron Karkovice (1990s) 123. Terry Kennedy (1980s) 124. Damian Miller (2000s) 125. Mike Heath (1980s) 126. Ivey Wingo (1920s) 127. Alan Ashby (1980s) 128.Les Moss (1950s) 129. Clint Courtney (1950s) 130. Joe Oliver (1990s) 131. Geno Petralli (1980s) 132. Ray Fosse (1970s) 133. Mike Fitzgerald (1980s)

C-

134. Rich Gedman (1980s) 135. Milt May (1970s) 136. Bob Boone (1980s) 137. Dan Wilson (1990s) 138. Boileryard Clarke (1890s) 139. Chad Kreuter (1990s) 140. Johnny Edwards (1960s) 141. Steve O'Neill (1910s) 142. Frank Snyder (1910s) 143. Jim Sundberg (1980s) 144. Clyde McCullough (1940s) 145. Eddie Ainsmith (1910s) 146. Scott Servais (1990s) 147. Ed Herrmann (1970s) 148. Brad Ausmus (2000s) 149. Dave Rader (1970s)

D+

150. Russ Nixon (1960s) 151. Rick Dempsey (1970s) 152. Ossee Schreckengost (1900s) 153. Al Lopez (1930s) 154. Johnny Gooch (1920s) 155. Buddy Rosar (1940s) 156. Mike Scioscia (1980s) 157. Steve Yeager (1970s) 158. George Mitterwald (1970s) 159. Jeff Reed (1990s) 160. Sammy White (1950s) 161. Mike LaVallere (1980s) 162. Rollie Hemsley (1930s) 163. Ray Mueller (1940s) 164. Randy Hundley (1970s) 165. Jimmy Archer (1910s)

166. Frank Bowerman (1900s) 167. Alex Trevino (1980s) 168. Andy Etchebarren (1970s) 169. Jim Hegan (1950s) 170. Brent Mayne (1990s) 171. Val Picinich (1920s) 172. Joe Girardi (1990s) 173. Cy Perkins (1920s) 174. Charlie O'Brien (1990s) 175. Mike Gonzalez (1920s) 176. Gus Mancuso (1930s) 177. John Flaherty (1990s) 178. Buck Martinez (1970s) 179. Joe Azcue (1960s) 180. Clay Dalrymple (1960s) 181. Joe Sugden (1900s) 182. Mickey Owen (1940s)

D-

183. Del Rice (1950s) 184. Rick Cerone (1980s) 185. Ed FitzGerald (1950s) 186. Dave Duncan (1970s) 187. Bill Rariden (1910s) 188. Jerry Grote (1970s) 189. J.C. Martin (1960s) 190. Billy Sullivan (1900s) 191. Larry McLean (1900s) 192. Tom Pagnozzi (1990s) 193. Lou Criger (1900s) 194. John Bateman (1960s) 195. Red Dooin (1900s) 196. Jamie Quirk (1980s) 197. Buck Rodgers (1960s) 198. Phil Roof (1960s)

199. Pat Moran (1900s) 200. Pat Borders (1990s) 201. Mike Tresh (1940s) 202. George Gibson (1910s) 203. John Warner (1900s) 204. Otto Miller (1910s) 205. Mike Matheny (2000s) 206. Zack Taylor (1920s) 207. Kirt Manwaring (1990s) 208. Bruce Benedict (1980s) 209. Paul Casanova (1960s) 210. Oscar Stanage (1910s) 211. Bob Swift (1940s) 212. Malachi Kittridge (1890s) 213. Fred Kendall (1970s) 214. Bill Killefer (1910s) 215. Bill Bergen (1900s)

There it is. History unblurred. The way it really was. Easy enough.

I'd love to hear your comments on who you think the best catchers were, offensively speaking.

The Best Players in MLB History with Short Careers (Position By Position)

Michael W — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 13:30:06 -0500

It seems that most of the great players in the history of MLB that had fairly short careers have been just about forgotten. They are usually highly underrated by most historians because it brings their career value down.

Some are the same caliber players as the greats of all time, and some of them should have never been forgotten.

The first time I read Bill James' book, and he had Bernie Williams rated higher than Bill Lange, it hit me, the career value thing. I can almost assure you that in his own mind James believes that Lange was a better player than Bernie, but he has him rated lower because of career value; I understand why, but it's wrong to me.

Don't get me wrong, I respect Bill James, he's the arguably the godfather of rating, and he's a genius. But I'll never be able to tell anybody that Bernie was better than Lange, unless my fingers are crossed.

Bernie was an extremely good player for a center fielder, don't get me wrong, but Lange was among the great/elite that ever stepped into center field. Lange was unquestionably better offensively and unquestionably better defensively. There's almost no argument except for length of career (career values). I have Lange ranked No. 1 on my center field short career list, by the way.

I have to go with who the better player was. That's what people are asking when they read these books, that's what they want to know. They don't want to know who had the longer career. The great/elite player was better than the extremely good player, obviously. How the hell did we ever start blurring history like that?

This is what urged me to write this article along with my discussions with Bruce Grossberg. By the way, he has a few excellent articles on this site that you have to check out, he knows his stuff.

Anyway, this will greaty lessen the importance of length of career and be a fun list of the best "short career" players of all time. They're the ones that are mainly forgotten anyway. So here's to them.

I'll use a minimum of 800 career games and a maximum of 1,200 career games.

And statistically, we'll list the career stats and we'll list the average season stats per 500 at-bats. Why 500? Everybody seems to look good with 600 at-bats, and few ever have 600 at-bats anyways. And I'll give their general defensive ranking, as I see it.

Left Field

1. Tip O’Neill (1880s)

Career Stats—1,052 G, 4,248 AB, .326 BA, .392 OB%, .458 SLG%, 161 SB, 879 R, 222 2B, 92 3B, 52 HR, 757 RBI and .917 FA.

Average Season—124 G, 500 AB, .326 BA, .392 OB%, .458 SLG%, 19 SB, 103 R, 26 2B, 11 3B, 6 HR, 89 RBI and .917 FA.

Defense—Average

O’Neill is the first player in the history of MLB to ever hit for the triple crown. There have only been 11 other players in history do it since, they’re all in the Hall of Fame. Most casual baseball fans think that hitting for the triple crown is a “sure in” for the HOF; and they’re correct, except for O’Neill.

He had two things going against him with the HOF and with historians. The first, short career. The second, he played in the American Association in the 1880s and it was looked as inferior to the National League back then by historians today. And it was, but what the hell else did they expect O’Neill to do.

I mean, the year he hit for the triple crown—he not only led the league in BA, HR and RBI to capture the crown, he also led the league in OB%, SLG%, R, 2B, 3B and hits. That’s nine of the 11 major categories, I don’t even know what you call that crown—the octagonagle crown, hell that ain’t even enough sides.

He basically led the league in everything except FA and SB—and he had 30 SB. It’s easy to argue that his 1887 season is one of the best single seasons in the history of MLB, it’s certainly on the short list.

So that season, not only did he hit for the triple crown, he also led the league in 2B, 3B and HR—no other player in the history of MLB has EVER led the league in 2B, 3B and HR during the same season, except for O’Neill that season, and it’s an achievement that many historians believe will never be duplicated.

Also, he hit .435 that season, still second on the all-time single-season list and his 167 R that season still ranks fourth on the all-time single season list, both MLB records at the time, of course. Even putting that season aside, he was a great player with a great career.

He still ranks in the top 20 all time in the history of MLB in R per AB for a career. There’s a very reasonable argument to put this guy into the HOF. In fact, there is not one player from the 1880s American Association that is in the HOF, except for his teammate Charlie Comiskey who’s not in as a player, he’s in as a “pioneer.”

Without any question what so ever, Tip O’Neill was the best Left Fielder from the 1880s—American Association or National League. There were some other good Left Fielders in the league in the 1880s, like Charley Jones. But even Charley Jones own mother didn’t think he was as good as O’Neill, come on.

So, MLB, it’s time to put a Left Fielder from the 1880s into the HOF—and if you do that it’s gotta be O’Neill, without question. Then you’ll kill two birds with one stone—you’ll get a Left Fielder from the 1880s into the Hall of Fame AND you’ll get an American Association player from the 1880s into the HOF. Sound good? Oh wait, have you seen the HOF Veterans Committee list, Tip O’Neill wasn’t even on the list.

