POLL 3000+ or .300+ ?

[ElTexan]

Would you rather have a ~20 year career and A. have 3000+ career hits, or B. have a career .300+ batting average?

(Well, to clear this up a bit, we’re talking a successful starter’s career and the difference would be something like:
A. 3017, .287 or
B. 2784, .304)

 

[Droopdog51]

I would take the 3000 hits and 20 years worth of paychecks that come with it.

 

[Nosferatu]

Would you rather have a ~20 year career and A. have 3000+ career hits, or B. have a career .300+ batting average?

(Well, to clear this up a bit, we’re talking a successful starter’s career and the difference would be something like:
A. 3017, .287 or
B. 2784, .304)

Clearly A as I would be a lock HOFer

 

[dougplayer]

C

 

[Iffster]

C

"C" Is 20 years living in your parents basement, picking zits, and living on government cheese.

 

[Voltaire26]

Would you rather have a ~20 year career and A. have 3000+ career hits, or B. have a career .300+ batting average?

(Well, to clear this up a bit, we’re talking a successful starter’s career and the difference would be something like:
A. 3017, .287 or
B. 2784, .304)

Just based on what your saying ... Ken Griffey Jr had a career .284 avg., 2781 hits and 630 home runs ... so he's under in both categories, but I think he's probably better that either player you're thinking about!!!

 

[ElTexan]

Clearly A as I would be a lock HOFer

Palmeiro

 

[ElTexan]

Just based on what your saying ... Ken Griffey Jr had a career .284 avg., 2781 hits and 630 home runs ... so he's under in both categories, but I think he's probably better that either player you're thinking about!!!

Whut? The question is asking what YOU’D rather have.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

3000 is a near instant lock to be a HOF'er and a long career in baseball. Yeah, I am good with that.

 

[Nosferatu]

Palmeiro

Juice

 

[navamind]

you can get 3000 hits over 20 years and still be a pedestrian player

 

[calsnowskier]

Would you rather have a ~20 year career and A. have 3000+ career hits, or B. have a career .300+ batting average?

(Well, to clear this up a bit, we’re talking a successful starter’s career and the difference would be something like:
A. 3017, .287 or
B. 2784, .304)

You fudged the numbers just enough to make it SEEM like you are not asking a loaded question. But I think it is obvious you are trying to equate Palmeiro to Griffey.

Palmeiro was very good, but never great, and was only very good for so long because of an outside influence. Griffey was GREAT, but was limited due to a series of injuries. And that does not begin to factor in the defensive differences between the two.

No sane fan would ever try to compare Palmeiro to Griffey.

 

[navamind]

You fudged the numbers just enough to make it SEEM like you are not asking a loaded question. But I think it is obvious you are trying to equate Palmeiro to Griffey.

Palmeiro was very good, but never great, and was only very good for so long because of an outside influence. Griffey was GREAT, but was limited due to a series of injuries. And that does not begin to factor in the defensive differences between the two.

No sane fan would ever try to compare Palmeiro to Griffey.

Palmeiro is the epitome of a compiler. The 71.9 WAR and 132 OPS+ look good, but 30.3 WAA is a bit underwhelming (especially for that many WAR) and he falls short IMO. Even with the 132 OPS+, he only had six seasons in the top 10 and only two top 5. That's a bit underwhelming for a 1B in the 90s/00s imo. He also only has four seasons in the top 10 in WAR and only one in the top 5 (4th in 1993).

 

[calsnowskier]

Palmeiro is the epitome of a compiler. The 71.9 WAR and 132 OPS+ look good, but 30.3 WAA is a bit underwhelming (especially for that many WAR) and he falls short IMO. Even with the 132 OPS+, he only had six seasons in the top 10 and only two top 5. That's a bit underwhelming for a 1B in the 90s/00s imo. He also only has four seasons in the top 10 in WAR and only one in the top 5 (4th in 1993).

Very good player. But he was never a guy you went out of your way to see. He had a super long career. That’s about the only thing that draws attention to him.

He gets a bit of a bum wrap due to the steroids thing, but no way was he a HOFer.

 

[broncosmitty]

What is the .300 hitters OPS?


I don't want 3000 singles.

 

[broncosmitty]

you can get 3000 hits over 20 years and still be a pedestrian player

Is there an example of that?



Please don't say Brock or Biggio...

 

[ElTexan]

You fudged the numbers just enough to make it SEEM like you are not asking a loaded question. But I think it is obvious you are trying to equate Palmeiro to Griffey.

Palmeiro was very good, but never great, and was only very good for so long because of an outside influence. Griffey was GREAT, but was limited due to a series of injuries. And that does not begin to factor in the defensive differences between the two.

No sane fan would ever try to compare Palmeiro to Griffey.

I was thinking if neither. You’re a fool.

 

[calsnowskier]

I was thinking if neither. You’re a fool.

Ok

 

[MilkSpiller22]

.287 compared to .304 is not much of a difference... You take the hits... easily... assuming all else is similar...

 

[navamind]

Is there an example of that?



Please don't say Brock or Biggio...

I don't have any examples of players in the 3000 club, but Buckner came close (2715) and he was a 1B/corner OFer with a lifetime line of .289/.321/.408 (100 OPS+). That's pretty pedestrian IMO.

Juan Pierre also managed 2200+ and he was pretty average.

Not gonna get into Brock (I don't think he's a HOFer, but he is not pedestrian), but I think Biggio deserved enshrinement. A little borderline, but I'd put him in.

I suppose it's pretty hard for players to not be very productive with 3000+ hits or a .300+ BA, but a .300 BA (especially nowadays) usually comes with some power and OBP skills.