Top 15 Players by Position- FIRST BASEMAN

[Omar 382]

1. Lou Gehrig
2. Stan Musial
3. Jimmie Foxx
4. Albert Pujols
5. Roger Connor
6. Dan Brouthers
7. Jeff Bagwell
8. Johnny Mize
9. Frank Thomas
10. Jim Thome
11. Willie McCovey
12. Hank Greenberg
13. Dick Allen
14. Miguel Cabrera
15. Mark McGwire

Notes:

Frank Thomas and Johnny Mize are virtually interchangeable to me. I went back and forth on which one should be higher. It came down to their peaks, with Mize having a slightly better JAWS and a better WAR7 (where Mize is actually 4th among first baseman).

I counted Stan Musial as a first baseman because he has more games there than any other position, unless you count all three outfield positions as one position. Meh.

Before I made the list (which I do completely unbiased to the best of my ability), I wondered if McGwire would make it. He barely squeezed in.

Eddie Murray is very overrated.

 

[broncosmitty]

1. Gehrig
2. Musial
3. Cap Anson
4. Foxx
5. Pujols
6. Greenberg
7. mize
8. bagwell
9. Thomas
10. Cabrera
11. McCovey
12. Palmeiro
13. Killebrew (played more first than third)
14. George Sisler
15. Pete Rose (played more first than anywhere else.)

Really wanted to get John Olerud and Keith Hernandez in there, but couldn't.

 

[Arizona_Sting]

Goldy snubbed #Snark

 

[Omar 382]

1. Gehrig
2. Musial
3. Cap Anson
4. Foxx
5. Pujols
6. Greenberg
7. mize
8. bagwell
9. Thomas
10. Cabrera
11. McCovey
12. Palmeiro
13. Killebrew (played more first than third)
14. George Sisler
15. Pete Rose (played more first than anywhere else.)

Really wanted to get John Olerud and Keith Hernandez in there, but couldn't.

Nice list. I wouldn't have Anson or Palmeiro so high but I agree with the gist of it.

 

[broncosmitty]

Nice list. I wouldn't have Anson or Palmeiro so high but I agree with the gist of it.

I gave Anson all of the deadball love on mine.

Well, most all of it. (Sisler kept his deadball game going into the live ball era. And I'm a sucker for Sisler. Like the white, first base playing version of Ichiro, sorta.)

 

[Iffster]

Can I put a stop to this list garbage? Back on your Catchers list, you said you could not list Roy Campanella due to a car accident. Yet you DID list Gene Tenace who caught around 200 less games than Campanella. Why?

Buck Ewing had almost half the number of games at catcher as Roy C. had.

 

[Omar 382]

Can I put a stop to this list garbage? Back on your Catchers list, you said you could not list Roy Campanella due to a car accident. Yet you DID list Gene Tenace who caught around 200 less games than Campanella. Why?

Buck Ewing had almost half the number of games at catcher as Roy C. had.

I am counting their whole careers, not just as catchers. Do you only want to count 200 or so home runs to Musial? Also, if you don't like it, don't read it.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

Why McGwire though? Do homeruns outweight defense and everything else? Just curious.

 

[Omar 382]

Why McGwire though? Do homeruns outweight defense and everything else? Just curious.

Obviously, McGwire is a tricky case given the PED controversy, but just by his stats I think he makes a good case to get in. He's the greatest power hitting first baseman of all time, with a .325 ISO that's 33 points ahead of second place Lou Gehrig. His downfall is his OBP, which is (only) .388, which ranks 28th among qualified first baseman.

Looking at his wRC+, arguably the single most important offensive statistic that we're available to, he has a 157 wRC+, which is fourth, and second and third are at 158 wRC+. And, of course, this takes into account different run-scoring environments, so Cap Anson (134 wRC+) isn't penalized for playing in a home run-suppressing environment. Now if you look at wOBA, which is what wRC+ is based on; but doesn't take into account different park factors, and different run scoring environments of the 1880's-1890's vs. the 1990's. For example, Anson is significantly behind McGwire in wRC+, but if you look at wOBA, Anson is at .393, while McGwire is only a little more ahead at .415.

McGwire/Anson isn't as great an example of different era's and park factors, but here's a better one I skimmed. Jimmie Foxx is one point ahead of McGwire in wRC+ at 158, but he is sitting at a pretty .460 wOBA, while (like I said) McGwire is only at .415. Why the gap? I don't feel like evaluating all their ballparks (although with today's technology that would be possible; maybe even easy- I don't feel like finding out), so instead I'll evaluate the league and park effects of each player's best individual season.

Mark McGwire- 1998: 681 PA, .299/.470/.752, .492 wOBA, 205 wRC+
Jimmie Foxx- 1932: 701 PA, .364/.469/.749, .522 wOBA, 198 wRC+

In 1998, the league average wOBA was .331, while the wOBA scale was 1.197 (basically how good an offensive era it was, the lower the scale, the more offense, the higher the scale, the less offense. For example, in 1968, the scale was 1.461). The wHR was 2.007.

In 1932, the league average wOBA was .337, while the wOBA scale was 1.227. The wHR was 2.005.

In 1998, Busch Stadium had a Basic park run score of 99 (100 being league average) Home runs were at 102, on the same scale.