It was a sad looking list, who’s making those anyway? Hell, all they have to do is ask me and my friend Bruce, we could make them a better looking list than that. Having said that, about half of the players on their ballot are HOF worthy, but the other half couldn’t have held Tip O’Neill’s water, and the Committee knows it. See what I mean? See why this short career stuff irritates me?

I’m not saying make a lot of exceptions, but the truly dominant ones with short careers like Tip O’Neill, Bill Lange, Smokey Joe Wood—let’s make an exception for them. By the way, there are four other players from the 1880s American Association that were also HOF worthy players; four that bring themselves to the forefront of my mind without thinking and research.

The first, Harry Stovey—First Baseman, played some Left Field, too. Stovey might be the only player from the American Association that was better than Tip O’Neill in the 1880s.

The second, Pete Browning—Center Field, he was the Louisville Slugger and he’s still in the top 15 all time in BA; I have him on my “short career” Center Field list. The third and fourth, Bob Caruthers and Dave Foutz—Starting Pitchers, they were O’Neill’s teammates.

Not only were those mid/late 1880s St. Louis teams among the great teams in history because of Tip O’Neill and that teams explosive offense, they were also great because of their extraordinary Pitching.

In particular, Caruthers and Foutz. And in case you’re wondering, yes, the Tip O’Neill Speaker of the House was named after “this” Tip O’Neill.

2. Charlie Keller (1940s)

Career Stats—1,170 G, 3,790 AB, .286 BA, .410 OB%, .518 SLG%, 45 SB, 725 R, 166 2B, 72 3B, 189 HR, 760 RBI and .980 FA.

Average Season—154 G, 500 AB, .286 BA, .410 OB%, .518 SLG%, 6 SB, 95 R, 22 2B, 9 3B, 25 HR, 100 RBI and .980 FA.

Defense—Bad

Keller missed one season because of the military and World War II and a few seasons after returning to the game he began suffering from injuries (back problems, if memory serves). He basically played his last five or six seasons hurt. The injuries were ultimately what led to his early retirement.

The first half of his career when he was healthy, he was incredible. He could knock the ball out of the park and he was a highly productive player. He ranks in the top 20 in the history of MLB in RBI per AB for a career, for ALL players. It’s a fact that surprises most fans because RBI are looked at by most with such importance.

Other than Ted Williams, Keller was the best Left Fielder from the 1940s. Putting length of career aside, he was even better than HOFer Joe Medwick, another Left Fielder from the 1940s.

Most will rate Medwick higher because of his long career, but there is no question that Keller was as good as or better than Medwick in his day to day play (putting career length aside).

I’m calling Keller bad defensively, but many argue that he was at least average and was another player that was a much better defensive player when he was healthy, just wasn’t healthy for almost half of his career. By the way, his Yankee Outfield had Joe DiMaggio in Center Field and Tommy Henrich in Right Field.

Other than that 1890s Philly Outfield with Delahanty, Hamilton and Thompson, it was probably the best Outfield in the history of MLB.

3. Lefty O’Doul (1920s)

Career Stats—970 G, 3,264 AB, .349 BA, .413 OB%, .532 SLG%, 36 SB, 624 R, 175 2B, 41 3B, 113 HR, 542 RBI and .964 FA.

Average Season—149 G, 500 AB, .349 BA, .413 OB%, .532 SLG%, 6 SB, 96 R, 27 2B, 6 3B, 17 HR, 83 RBI and .964 FA.

Defense—Terrible

OK, I’m going to give you the quick condensed version of why O’Doul only played in @ 1,000 games; because you might be asking, how can a guy with a .349 BA have only played in 1,000 games? That .349 BA is fourth all time in the history of MLB, by the way—behind only Ty Cobb, Shoeless Joe Jackson and Rogers Hornsby.

Here’s the quick answer, simplified: O’Doul came into MLB in the late 1910s as a Relief Pitcher, he pitched four or five seasons into the early 1920s. Truth is, he was OK, but really not a very good Relief Pitcher. Plus, he started to have arm problems.

So he went back down to the Minor Leagues for five or six seasons. Why he was in the Minor Leagues he kind of gave up on Pitching and decided to learn how to hit. In 1928, he came back up to MLB, by this time he was 31 years old. He played another six or seven seasons and retired when he was 37 years old, which was fairly old for MLB back then.

Once he came back up in 1928, he was one of the best pure hitters the game has ever seen, amazing to think that he “was” basically a Relief Pitcher gone bad. He could pretty much hit the ball at will and many think of him as a great baseball mind.

Like a modern day player, he made it his business to study the pitcher’s, know what they threw, know where they threw, etc...Anyway, that how one of the best pure hitters in the history of MLB only played @ 1,000 games, didn’t “really” start playing until his was 31 years old. I love the O’Doul story, that’s the quick condensed version anyway.

There are no Left Fielders from the 1920s in the HOF, though there are four or five from the 1930s. O’Doul and Ken Williams, and maybe Bob Meusel were the best Left Fielders in the league in the 1920s, putting length of career aside.

4. Adam Dunn (2000s)

Career Stats—1,131 G, 3,871 AB, .247 BA, .381 OB%, .518 SLG%, 59 SB, 699 R, 201 2B, 8 3B, 278 HR, 672 RBI and .968 FA.

Average Season—147 G, 500 AB, .247 BA, .381 OB%, .518 SLG%, 8 SB, 91 R, 26 2B, 1 3B, 36 HR, 87 RBI and .968 FA.

Defense—Bad

This will be the last season that Dunn will be eligible for this list because he will get over 1,200 games next season. We all know that Dunn is among the best Left Fielders in the league right now and we all know that he is a much, much better offensive player than his .247 BA would lead you to believe.

He’s a highly powerful hitter who is in the top 20 all time in the history of MLB in HR per AB. He can hit the crud out of the ball, a great player. Imagine how many HR he would have if he could hit the damn ball.

5. Sam Mertes (1900s)

Career Stats—1,190 G, 4,405 AB, .279 BA, .346 OB%, .398 SLG%, 396 SB, 695 R, 188 2B, 108 3B, 40 HR, 721 RBI and .938 FA.

Average Season—135 G, 500 AB, .279 BA, .346 OB%, .398 SLG%, 45 SB, 79 R, 21 2B, 12 3B, 5 HR, 82 RBI and .938 FA.

Defense—Extremely Good

Mertes was a heck of a player. He ranks in the top 20 all time in the history of MLB in SB per AB and 3B per AB. He was a great base runner, even for a Left Fielder. Speed wasn’t the only great part of his game, he was a well rounded player who knocked in a lot of RBI to go along with his speed.

Wasn’t necessarily a powerful hitter, but he still piled up a lot of RBI. His last season in 1906, he had a bad season, his first bad season since his Rookie Season. He hung it up after that bad season. There is only one Left Fielder from the 1900s in the HOF, it’s Fred Clarke. Clarke had a long, long career and he was a heck of a player, too.

But putting length of career aside, Mertes was as good or better than the HOFer Clarke, they were about the same caliber player.

Center Field

1. Bill Lange (1890s)

Career Stats—813 G, 3,202 AB, .330 BA, .400 OB%, .458 SLG%, 400 SB, 691 R, 134 2B, 80 3B, 39 HR, 579 RBI and .942 FA.

Average Season—127 G, 500 AB, .330 BA, .400 OB%, .458 SLG%, 63 SB, 108 R, 21 2B, 13 3B, 6 HR, 90 RBI and .942 FA.

Defense—Great/Elite

Lange quit the game early to get married. Here’s the quick condensed story. You have to remember that not only did MLB players not make a lot of $ back then, they were also looked at by the general public as—what’s the word—low life’s. Lange fell in love with a woman from a well to do family and her father made it apparently clear that she could not associate with a lowly MLB player.

Lange was at a crossroads, he walked away from the game and never returned so he could marry her. Despite lucrative offers to return to the game after he was married, he refused. The offers were so high that they would have made him the highest paid player in the league at the time, that’s how good Lange was. But he refused the offers, never returned to the game.

That’s the quick condensed story anyway. I’m actually working on a script for a Bill Lange movie. So, Billy Crystal, Kevin Costner, if you’ve still got that passion for the game like you used to have, give me a shout.

