The Hall of Fame

[methodology]

Ripken was a great SS but let's not go whacky here. He was an all star basically every year even when he hit.250-.260 which was often? His "power" numbers held on after '92 when they built him a shoe box of a stadium where fly balls everywhere else were HR's. He did revolutionize the position with the bigger, power hitters could actually play there in the bigs. His numebers are comparable to Biggio because he is comparable to Biggio except HR's for the most part.

And Jeter and the strong lineup is somewhat fair but how many runs does Biggio score if they don't let Caminitti and Bagwell use the roids? So many variables hence why so many of the stats you guys look at are kind of crap. It's baseball - did you see him hit, throw, steal bases, run the bases, score, hot for power, hit in the clutch - pretty simple. All of these guys played the game the way it was supposed to be played and hence HOFers. But Jeter and Ripken are more comparable than Ripken and Wagner. Neither are the 2nd best SS's ever in no way, although the options aren't tremendous. Ripken and Yount are comparable and Ernie Banks also has to be in the mix I would think. Wagner is so much better it's a tough call I guess. As you said the others are such weak hitters and some don't even belong - Phil!!

I never compared Wagner to Ripken. I only stated Wagner was the undisputed #1 SS in history of baseball.

Yount played 10 years at SS and 10 in OF (Ripken was better overall anyway even if you just consider RY a SS), Ernie played more years at 1st than SS he spent less than half his career at SS. His peak and best years were when he was at SS but he had to be moved to 1st.

Either way Ripken was a great and underrated defensive SS. That's what cements him as #2 on all time SS list behind Wagner. He was good offensively and even better defensively

Career WAR:
Honus (21 years) 131
Ripken (21) 95.5
Yount (20) 77
Ozzie (19) 76.4
Jeter (20) 71.8
Trammel (20) 70.4
Larkin (19) 70.2
Ernie (19) 67.5

If I was ranking them it would go: Wagner, Ripken, Banks, Jeter, Ozzie

 

[methodology]

The system is skewed to favor compilers. Take Don Sutton. He was a good pitcher. But he was rarely the ace of his own pitching staff. Never won a Cy Young (only finished as high a 3rd once), only won 20 games once. But he was pretty good for a long time so that makes him great? I have always considered Yaz the ultimate compiler. But at least he has 3 batting titles, a triple crown and the Impossible Dream. Even so, at his best was he ever as good as a guy like Dave Parker?

You could say the same about Jeter. He was never the best player on his team (1999 is the only year he was) or in baseball. No batting titles, no MVPs, he did lead the league in hits twice though and his defense was often bottom tier.

Jeter is better than Sutton was just pointing out you can still be a sure HOFer without being best player on your team or in baseball.

Yaz was still productive in his last 4 years while he was in his 40s. He wasn't hanging on by a thread like some players towards the end.

 

[mauconnfan]

Let me reset exactly what I'm saying once again because I'm having my point twisted and taken out of context.

Dove called Biggio a "compiler" in a negative way. I pointed out that, over 20 years, the numbers a player accumulates or "compiles" was pretty friggin' similar for Jeter.

I know Jeter had a higher batting average. I recognize Jeter has some better fancy newfangled metrics that I don't understand. I am not suggesting Biggio is as good or better than Jeter. All I'm saying is, if Biggio is deemed to be a compiler, it's ironic that Jeter's career totals are virtually identical in a LOT of buckets.

As others have said they are all compilers to point. Some guys hang on playing well still while others ruin/ruined their legacy by hanging on too long.

 

[Deepster]

As others have said they are all compilers to point. Some guys hang on playing well still while others ruin/ruined their legacy by hanging on too long.

And I don't think Biggio or Jeter belong in that bucket of hanging on too long. Maybe a year or so? But it's tough to say if it's for racking up stats....or just not being able to say goodbye to the game.

 

[Excalibur]

I have always considered Yaz the ultimate compiler. But at least he has 3 batting titles, a triple crown and the Impossible Dream. Even so, at his best was he ever as good as a guy like Dave Parker?

Yaz hung on for way too long, for sure, but his best, and his typical, years, were better than Parker's. His '67 and '70 seasons blow Parker's best out of the water.

 

[mauconnfan]

Biggio had 170 more (HBP, Sacrifice flys, and sac hits) than Jeter. Jeter ended having close to 300 more ABs, or about half a season worth or ABs even though he played in less games ove his career. The reason Jeter was able to get to the plate more is because the lineup turnover on the Yankees was much better. Biggio had a pitcher, automatic out, batting in front of him. Are you really going to say that had literally NO effect on Biggio's potential oWAR over his career? How many RBIs did Biggio miss out on because of that? How many times was the pitcher unable to move th runner over that Biggio could have driven in or how many times did the pitcher ground into a double play? How many times did that automatic pitcher out cause an inning to end early with Biggio in scoring position rather than there being 1 less out and an opportunity to score a run?