In 1932, Shibe Park had a Basic park run score of 100. They don't have home run scales.

In conclusion, considering Foxx played in a more hitter friendly era in a slightly (but basically equal) hitter-friendly park, it's clear why his wRC+, which accounts for these two, is closer to McGwire's, despite having better pure offensive, era-neutral statistics. Of course, I looked purely at offensive output, not base running or defense, or even some common intangible factors or team success.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

Obviously, McGwire is a tricky case given the PED controversy, but just by his stats I think he makes a good case to get in. He's the greatest power hitting first baseman of all time, with a .325 ISO that's 33 points ahead of second place Lou Gehrig. His downfall is his OBP, which is (only) .388, which ranks 28th among qualified first baseman.

Looking at his wRC+, arguably the single most important offensive statistic that we're available to, he has a 157 wRC+, which is fourth, and second and third are at 158 wRC+. And, of course, this takes into account different run-scoring environments, so Cap Anson (134 wRC+) isn't penalized for playing in a home run-suppressing environment. Now if you look at wOBA, which is what wRC+ is based on; but doesn't take into account different park factors, and different run scoring environments of the 1880's-1890's vs. the 1990's. For example, Anson is significantly behind McGwire in wRC+, but if you look at wOBA, Anson is at .393, while McGwire is only a little more ahead at .415.

McGwire/Anson isn't as great an example of different era's and park factors, but here's a better one I skimmed. Jimmie Foxx is one point ahead of McGwire in wRC+ at 158, but he is sitting at a pretty .460 wOBA, while (like I said) McGwire is only at .415. Why the gap? I don't feel like evaluating all their ballparks (although with today's technology that would be possible; maybe even easy- I don't feel like finding out), so instead I'll evaluate the league and park effects of each player's best individual season.

Mark McGwire- 1998: 681 PA, .299/.470/.752, .492 wOBA, 205 wRC+
Jimmie Foxx- 1932: 701 PA, .364/.469/.749, .522 wOBA, 198 wRC+

In 1998, the league average wOBA was .331, while the wOBA scale was 1.197 (basically how good an offensive era it was, the lower the scale, the more offense, the higher the scale, the less offense. For example, in 1968, the scale was 1.461). The wHR was 2.007.

In 1932, the league average wOBA was .337, while the wOBA scale was 1.227. The wHR was 2.005.

In 1998, Busch Stadium had a Basic park run score of 99 (100 being league average) Home runs were at 102, on the same scale.

In 1932, Shibe Park had a Basic park run score of 100. They don't have home run scales.

In conclusion, considering Foxx played in a more hitter friendly era in a slightly (but basically equal) hitter-friendly park, it's clear why his wRC+, which accounts for these two, is closer to McGwire's, despite having better pure offensive, era-neutral statistics. Of course, I looked purely at offensive output, not base running or defense, or even some common intangible factors or team success.

I always felt that PEDs merely amplify skills that are already there. How many players in the minors have used PEDs and never accomplished anything significant? That being said, I can only see McGwire as a 'roided up Adam Dunn.

But I understand that this is just for fun and I think people should remember that it's impossible to make a perfect list of the all-time best baseball players that everyone will agree with. No sense in getting worked up over it.

 

[4thstreet]

are you taking into account "gold gloves"?along with their fielding %.

how in the hell is Mattingly not in here,and Palmeiro doesn't make it,but McGwire does?

 

[Omar 382]

are you taking into account "gold gloves"?along with their fielding %.

how in the hell is Mattingly not in here,and Palmeiro doesn't make it,but McGwire does?

try again- this time make sense.

 

[Omar 382]

are you taking into account "gold gloves"?along with their fielding %.

how in the hell is Mattingly not in here,and Palmeiro doesn't make it,but McGwire does?

Palmeiro is about as overrated as they come. Mattingly didn't play long enough. Steroids aside, McGwire was one of the greatest power hitters of all time.

 

[4thstreet]

try again- this time make sense.

WTF?was I thinking-your opinion is the only one the matters.

 

[Omar 382]

WTF?was I thinking-your opinion is the only one that is expressed coherently.

Between me and you, yes

 

[4thstreet]

Between me and you, yes

It's you,and I
You're 3rd grade education is showing.

 

[Omar 382]

hahahahahaha

 

[StanMarsh51]

Why McGwire though? Do homeruns outweight defense and everything else? Just curious.

McGwire not only hit homers, but had a near .400 career OBP and 163 OPS+. He didn't add value on defense but I think his offense being as good as it was is enough to overcome that.

 

[StanMarsh51]

are you taking into account "gold gloves"?along with their fielding %.

how in the hell is Mattingly not in here,and Palmeiro doesn't make it,but McGwire does?

Mattingly in his best season had an OPS 61% better than the league average. McGwire's career OPS was 63% better than league average. That's how much better offensively McGwire was than Mattingly, and the gap in defense doesn't make up for that (especially since it's 1B, the least valuable defensive position).

 

[Omar 382]

Mattingly in his best season had an OPS 61% better than the league average. McGwire's career OPS was 63% better than league average. That's how much better offensively McGwire was than Mattingly, and the gap in defense doesn't make up for that (especially since it's 1B, the least valuable defensive position).

That under-represents McGwire's offensive prowess.