By the way, if I ever work on a second script, it’ll be about either Benny Kauff (No. 2 on my Center Field short career list) or Pete Browning (No. 5 on my Center Field short career list).

Lange played for the legendary Cap Anson for most of his career and Anson was awfully tough on Lange when he played, trying to get the best out of him. He usually did. In my opinion, Lange is the best player in the history of MLB that is not in the HOF.

He’s obviously generally highly underrated by most historians; they all know he was great, but his short career brings him way down with most rating systems because they put such a huge weight on length of career—which Lange didn’t have.

Putting career length aside (career values), he’s among the 10 best players in the history of MLB to ever step into Center Field. Lange could flat out hit, still holds the Chicago Cubs single season BA record.

A big awesome looking man for the times. He was a great pure hitter that hit the ball hard. He was also a great base runner. Lange is fifth all time in the history of MLB in SB per AB. Had over 20 SB every season. And he’s in the top 20 all time in 3B per AB. He scored a lot of R and unquestionably helped manufacture them with his great base running.

He was a great pure hitter and he knocked in a lot of RBI. He did it all well. Might have been the best defensive Center Fielder in the league in the 1890s. I’ve assembled dozens upon dozens of great quotes about Bill Lange over the last 10 years or so.

Truth is, it’s easy find a lot of quotes from historians about Bill Lange from the 1950s or before because they are usually from people that actually saw him play with their own eyes. You can find recent quotes about Bill Lange, but they’re a bit harder to find now days since he’s kind of falling into oblivion.

So here’s four quick quotes that I like—two old ones and two recent ones, we’ll start with the two old quotes: Quote No. 1—“Ty Cobb and Bill Lange always present themselves before me for comparison, and, despite all the praise they lavish on Ty Cobb, I cannot see where Lange was his inferior…if ever two men, of strangely different physical and temperamental types, were to be counted as an equal, well matched pair, these two were Ty Cobb and Bill Lange…Bill Lange is one of the greatest ballplayers the game has ever known.”—Bill Phelon, Baseball Magazine, 1915.

Quote No. 2—“I have seen all the other great Outfielders, Tris Speaker, Ty Cobb, Joe DiMaggio, I have seen them all in action and I consider Bill Lange the equal of, if not better than, all Outfielders of all time.”—Clark Griffith, respected baseball historian, 1950.

Now the recent quotes. Quote No. 3—“Bill Lange is a top tier Hall of Fame player…I personally place him in my top 20 greatest all around players of all time.”—Bill Burgess, respected baseball historian, 2005.

Quote No. 4, “Bill Lange was probably the greatest all around athlete to play MLB in the first 30 seasons of the game.”—Bill James, the godfather of modern day rating, 2001.

Of course, after Bill James lavishes his praise on Lange, he then rates him between No. 60-65 on his all time Center Field list, behind Center Fielders like Ray Lankford from the 1990s. I can almost assure you that Bill James believes that Lange was a better player than Lankford, but he has Lankford rated higher because of Lange’s short career.

It’s probably not what you were asking when you bought Bill James book, right? You probably were wondering who the best players were. Of course, you were. I’ll never be able to tell anybody that Lankford was better than Lange, unless my fingers are crossed.

Let’s start telling it like it was, let’s let it be known that Lankford was not as good as Lange. Bill James knows his stuff, but like most modern day historians, he gets caught up in his modern rating system that puts far too much weight on length of career (career values).

Don’t get me wrong, Lankford was an extremely good player, but Lange was great/elite. You’ll be happy to know, just to be safe, I checked my “stupid stint meter”, and it was just as I suspected—the great/elite player is indeed better than the extremely good player.

How the hell did we ever start blurring history like this? I know why Bill James and most historians do it, the career value thing (career length), but it’s just wrong to me. Unless they change these lists and books and start calling them, The Best Careers Ever. Because they’re sure as hell not The Best Players Ever.

2. Benny Kauff (1910s)

Career Stats—859 G, 3,094 AB, .311 BA, .389 OB%, .450 SLG%, 234 SB, 521 R, 169 2B, 57 3B, 49 HR, 454 RBI and .960 FA.

Average Season—139 G, 500 AB, .311 BA, .389 OB%, .450 SLG%, 38 SB, 84 R, 27 2B, 9 3B, 8 HR, 73 RBI and .960 FA.

Defense—Average

Kauff quit playing early because he had to. He was banned from the game by Landis. Kauff is the only player in the history of MLB that remains banned from the game for life and wasn’t banned because of gambling.

Here’s the story, the quick condensed version—when Landis was cleaning up the league after the 1919 Black Sox scandal, he had a laundry list of other players that he wanted to kick out, too.

And he did kick out a lot of other players along with those eight White Sox players. Many who wanted to remain anonymous said in later years that Landis didn’t like Kauff, thought he was a bad apple and the next time that Kauff looked at Landis cross-eyed, he was going to kick his a*s out.

Landis had him investigated without the general public or Kauff knowing. Behind closed doors the investigators told Landis that Kauff had been offered money to throw games on more than one occasion, but Kauff always refused. They basically told Landis that Kauff was on the up and up.

He was no saint, but he wasn’t throwing games. Landis was still waiting for his chance with Kauff. He got it when Kauff was arrested for stealing a car. Landis kicked him out, banned him from the game.

Here’s the problem, Landis was acquitted of the crime, he didn’t steal the car. Landis still wouldn’t re-instate him. Kauff is still banned from MLB to this day, he’s been dead for almost 50 years, still banned.

So MLBs official stance to this day remains—Benny Kauff, banned from the game for being falsely accused of stealing a car. Some argue (and so did Landis), he was acquitted of the crime, but he still probably stole the car. I say WHO CARES—even IF he did it, is stealing a car supposed to get you banned from MLB for life?

That’s the story, the short condensed version. Many bring up Buck Weaver or Pete Rose as the biggest injustice of all the banishments, I think Kauff might have them both beat. We have to also remember that other than Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker, Kauff was the best Center Fielder in the league during the 1910s. He was a hell of a player.

He could flat out play, over a .310 BA for his career, he was the real deal. So during those banishments, MLB lost the best Left Fielder in the league with Shoeless Joe and they lost the third est Center Fielder in the league with Benny Kauff. He was arguably the biggest injustice and at least one of the best players of all the banishments.

By the way, Kauff played for the legendary John McGraw for much of his career. Also, Kauff was a real hot head on the field; he’d get real po’d, reminded me of a Cobb attitude on the field.

3. Bug Holliday (1890s)

Career Stats—930 G, 3,658 AB, .312 BA, .377 OB%, .449 SLG%, 252 SB, 735 R, 162 2B, 72 3B, 65 HR, 621 RBI and .934 FA.

Average Season—127 G, 500 AB, .312 BA, .377 OB%, .449 SLG%, 35 SB, 101 R, 22 2B, 10 3B, 9 HR, 85 RBI and .934 FA.

Defense—Bad

First of all, one of my favorite names in MLB history, sounds like an old western outlaw and a 1930s gangster got together and named a child, I love it. Holliday had a short career because of a surgery he had in 1895. Here’s the quick story: His first seven or eight seasons, he was unquestionably one of the four or five best Center Fielders in the league.

But he had his appendix removed after his seventh season and was never the same after that, we have to remember that many surgeries were pretty medieval in those days compared to today.

Either way, he never really recovered fully from having his appendix removed and was certainly not the same caliber player after that. He played another three or four seasons after the removal of his appendix before hanging it up. That’s why his career was short, he lost it, but most believe it was only because of that surgery.

That’s the short condensed story. He was on those good offensive Cincinnati Reds teams of the 1890s with HOF Second Baseman, Bid McPhee. Holliday was a great player, well rounded. He was a great pure hitter, a good base runner and he could hit for power. Offensively, there were no flaws to his game, he was the real deal.

4. Mike Donlin (1900s)

Career Stats—1,049 G, 3,854 AB, .333 BA, .386 OB%, .468 SLG%, 213 SB, 669 R, 176 2B, 97 3B, 51 HR, 543 RBI and .924 FA.

Average Season—136 G, 500 AB, .333 BA, .386 OB%, .468 SLG%, 28 SB, 87 R, 23 2B, 13 3B, 7 HR, 71 RBI and .924 FA.

Defense—Terrible

Donlin had a short career for two reasons. The first, he sat out one season because of a salary dispute. The second, he missed two seasons to act in theatre. So between those two reasons, he missed three seasons. Now, don’t go thinking he was a girly boy for acting in the theatre, it’s quite the contrary.