There are countless ways Biggio had his oWAR effected when compared to Jeter's situation, who batted in one of if not the best offensive lineups in all of baseball during the coarse of his career. To say it had literally no effect is being oblivious. The RBI and Run differential are directly linked to the other players in the lineup. Biggio was basically walking up to the plate with an extra out vs. Jeter

Okay since your on a "variable" kick let's throw in one that pretty big as far as I'm concerned and it's not on any WAR or other crap people like to look at. Astrodome/NL/astroturf - ground ball hits flying through the infield which would be caught on grass fields. 11 years on the Dome turf as well as having what I believe to be more in the whole NL during his early career. It's much bigger than some would like to think. So switch spots and the BA's may be .315 and .275 or something to that affect. Maybe a little more maybe a little less.

My point is splitting hairs on these 2 is crazy, Jeter was a better player than Craig Biggio just by watching the game. Crazy stats aren't needed. Biggio was good but he's not Ripken/Yount/Jeter that's all.

 

[Husky25]

The system is skewed to favor compilers. Take Don Sutton. He was a good pitcher. But he was rarely the ace of his own pitching staff. Never won a Cy Young (only finished as high a 3rd once), only won 20 games once. But he was pretty good for a long time so that makes him great? I have always considered Yaz the ultimate compiler. But at least he has 3 batting titles, a triple crown and the Impossible Dream. Even so, at his best was he ever as good as a guy like Dave Parker?

There is no comparison whatsoever between Yaz and Dave Parker. Yaz was a better power hitter (452 HRs vs. 339), had a better eye (W:K ratio = 9:7 vs. 1:2), was a better fielder (pick your metric), and was healthier. On top of that he was the League MVP (not just Red Sox) and Triple Crown winner on the team that saved baseball in Boston.

 

[mauconnfan]

There is no comparison whatsoever between Yaz and Dave Parker. Yaz was a better power hitter (452 HRs vs. 339), had a better eye (W:K ratio = 9:7 vs. 1:2), was a better fielder (pick your metric), and was healthier. On top of that he was the League MVP (not just Red Sox) and Triple Crown winner on the team that saved baseball in Boston.

This is much closer than you'd like to think. 452 vs 339 is unfair because Yaz had 13992 AB's vs 10,184 for Parker. The actual average per AB favors Parker. RBI are close also because of the AB difference. And while Yaz was very good in left field Parker was real good in RF and had a rocket. This one is a toss up, and I liked Yaz.

 

[mauconnfan]

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/24382978/breaking-down-don-mattinglys-hall-of-fame-case

Nice article I hadn't seen before. I looked it up because of some callers who called in making a case for Donnie Baseball on the FAN vs Biggio. I mean there is no comparing the 2 for so many reasons just thought some had compelling arguments. The one that never goes away is Kirby Puckett.

 

[Husky25]

This is much closer than you'd like to think. 452 vs 339 is unfair because Yaz had 13992 AB's vs 10,184 for Parker. The actual average per AB favors Parker. RBI are close also because of the AB difference. And while Yaz was very good in left field Parker was real good in RF and had a rocket. This one is a toss up, and I liked Yaz.

Parker had few intangibles. Yaz was the best player on the team that saved the Red Sox organization.

 

[Excalibur]

This is much closer than you'd like to think. 452 vs 339 is unfair because Yaz had 13992 AB's vs 10,184 for Parker. The actual average per AB favors Parker. RBI are close also because of the AB difference. And while Yaz was very good in left field Parker was real good in RF and had a rocket. This one is a toss up, and I liked Yaz.

It's a toss-up until you compare their best seasons head to head, and consider Yaz' 30 point OPS advantage (which would have been greater if he did the smart thing and retired after the 1980 season).

 

[G0UCONN]

Plus Yaz hit 452HRs playing 81 games a year in Fenway which is very unfriendly to leftys power wise.....unless you hook it or hit it off Pesky Pole....it is basically like 370 -380 feet everywhere in RF to hit it out....

 

[mauconnfan]

Parker had few intangibles. Yaz was the best player on the team that saved the Red Sox organization.