Donlin was a man’s man. He was a drinker, a ladies man and he’d kick you’re a*s for looking at him wrong if he felt like it. A real bad a*s. In fact, many argue that he should have been better than he was, he just fought and drank too much.

He was among the worst defensive Center Fielder of the 1900s, but he was unquestionably the best overall player for a Center Fielder in the 1900s, even with his terrible defense.

Offensively, he could flat out play. He had over a .330 BA for his career and he still ranks in the top 20 all time in the history of MLB in 3B per AB.

5. Pete Browning (1880s)

Career Stats—1,183 G, 4,820 AB, .341 BA, .403 OB%, .467 SLG%, 258 SB, 954 R, 295 2B, 85 3B, 46 HR, 659 RBI and .883 FA.

Average Season—123 G, 500 AB, .341 BA, .403 OB%, .467 SLG%, 27 SB, 99 R, 31 2B, 9 3B, 5 HR, 69 RBI and .883 FA.

Defense—Terrible

Browning and his story is an interesting one, I’ll try and give the quick condensed one. He WAS the Louisville Slugger, he knew a bat maker around town that made bats, Browning had a small hand in designing the bats.

Browning’s nickname was the Louisville Slugger since he played for Louisville in MLB, so the bat maker called the bats The Louisville Slugger—the same bats used today by most MLB players.

Browning suffered severe ear problems as a child and the medieval medical procedure was almost nothing less than a guy that called himself a Dr. going in and ripping his eardrums out with some pliers.

It virtually left Browning deaf; and maybe worse, it caused him severe pain for the rest of his life. I can’t overstate just how severe the pain was during his entire life. It caused Browning to begin drinking heavily at an early age and he was a heavy drinker for most of his life.

He actually played drunk a lot. Many people also believe that the pain drove him crazy, literally. Browning died about 10 years after he retired from MLB.

Unfortunately, much of those last 10 years were in an insane asylum. Not a very happy ending for the Louisville Slugger. That’s the quick condensed story. Browning finished his career with a .341 BA, it still ranks in the top 15 in the history of MLB.

Even with his terrible defense, he was unquestionably the best Center Fielder in the league in the 1880s and the first great Center Fielder in the history of MLB. Between being the Louisville Slugger and being in the top 15 all time in BA, there’s actually a reasonable argument that he should be in the Hall of Fame.

Right Field

1. George Selkirk (1930s)

Career Stats—846 G, 2,790 AB, .290 BA, .400 OB%, .483 SLG%, 49 SB, 503 R, 131 2B, 41 3B, 108 HR, 576 RBI and .977 FA.

Average Season—151 G, 500 AB, .290 BA, .400 OB%, .483 SLG%, 9 SB, 90 R, 23 2B, 7 3B, 19 HR, 103 RBI and .977 FA.

Defense—Great

Selkirk had a short career because he went into the military for World War II. He lost three seasons to the War, when he got out he was almost 38 years old and didn’t return to the game. Selkirk was brought into Right Field as Babe Ruth’s replacement.

It took some time, but I checked the records of every single person that has ever walked on the face of the earth—no one was qualified to fill that position. But Selkirk didn’t do a bad job.

A well rounded player with no flaws. He was a great defensive Right Fielder, a good pure hitter, smart base runner and hit for enough power to knock in plenty of RBI.

Of the Right Fielders from the 1930s, he wasn’t quite as good as HOFer Mel Ott, but putting length of career aside, he was as good or better than HOFers Chuck Klein and Paul Waner.

2. Tommy Burns (1880s)

Career Stats—1,188 G, 4,645 AB, .300 BA, .368 OB%, .445 SLG%, 263 SB, 870 R, 224 2B, 129 3B, 65 HR, 834 RBI and .920 FA.

Average Season—128 G, 500 AB, .300 BA, .368 OB%, .445 SLG%, 28 SB, 94 R, 24 2B, 14 3B, 7 HR, 90 RBI and .920 FA.

Defense—Good

Burns really never had a bad season until his final season in 1895, had 1 bad season and hung it up. Burns was a great pure hitter, a good base runner, a good defensive Right Fielder and he hit with some power for back then, knocked in a lot of RBI. There were no flaws to the guys game. He ranks in the top 10 all time in the history of MLB in 3B per AB.

There is one Right Fielder from the 1880s that is in the Hall of Fame, King Kelly. Putting length of career aside, Burns was as good or better than Kelly—and that’s saying a lot. By the way, he’s sometimes listed as Oyster Burns instead of Tommy Burns in published writings because there was a Tom Burns that also played MLB in the 1880s.

Tom Burns played Third Base, he was good, not great like Tommy, but good. The name Oyster was a nickname for Tommy that wasn’t really used much when he played, but it’s used more now to distinguish between the two.

3. Braggo Roth (1910s)

Career Stats—811 G, 2,831 AB, .284 BA, .367 OB%, .416 SLG%, 190 SB, 427 R, 138 2B, 73 3B, 30 HR, 422 RBI and .944 FA.

Average Season—142 G, 500 AB, .284 BA, .367 OB%, .416 SLG%, 33 SB, 75 R, 24 2B, 13 3B, 5 HR, 74 RBI and .944 FA.

Defense—Terrible

There are only two Right Fielders from the 1910s that are in the HOF. Casey Stengel and Harry Hooper. Stengel is in as a Manager and no one is pretending that he was the best Right Fielder from the 1910, though he wasn’t bad. But putting career length aside, Roth was definitely a better player than Hooper. Hooper was one of those guys that had a really long career 2,300 games.

In fact, Roth might be the best Right Fielder from the 1910s. I’ve got to tell you the truth, I’m not exactly sure why Roth had such a short career. He was still young and he was still good when he stopped playing.

You know I know my history, but I’ve just never heard much about why Roth had such a short career. He was among the worst defensive Right Fielders of the 1910s, but I can’t imagine that was the reason, we are talking about Right Field—one of the least significant defensive positions on the field. Roth ranks in the top 20 in the history of MLB in 3B per AB.

Offensively, he was an extremely good player across the board, especially for the low offensive decade of the 1910s.

4. Wally Westlake (1950s)

Career Stats—958 G, 3,117 AB, .272 BA, .345 OB%, .450 SLG%, 19 SB, 474 R, 107 2B, 33 3B, 127 HR, 539 RBI and .983 FA.

Average Stats—155 G, 500 AB, .272 BA, .345 OB%, .450 SLG%, 3 SB, 76 R, 17 2B, 5 3B, 20 HR, 87 RBI and .983 FA.

Defense—Great/Elite

Westlake was basically a starter during the first half of his career, but he was a backup during the second half of his career. I’ve never quite been sure why he was a backup because he was a heck of a player.

Offensively, he could hit the crud out of the ball and he was a a fairly powerful hitter. Defensively, he was among the great/elite Right Fielders from the 1950s. Putting career length aside, overall, he was among the three or four best Right Fielders in the league from the 1950s.

5. George Harper (1920s)

Career Stats—1.073 G, 3,398 AB, .303 BA, .380 OB%, .455 SLG%, 58 SB, 505 R, 158 2B, 43 3B, 91 HR, 528 RBI and .970 FA.

Average Season—158 G, 500 AB, .303 BA, .380 OB%, .455 SLG%, 9 SB, 74 R, 23 2B, 6 3B, 13 HR, 78 RBI and .970 FA.

Defense—Extremely Good

Harper didn’t play a lot of games during his career because he bounced back and forth from MLB to the Minor Leagues early in his career. When he came back up in 1922, he came up to stay, but he was 30 years old by that time—that’s when his career really started.

In a nut shell, that’s why he didn’t play a lot of games—by the time he “really” made it to the big leagues, he was 30.

He played seven or eight seasons after that and he was a heck of a Right Fielder year in and year out, offensively and defensively. A good balanced player offensively that hit well, was a good smart base runner and hit for fair power.

There are five HOF Right Fielders from the 1920s—Babe Ruth, Harry Heilmann, Kiki Cuyler, Ross Youngs and Sam Rice. Even putting career length aside, Harper wasn’t as good as the HOFers Ruth, Heilmann, Cuyler or Youngs; but putting career length aside, he was as good as the HOFer Rice.

FIRST BASE

1. Zeke Bonura (1930s)

Career Stats--917 G, 3,582 AB, .307 BA, .380 OB%, .487 SLG%, 19 SB, 600 R, 232 2B, 29 3B, 119 HR, 704 RBI and .992 FA.

Average Season--127 G, 500 AB, .307 BA, .380 OB%, .487 SLG%, 3 SB, 83 R, 32 2B, 4 3B, 17 HR, 98 RBI and .992 FA.

Defense--Great/Elite

Following the 1940 season, Bonura went into the military for World War II. He spent 5 years in the military and never returned to the game when he got out. He was a great player, but not up there with the great/elite First Basemen of all time, if you take career length out of the equation, he's probably around No. 30 all time, which is still great.

Also, he was one of the great/elite defensive First Basemen of the 1930s. My friend Bruce brought up Dave Orr the other day, man was Orr great in the 1880s, played just under 800 games so he's not on the list. If he had played 800 games, he'd be in this spot, not Bonura.

2. Henry Larkin (1880s)

Career Stats--1,184 G, 4,718 AB, .303 BA, .380 OB%, .440 SLG%, 129 SB, 925 R, 259 2B, 114 3B, 53 HR, 836 RBI and .971 FA.

Average Season--126 G, 500 AB, .303 BA, .380 OB%, .440 SLG%, 14 SB, 98 R, 28 2B, 12 3B, 6 HR, 89 RBI and .971 FA.

Defense--Terrible

Larkin is sixth all time in the history of MLB in 3B per AB for a First Baseman. He's eighth all time in the history of MLB in R per AB for a First Baseman. Not bad, huh?

3. Joe Harris (1920s)

Career Stats--970 G, 3,035 AB, .317 BA, .404 OB%, .472 SLG%, 36 SB, 461 R, 201 2B, 64 3B, 47 HR, 517 RBI and .989 FA.

Average Season--159 G, 500 AB, .317 BA, .404 OB%, .472 SLG%, 6 SB, 76 R, 33 2B, 10 3B, 8 HR, 85 RBI and .989 FA.

Defense--Average

Harris was a great pure hitter. He's seventh all time in the history of MLB in 2B per AB for a First Baseman. He's ninth all time in the history of MLB in 3B per AB for a First Baseman. Harris missed one season because of the military and World War I. He did return after the War.

He played one season after the War, then he was banned from the game by Landis. Now, Harris wasn't crooked, he was banned because he played in another professional league that was trying to compete with MLB. Landis didn't like it, so he banned him.

Harris didn't play for three seasons, until Landis finally reinstated him. So between the military and the banishment, he missed four seasons. That's why his career was fairly short. There are four Hall of Fame First Basemen from the 1920s that Harris played in--Bill Terry, George Sisler, Jim Bottomley and George Kelly.

I can tell you this, putting length of career aside, he was about the same caliber player as those four Hall of Famers, actually unquestionably better than George Kelly. By the way, when Harris was in the military and missed that season during World War I, he broke both of his legs and fractured his skull.

Some suggest that he was about 70 percent of what he should have been for most of his career because of that. If that's true I'd have loved to seen what he would have been without that.

4. John Jaha (1990s)

Career Stats--826 G, 2,775 AB, .263 BA, .369 OB%, .465 SLG%, 36 SB, 470 R, 126 2B, 5 3B, 141 HR, 490 RBI and .993 FA.

Average Season--148 G, 500 AB, .263 BA, .369 OB%, .465 SLG%, 6 SB, 84 R, 23 2B, 1 3B, 25 HR, 88 RBI and .993 FA.

Defense--Extremely Good

Jaha was kind of a poor mans McGwire, except he didn't eat as many "vitamins"--and he could play defense. At least I've never heard those "vitamin" talks about Jaha. He could hit the crud out of the ball. He retired early because of injuries and actually played his last three or four seasons hurt. He was a heck of a player.

5. Jim Gentile (1960s)

Career Stats--936 G, 2,922 AB, .260 BA, .368 OB%, .486 SLG%, 3 SB, 434 R, 113 2B, 6 3B, 179 HR, 549 RBI and .990 FA.

Average Season--161 G, 500 AB, .260 BA, .368 OB%, .486 SLG%, 1 SB, 75 R, 19 2B, 1 3B, 31 HR, 95 RBI and .990 FA.

Defense--Good

He was a powerful hitter. Other than Harmon Killebrew and Willie McCovey, he was probably the best HR hitting First Baseman from the 1960s.

Second Base

1. Yank Robinson (1880s)

Career Stats--978 G, 3,428 AB, .241 BA, .375 OB%, .324 SLG%, 272 SB, 697 R, 148 2B, 44 3B, 16 HR, 399 RBI and .887 FA.

Average Season--142 G, 500 AB, .241 BA, .375 OB%, .324 SLG%, 39 SB, 101 R, 21 2B, 6 3B, 2 HR, 58 RBI and .887 FA.

Defense--Terrible

Robinson was a much better offensive player than his BA would lead you to believe. His .375 OB% helped make up for that. So for a sub-par hitter, he got on base a lot; and you didn't want him on base if you were the other team because he was a terror on the bases. One of the best baserunners in history for a Second Baseman.

He's in the top 20 all time in the history of MLB in SB per at bat and R per AB--for ALL positions. Robinson was part of those great St. Louis Browns teams of the 1880s (now the Cardinals of course). Some still bring up that 1887 St. Louis team that he was on as one of the 10 best teams in the history of MLB.

Being on that great team certainly helped him score all of those R, but he definitely helped manufacture them himself with his great/elite baserunning, too. Robinson stopped playing early because he was ill with TB.

Unfortunately, he passed away only a couple years after he stopped playing MLB.

2. Bump Wills (1970s)

Career Stats--831 G, 3,030 AB, .266 BA, .335 OB%, .360 SLG%, 196 SB, 472 R, 128 2B, 24 3B, 36 HR, 302 RBI and .979 FA.

Average Season--136 G, 500 AB, .266 BA, .335 OB%, .360 SLG%, 32 SB, 77 R, 21 2B, 4 3B, 6 HR, 50 RBI and .979 FA.

Defense--Extremely Good

Some people forget that Wills was among the best Second Basemen in the league during the late 1970s, early 1980s. His father was Maury Wills, the great Shortstop from the 1960s. Looks like the apple didn't fall far from the tree on this one.

Wills retired early for reasons that are unknown to me, to tell you the truth. He was still good, don't know why he retired so young. He played more professional baseball over in Japan after he retired from MLB.

3. Odell Hale (1930s)

Career Stats--1,062 G, 3,701 AB, .289 BA, .352 OB%, .441 SLG%, 57 SB, 551 R, 240 2B, 51 3B, 73 HR, 573 RBI and .959 FA.

Average Season--144 G, 500 AB, .289 BA, .352 OB%, .441 SLG%, 8 SB, 74 R, 32 2B, 7 3B, 10 HR, 77 RBI and .959 FA.

Defense--Bad

Three Hall of Fame Second Basemen from the 1930s that Hale played in: Charlie Gehringer, Tony Lazzeri and Billy Herman. Putting length of career aside, Hale was better than Herman, though not nearly as good as Gehringer and Lazzeri.

4. Gene DeMontreville (1890s)

Career Stats--922 G, 3,615 AB, .303 BA, .340 OB%, .373 SLG%, 228 SB, 537 R, 130 2B, 35 3B, 17 HR, 497 RBI and .948 FA.

Average Season--128 G, 500 AB, .303 BA, .340 OB%, .373 SLG%, 32 SB, 75 R, 18 2B, 5 3B, 2 HR, 69 RBI and .948 FA.

Defense--Average

He could flat out play.

5. Brian Roberts (2000s)

Career Stats--976 G, 3,858 AB, .284 BA, .355 OB%, .416 SLG%, 226 SB, 619 R, 262 2B, 32 3B, 61 HR, 364 RBI and .987 FA.

Average Season--127 G, 500 AB, .284 BA, .355 OB%, .416 SLG%, 29 SB, 80 R, 34 2B, 4 3B, 8 HR, 47 RBI and .987 FA.

Defense--Extremely Good

We all know he's among the four or five best Second Basemen in the league right now, so it shows how good the five in front of him were. Roberts is obviously still playing and will get over 1,200 games in a couple years.