Few intangibles? I mean what intangibles did Yaz have that Parker didn't. I remember Yaz as a very smart baserunner, not especially fast but fast enough to steal some bases and take some extra bases. That may be one I guess but again I'm no as sure on Parker.

 

[Husky25]

Few intangibles? I mean what intangibles did Yaz have that Parker didn't. I remember Yaz as a very smart baserunner, not especially fast but fast enough to steal some bases and take some extra bases. That may be one I guess but again I'm no as sure on Parker.

Really? I've said it twice and Waquoit mentioned it on page 2. Do I really need to say it again? The Red Sox' home attendance peaked in 1950 for the era at 20,602 fans per game. From there, save for two years (1955 and 1957), attendance was under 15k to a low of 8,052 in 1965, the second time since Ted Williams' retirement that average attendance was four figures. The Ballpark was over 50 years old, run down, and sections had been rebuilt at least twice. Since 1967, the Red Sox have set attendance records 19 times with only one significant addition to ball park capacity (1989) until 2004. Repeat #3: Carl Yastremski was the best player in the American League and on the team that saved baseball in Boston.

All of it is moot anyway. Yastremski was voted into Cooperstown on the first ballot with over 94% of the vote. Dave Parker is no longer eligible on the BBWAA ballot and never received even 25%, meaning he likely will not get a veterans committee induction either.

 

[mauconnfan]

Really? I've said it twice and Waquoit mentioned it on page 2. Do I really need to say it again? The Red Sox' home attendance peaked in 1950 for the era at 20,602 fans per game. From there, save for two years (1955 and 1957), attendance was under 15k to a low of 8,052 in 1965, the second time since Ted Williams' retirement that average attendance was four figures. The Ballpark was over 50 years old, run down, and sections had been rebuilt at least twice. Since 1967, the Red Sox have set attendance records 19 times with only one significant addition to ball park capacity (1989) until 2004. Repeat #3: Carl Yastremski was the best player in the American League and on the team that saved baseball in Boston.

All of it is moot anyway. Yastremski was voted into Cooperstown on the first ballot with over 94% of the vote. Dave Parker is no longer eligible on the BBWAA ballot and never received even 25%, meaning he likely will not get a veterans committee induction either.

This coming from a Red Sox fan with no bias. He was a real good player, a great player, a HOFer. How long was he the best player in baseball and give me those years just in case I have an argument for those?

 

[mauconnfan]

I never compared Wagner to Ripken. I only stated Wagner was the undisputed #1 SS in history of baseball.

Yount played 10 years at SS and 10 in OF (Ripken was better overall anyway even if you just consider RY a SS), Ernie played more years at 1st than SS he spent less than half his career at SS. His peak and best years were when he was at SS but he had to be moved to 1st.

Either way Ripken was a great and underrated defensive SS. That's what cements him as #2 on all time SS list behind Wagner. He was good offensively and even better defensively

Career WAR:
Honus (21 years) 131
Ripken (21) 95.5
Yount (20) 77
Ozzie (19) 76.4
Jeter (20) 71.8
Trammel (20) 70.4
Larkin (19) 70.2
Ernie (19) 67.5

If I was ranking them it would go: Wagner, Ripken, Banks, Jeter, Ozzie

SS's are a real good discussion because there weren't a lot of great ones at everything. After the obvious Wagner people can put Ripken, Yount, Jeter, Banks and maybe even Larkin in any order and they'd have an argument.

 

[Husky25]

This coming from a Red Sox fan with no bias. He was a real good player, a great player, a HOFer. How long was he the best player in baseball and give me those years just in case I have an argument for those?

That's a straw man argument, you're introducing Mau. I said he was the best player in the American League the year the Red Sox saved baseball in Boston. He may have been the single most important Red Sox player in their history, considering the state of the franchise by the early 60's. Yes, even more important than Teddy Ballgame if only because he wasn't so surly.

 

[mauconnfan]

That's a straw man argument, you're introducing Mau. I said he was the best player in the American League the year the Red Sox saved baseball in Boston. He may have been the single most important Red Sox player in their history, considering the state of the franchise by the early 60's. Yes, even more important than Teddy Ballgame if only because he wasn't so surly.

I have no reason to not agree or believe he is the most important player in Red Sox history. And I am sure a year or 2 he was the best player in the AL or close. But there were a lot of good players back in his day too, just not too many on the Yankees!

 

[Husky25]

At the end of the day, I am anti-"compiler argument"

I have no reason to not agree or believe he is the most important player in Red Sox history. And I am sure a year or 2 he was the best player in the AL or close. But there were a lot of good players back in his day too, just not too many on the Yankees!

...