He's a good base runner and he hits an overabundant amount of 2B, he's up there all time in 2B per AB.

Shortstop

1. Ray Chapman (1910s)

Career Stats--1,051 G, 3,785 AB, .278 BA, .358 OB%, .377 SLG%, 238 SB, 671 R, 162 2B, 81 3B, 17 HR, 364 RBI and .939 FA.

Average Season--138 G, 500 AB, .278 BA, .358 OB%, .377 SLG%, 31 SB, 88 R, 21 2B, 11 3B, 2 HR, 48 RBI and .939 FA.

Defense--Average

Chapman is the only player in the history of MLB to die from an on the field injury. He was hit in the head while up to bat in 1920, days later, he died from his injury. It was a tragedy for everyone, including MLB. Baseball was dealing with the Black Sox scandal from the year before and now this.

Also, Chapman was the best Second Baseman of the 1910s, not that it mattered, but he wasn't just any player, he was the star Second Baseman in MLB. When he died, his replacement was Joe Sewell and most remember that Sewell ended up having a Hall of Fame career.

When Chapman died, things changed. MLB outlawed the spit ball, they used several balls during a game to keep them "white" because many felt that Chapman never saw the ball, Pitcher's liked to dirty the ball back then, and it was legal.

So many changes in MLB were directly and indirectly linked to the death of Chapman.

2. Carlos Guillen (2000s)

Career Stats--1,128 G, 4,048 AB, .290 BA, .360 OB%, .448 SLG%, 71 SB, 663 R, 237 2B, 46 3B, 104 HR, 572 RBI and .966 FA.

Average Season--139 G, 500 AB, .290 BA, .360 OB%, 448 SLG%, 9 SB, 82 R, 29 2B, 6 3B, 13 HR, 71 RBI and .966 FA.

Defense--Bad

Guillen is still playing and this will be the last season that he's eligible for this list as he will be over 1,200 games after next season. One of the five or six best Shortstops in the league. And the league is chalked full of good Shortstops right now.

He's one of the five or six best, even with his bad defense. He's not terrible at defense, he's bad--and close to average truthfully. Very underrated offensive player for a Shortstop by the casual fan.

3. Glenn Wright (1920s)

Career Stats--1,119 G, 4,153 AB, .294 BA, .328 OB%, .447 SLG%, 38 SB, 584 R, 203 2B, 76 3B, 94 HR, 723 RBI and .941 FA.

Average Season--135 G, 500 AB, .294 BA, .328 OB%, .447 SLG%, 5 SB, 70 R, 24 2B, 9 3B, 11 HR, 87 RBI and .941 FA.

Defense--Average

There were four Hall of Fame Shortstops from the 1920s that Wright played in the league with. Setting length of career aside, he was the same caliber player as three of the four, Joe Sewell, Dave Bancroft and Travis Jackson and he was better than Rabbit Maranville.

Maranville had a long, long career, which historians love. But setting career length (career value) aside, he could play with all of those guys day in and day out.

4. John Valentin (1990s)

Career Stats--1,105 G, 3,917 AB, .279 BA, .360 OB%, .454 SLG%, 47 SB, 614 R, 281 2B, 17 3B, 124 HR, 558 RBI and .972 FA.

Average Season--142 G, 500 AB, .279 BA, .360 OB%, .454 SLG%, 6 SB, 79 R, 36 2B, 2 3B, 16 HR, 72 RBI and .972 FA.

Defense--Great

Valentin was the real deal, offensively and defensively. I used to love watching that guy play. Starting suffering injuries late in his career, tried to re-hab in the minors, but never made it back up. Started coaching after reluctantly retiring. Valentin is in the top 20 all time in the history of MLB in 2B per AB.

An amazing fact that hardly anyone knows. In the 1990s at Shortstop, putting length of career aside--he wasn't up there with Barry Larkin, but he was right around the same caliber player as Julio Franco and Cal Ripken, that's saying a lot.

Yes, I believe when you take away length of career (career value), Larkin was a slightly better day to day player than Ripken. Don’t get me wrong, Ripken was the real deal. Larkin will be in the HOF next year, he was the real deal, too.

5. Jimmy Rollins (2000s)

Career Stats--1,150 G, 4,636 AB, .286 BA, .352 OB%, .412 SLG%, 259 SB, 788 R, 227 2B, 53 3B, 83 HR, 418 RBI and .966 FA.

Average Stats--124 G, 500 AB, .286 BA, .352 OB%, .412 SLG%, 28 SB, 85 R, 24 2B, 6 3B, 9 HR, 45 RBI and .966 FA.

Defense--Average

Rollins is still playing and this will be his last year on this list as he will get over the 1,200 games mark next season also. I think Rollins is slightly overrated. Do I think he's good? Yes, I've got him as one of the five best Shortstops in history with less than 1,200 games don't I.

But he's still slightly overrated when I think of the fact that a lot of casual fans think he's the best Shortstop in the league. It's simply not true. I think he's overrated defensively also. I think he's average, most think he's great.

I don't think he's bad, but I'll stick with average for now. The guy can play, don't get me wrong.

Third Base

1. John McGraw (1890s)

Career Stats--1,099 G, 3,924 AB, .334 BA, .466 OB%, .410 SLG%, 436 SB, 1,024 R, 121 2B, 70 3B, 13 HR, 462 RBI and .898 FA.

Average Season--141 G, 500 AB, .334 BA, .466 OB%, .410 SLG%, 56 SB, 131 R, 16 2B, 9 3B, 2 HR, 59 RBI and .898 FA.

Defense--Average

Those aren't misprints folks. He really had a .334 BA, it's the best BA in the history of MLB for a Third Baseman. His .466 OB% is fourth all time, for ALL players. Those SB, he's in the top 10 all time in SB per AB, for ALL players. The R, he's third all time in R per AB, for ALL players. McGraw is in the Hall of Fame, officially as a Manager. He should have went in as a Player/Manager (he’s the only player on any of these lists that’s in the HOF, by the way).

I don't care if he only played 1,100 games, they're dominant numbers, to say the least. Putting his short career aside, he's as good as any Third Baseman in the history of MLB. I think McGraw and Schmidt were the best Third Basemen ever.

In fact, most historians will still rank McGraw in the top 15 or 20, even with his short career, whi

New Rule Introduced For Major League Baseball

Michael W — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:32:01 -0500

I would like to introduce a new rule for Major League Baseball to consider. It's a rule that I'm fairly sure they will implement.

Here it is, rule 823B, subsection 12, "From this point on, no Starting Pitcher will be inducted into the Hall of Fame until we get our heads out of our a*ses and put Smokey Joe Wood in the Hall of Fame".

Yeah, I like that rule.

There can and will not be any exceptions to this rule unless they fall under subcategory 14c, which states: "unless their first name starts with the letters P-E-D-R-O (not necessarily in that order) and their last name starts with the letters M-A-R-T-I-N-E-Z (not necessarily in that order). Both first and last name 'must' start with these letters for the exception to apply."

I like that rule, too.

What made me want to write this article is all the talk about Mike Mussina and his retirement. The Mussina Hall of Fame talk has already started.

First of all, Mussina was a great Starting Pitcher, don't get me wrong. He's in the "great" category. You know, the category that is right under the "great/elite" category that Starting Pitchers like Smokey Joe Wood, Walter Johnson, Ed Walsh and Pedro Martinez are in. We remember that category, right?

Some of the Hall of Famers are actually in that category.

Surely, no one is pretending that Mussina was better than Smokey Joe Wood. Mussina had a longer career, but wasn't nearly as good. Hell, Mussina was great and still wasn't nearly as good as Smokey Joe, that's how good he was.

Back in the day when they both Pitched at the same time, the tough question was (and still is), "was Smokey Joe Wood as good as Walter Johnson". The question never was (and still isn't), "was he as good as Mike Mussina". It's not a problem with Mussina, again he's great, it's a problem with the Hall of Fame.

Many assume that the Hall of Fame is filled with the best players ever, it's really not true. They should rename the Hall of Fame. It should be called "Extremely Good Players that had Really Long Careers". That name fits it better, that's 90 percent of who's in.

I'm being a bit hard on the Hall of Fame. They do the right thing sometimes. They did put Addie Joss in the Hall and he had a short career, and there are other players we could bring up. But one of them that we bring up "should" be Smokey Joe Wood, maybe Bill Lange.

Anyway, it's a rule that I'm sure will be implemented. I don't mind when it's implemented, as long as it's before 2013.

Can someone do me a favor, forward this to MLB, The Hall of Fame Voting Committee, The Hall of Fame Veterans Committee, Your Local Congressman and The President of The United States. I hate to get Congress involved, but it's a rule that's pretty much as important as steroids and I think they must be notified, as a civic duty and stuff.

Can't wait for the comments and this one, should be fun.

Lajoie/Hornsby: The Best Single Season in MLB History for a Second Baseman?

Michael W — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:48:43 -0500

The season that Dustin Pedroia just had got me thinking, who has the best single season in the history of MLB for a Second Baseman? He had a great one this year, .326 BA, 20 SB, 118 R, 54 2B and .992 FA.

That's one hell of a season for a Second Baseman. But there are three other seasons that present themselves in the forefront of my mind for comparison and arguments as the best single seasons in history for a Second Baseman. They are: Nap Lajoie-1901, Rogers Hornsby-1922 and Hornsby-1929.

Lajoie

In 1901, Nap Lajoie hit for the triple crown and only 11 other players in history have ever done it. Of course, they're all in the Hall of Fame, except for Tip O'Neill. O'Neill was the first player in history to do it, he's not in the Hall and that's a-whole-nother story, don't get me started.

Anyway, Lajoie had a .426 BA during his magical 1901 season and that .426 BA still ranks 4th on the all time single season list. His .960 FA doesn't look impressive by today's standards, but it was for back then and he led the league in FA that season.

Here are some of his stats for that 1901 season: .426 BA, .463 OB%, .643 SLG%, 27 SB, 145 R, 48 2B, 14 3B, 14 HR, 125 RBI and .960 FA.

So, not only did he lead the league in BA, HR and RBI to hit for the triple crown, he also led the league in OB%, SLG%, R, 2B and FA.

Hornsby 1922

Rogers Hornsby has two seasons that are possibly the best ever for a Second Baseman and we'll start with his 1922 season. Hornsby also hit for the triple crown in 1922. He had a .967 FA that season and it also looks low by today's standard, but it was great for the 1920s and he led the league that season in FA. YES, it's true, Hornsby led the league in FA.

Here are some of his stats for that 1922 season: .401 BA, .459 OB%, .722 SLG%, 141 R, 46 2B, 14 3B, 42 HR, 152 RBI and .967 FA.

So, not only did he lead the league in BA, HR and RBI to hit for the triple crown, he also led the league in OB%, SLG%, R, 2B and FA. Interesting, the exact same 8 categories that Lajoie led the league in 1901.

Hornsby 1929

Hornsby and his 1929 season is the other season I had in mind. He led the league in SLG% and R that season.

Here are some of his stats for that 1929 season: .380 BA, .459 OB%, .679 SLG%, 156 R, 47 2B, 39 HR and 149 RBI.

The question is, who has the best single season in the history of MLB for a Second Baseman?

Tip O'Neill Hit for the Triple Crown; Still Not in the Hall of Fame

Michael W — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:55:50 -0500

Tip O'Neill is one of only 12 different players in the history of MLB to hit for the triple crown. He was the first to do it, and he remains as the ONLY player in the history of MLB to do it and NOT be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

Hitting for the triple crown is "known" as a sure way to get in the Hall of Fame, and many assume that hitting for the crown puts you in, for sure. It's true, except for O'Neill.

He hit for the triple crown, but so did 11 others. Here's a fact about O'Neill that no one else can say: O'Neill still remains as the only player in the history of MLB to lead the league in 2B, 3B, and HR during the same season, the only player ever. Many historians believe that accomplishment will never be duplicated.

I do not believe that he is the best player in history that is not in the Hall of Fame, though he would almost surely have to be included on anyone's short list of "should be's."

As far as left field goes, I believe he is the best player in history that is not in the Hall of Fame, other than Ken Williams from the 1920s. Other left fielders that come to mind, but I don't believe were as good as O'Neill: Charlie Keller (1940s), Albert Belle (1990s), Shoeless Joe Jackson (1910s)--of course, Lefty O'Doul (1920s), Bob Johnson (1930s), Bob Meusel (1920s), Riggs Stephenson (1920s), Walt Wilmot (1890s), off the top of my head, you get the point.

He's arguably at or near the top of the left-field should be's for the Hall of Fame.

His 1887 season was incredible. He had a .435 BA that season and that .435 BA still ranks second on the all-time single season BA list. His 167 R that season still ranks fourth on the all time single season R list. They were both MLB records at the time. Here are his stats for that 1887 season.

1887: .435 BA, .490 OB%, .691 SLG%, 30 SB, 167 R, 52 2B, 19 3B, 14 HR and 123 RBI

Not a bad season, he not only led the league in BA, HR and RBI to hit for the triple crown. He also led the league in OB%, SLG%, R, 2B, 3B and hits. That's at least nine categories he led the league in.

I don't even know what the hell you call that. The Octagonagle crown, I don't even think that's enough. The only major categories that he didn't lead the league in were FA and SB and he had 30 SB, not bad.

So, why is he not in the Hall of Fame? Before someone starts going No. 1 up your leg, let me tell you this. O'Neill only played 10 seasons. Hall of Fame voters generally love long careers, not short ones.

Let's see, O'Neill's career falls in the... "short ones" category. The bigger reason: He played six of his 10 seasons in the American Association and historians generally regard the American Association as an inferior league to the National League in the 1880s. And it was.

But let's not hold that against O'Neill; there wasn't much else he could do other than lead the league in nine of the 11 major categories. The fact is, there is only one player from the 1880s American Association that is in the Hall of Fame, Charlie Comiskey.

Comiskey was put in as a "Pioneer of the game" and isn't really in as a player. O'Neill and Harry Stovey are probably the two most deserving from that league that belong in, at least out of the non pitchers.

We've primarily talked about his 1887 season only. What about his career numbers? He ended his career with a .326 BA and he still remains in the top 20 all time in the history of MLB in R per AB. So, his career numbers are great, too.

Quick facts: His 1887 St. Louis Browns would later become the St. Louis Cardinals that we know and love now. He had Charlie Comiskey at First Base, Yank Robinson at Second Base, Arlie Latham at Third Base, Bob Caruthers at Starting Pitcher, and Dave Foutz at Starting Pitcher.

An unbelievable team that dominated the league and many historians bring up as one of the best teams in history. O'Neill was arguably the best player from the best team ever.

The speaker of the house, Tip O'Neill, was named after "this" Tip O'Neill.

I'll go ahead and bring up the only bad part of Tip O'Neill and his game. Defense. Couldn't cover the field, couldn't catch the ball, and couldn't throw the ball. Other than that, he was perfectly fine on defense.

Hughie Jennings: Best Single Season In The History Of MLB For a Shortstop?

Michael W — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:37:05 -0500

Hughie Jennings had two great seasons in 1895 and 1896 that I don't know have ever been topped by another Shortstop in the history of MLB. He scored 159 R during the 1895 season and that mark still ranks 17th on the all-time single season R list. His FA looks low by today's standard, but it was great for back then and he led the league both of those seasons in FA.

Here are his stats for those seasons:

1895--.386 BA, .444 OB%, 53 SB, 159 R, 41 2B, 125 RBI and .940 FA

1896--.401 BA, .472 OB%, 70 SB, 125 R, 121 RBI and .928 FA

The question is, which of those two seaons were his best?

The next question, is it the best single season in the history of MLB for a Shortstop?

Why Is Smokey Joe Wood Not in the Hall of Fame?

Michael W — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:39:55 -0500

This isn't an article as much as it is a question in need of comments.

Many historians believe that Walter Johnson is a top tier Hall of Fame starting pitcher and he might make it in many historians all time five-man rotation, and I agree, it's at least arguable.

What we have to remember is that when Johnson and Smokey Joe Wood both played, the question was: Who's Better Walter Johnson or Joe Wood? Back then, it wasn't a question that was easily answered.

In fact, more people than you might think thought Wood was as good or better than Johnson at the time. How we ever lost sight of that is beyond me.

What spurred me to write this was the Jamie Moyer article asking if he should be in the Hall of Fame. Moyer is good, not great, and it just got me thinking about Smokey Joe.

To keep you from having to look it up, some Smokey Joe Wood stats and facts: 2.03 ERA (third all time), .672 winning percentage (top-10 all time), pitched in just over 200 games before he threw his arm out, gave up only 10 HR during his career (amazing, even for the 1910s)

So here's why I'm requesting comments:

Give me a reason, other than his short career, that Smokey Joe Wood is not in the Hall of Fame?

MLB's 10 Best First Basemen of All Time

Michael W — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 06:19:25 -0500

10. Johnny Mize (1940s)

One of those seemingly forgotten Hall of Famers. Historians haven't forgotten him, but many of the casual fans have. His .562 SLG percentage still ranks in the top 20 all time. He is also in the top 20 all time in RBI per AB.

Mize was a dominant player who led the league in eight of the 10 "major" categories during his career; at one time or another he led the league in BA, SLG%, R, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI and FA.

The only two he never led the league in were OB% and SB. He still had a great .397 OB% for his career. In fact, he had over a .400 OB% in each of his first six seasons. He could hit, too. He had a .312 career BA; had over a .300 BA in each of his first nine seasons; over .310 in his first six and over .325 in his first four.

Arguments of some who didn't make my list in alphabetical order: Dick Allen (1970s), Cap Anson (1880s), Roger Connor (1880s), Carlos Delgado (2000s), Jason Giambi (2000s), Stan Musial (1950s), David Ortiz (2000s), Harry Stovey (1880s), Frank Thomas (1990s), and Jim Thome (1990s)

9. Frank Chance (1900s)

Frank Chance was injured for much of his career. He played 17 seasons of MLB, but really only played seven or eight full seasons. He was as good as any player when he was healthy. He was a great all around player, but his base running is the one thing that stands out above the rest.

He ranks in the top 10 all time in SB per AB. He had over 25 SB in nine consecutive seasons. A couple of those seasons he had less than 250 at bats, still had over 25 SB. His .296 BA is a lot better than it appears because he played in the offensively low decade of the 1900s; also a very good defensive First Baseman.

8. Jeff Bagwell (1990s)

A fairly quiet superstar when he played, if that's possible. One of my favorite batting stances of all time, looked like he was sitting on a park bench. Without being seemingly dominant, he was extremely good at a lot of things: hitting, defense, eye. Many players of the 1990s helped take the attention away from the "power" that Bagwell possessed.

He had great power, but not stupid crazy power like Bonds, McGwire, and some select others. But he was quiety one of the more consistently powerful hitters of the 1990s and one of the few consistent power hitters that was not really suspected of steroid use. Bagwell had at least 20 HR in 12 consecutive seasons. He had over 110 RBI in six consecutive seasons. Extremely good defense, too.

7. Mark McGwire (1990s)

The only reason he is not in the Hall of Fame is because of his suspected use of steroids. There is very little question that he is the best first baseman in the history of MLB that is not in the Hall of Fame, and there is very little question he belongs on this list. If he was one of the best first basemen ever is NOT the question. The only real question is if he didn't naturally or not. That is the true question.

He is first all time in HR per AB. That alone should put you in the Hall of Fame. He's also in the top 10 all time in SLG% and RBI per AB. That puts you in for sure. Again, the only real question: Did he do it naturally or not?

Well, looks like the Hall of Fame voters are answering that question. Interesting, they would have put him in the Hall of Fame while he still played following the 1998 season if they could have. He want from Superman to the Villain in 10 years, huh?

6. Todd Helton (2000s)

Todd Helton might be a quieter superstar than Jeff Bagwell was. He is in mid-late career right now and is still recovering from injuries he has suffered in the last couple of years.

He might be the best pure hitter in the game right now, with arguments from Pujols and Ichiro, maybe. He has a .328 BA for his career. Helton had over a .300 BA in 10 consecutive seasons, every season thus far during his career except for his 1st and last season.

He is among the top five all time in 2B per AB, was first all time before his injury last season. His .574 SLG% is in the top 15 all time, he hits some HR to go along with all those 2B he hits. His .428 OB% ranks in the top 10 all time.

Not only a great hitter that Pitchers tend to fear, but a great eye. He's also a smart base runner, and he might be the best defensive first baseman in the league.

5. Albert Pujols (2000s)

If you don't think you're watching greatness when you see Pujols play, then it's your own dern fault. He's among the best pure hitters in the game right now. He has a .334 BA thus far for his career. Has had over a .310 BA in all eight seasons. Has over 30 HR in all eight seasons (without hardly ever striking out).

Has over 100 RBI in all eight seasons. His .624 SLG% is fourth all time and his .425 OB% is in the top 15 all time. Oh, and he's one of the great/elite defensive first basemen in the league.

4. Dan Brouthers (1890s)

Every now and then, you run across a player that seemed to be playing a different game than everybody else; that was Brouthers. I mean, Billy Hamilton at center field in the 1890s might have been as good, but Brouthers played the game a different way, with a mix of smart base running and powerful hitting.

During his career, he led the league in BA, OB%, SLG%, R, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, and FA. Everything but SB. The only player that ever led the league in all 10 categories was Ty Cobb.

The argument could be easily and obviously made that Brouthers was a very well rounded player by leading the league in nine of the 10 "major" categories. Led the league 28 times in those nine categories, that's in the top 10 all time in league leading totals.

His 205 career 3B still rank in the top 10 all time and he is in the top five all time in 3B per AB. He was a big awesome looking guy, but he could run. He's also in the top 10 all time in 2B per AB and R per AB. Basically, he liked to hit for extra bases and he like to score R.

His .342 BA still ranks in the top 10 all time. He had at least a .300 BA in 16 consecutive seasons. His .423 OB% still ranks in the top 20 all time. You start making top 10 or top 20 lists and you'll find that Brouthers is all over them.

By far the best pre-1900s first baseman in history, with maybe some arguments from Harry Stovey, Cap Anson and Roger Connor.

3. Hank Greenberg (1930s)

Hank Greenberg ranks in the top five all time in RBI per AB. His 183 RBI during the 1937 season still rank third on the all-time single season list. He's also in the top 10 all time in 2B per AB. His 63 2B during the 1934 season still rank fourth on the all time single-season list.

His .605 SLG% is in the top 10 all time. His SLG% was so high because he hit a lot of HR to go along with his 2B.

Hank Greenberg is the only player in the history of MLB that is in the top 10 all time in SLG%, RBI per AB and 2B per AB.

His .312 career BA is great and he had over a .300 BA in eight consecutive seasons. He had a .412 OB% for his career and he had over a .400 OB% in nine consecutive seasons. One of the best and most feared hitters in history.

2. Jimmie Foxx (1930s)

Jimmie Foxx ranks in the top five all time in RBI per AB. He had at least 105 RBI in 13 consecutive seasons. He had over 1,400 RBI in the 1930s alone, more than any other player. His 175 RBI during the 1938 season still rank fourth on the all-time single season list.

His .609 SLG% ranks in the top 10 all time and he is in the top 20 all time in HR per AB. He had at least 30 HR in 12 consecutive seasons. He had 415 HR in the 1930s alone, more than any other player.

He was a great hitter, feared, with a good eye. He had a .325 career BA and his .428 career OB% ranks in the top 15 all time. He is also in the top 20 all time in R per AB, scoring over 105 R in nine consecutive seasons. Cherry on top, extremely good defensive first baseman.

1. Lou Gehrig (1930s)

I'll try to be as short as I can with Gehrig. Truth is, not many argue against Gehrig, even with his terrible defense and you're not going to hear one from me. It's possible that he was the best offensive player in the history of MLB, other than maybe Babe Ruth and Ted Williams.

I'll just start going through some of his accomplishments. I'll have some broken sentences to shorten it up. Second all time in RBI per AB. Over 110 RBI in 13 consecutive seasons. 184 in 1931 is second all time and 175 in 1927 is fourth all time. His career 1,995 RBI is third all time.

His career .632 SLG% is in the top five all time. .447 career OB% is fifth all time. Had at least a .410 OB% in 13 consecutive seasons. In top 10 all time in R per AB. Scored at least 115 R in 13 consecutive seasons. Scored 167 R in 1936, fourth all time. His .340 career BA is 15th all time. Had at least a .300 BA in 12 consecutive seasons.

You have to stop somewhere with Gehrig, it just goes on and on. Truly one of the great/elite players that have ever stepped on the field.