Is Miguel Cabrera the best hitter ever

[Nosferatu]

Exactly. Leading the pack in an era of mediocrity does not make one great.

The game was different, nobody was hitting home runs, to say he wasn't a power hitter at a time when nobody was hitting home runs during the dead ball era is foolish.

 

[romeo212000]

The game was different, nobody was hitting home runs, to say he wasn't a power hitter at a time when nobody was hitting home runs during the dead ball era is foolish.

Call it what you want, he wasn't a power hitter.

 

[Nosferatu]

Call it what you want, he wasn't a power hitter.

I think a previous post of mine shows he could have hit more home runs if he wanted to, it was simply a different game. The Bambino changed things a bit...

 

[Logicallylethal]

The game was different, nobody was hitting home runs, to say he wasn't a power hitter at a time when nobody was hitting home runs during the dead ball era is foolish.

You're right...the game IS different now...players are bigger...stronger...and hit for more power

Cobb might be considered a great power hitter in his era...but by definition he is not a power hitter

What if starting pitchers back then, their top speed fastball was only 75 mph. Would you consider those guys "hard throwers" compared to our guys now who throw 95 mph and some who even clock in at 100 mph?

a 75 mph pitch...is a 48 year old Jamie Moyer fastball...whew that dude was such a flame thrower!

Like I said earlier...I can see the arguments for Cobb being a better hitter than the guys discussed in this thread...but to say that he's a power hitter just because he topped the list in a very poor power hitting era is foolish

 

[dougplayer]

Miggy homers again tonight. against C Sale.

he is hurting. can hardly run. But still crushing the ball.

don't think he will win another triple crown this year. BUT all of his numbers will be better than last years

 

[wood20ks]

After enduring several years of seeing his fame and notoriety usurped by Ruth, Cobb decided that he was going to show that swinging for the fences was no challenge for a top hitter. On May 5, 1925, he began a two-game hitting spree better than any even Ruth had unleashed. Sitting in the Tiger dugout, he told a reporter that, for the first time in his career, he was going to swing for the fences. That day, he went 6 for 6, with two singles, a double and three home runs.[76] The 16 total bases set a new AL record, which stood until May 8, 2012 when Josh Hamilton of the Texas Rangers hit four home runs and a double for a total of 18 bases.[77] The next day he had three more hits, two of which were home runs. The single his first time up gave him nine consecutive hits over three games. His five homers in two games tied the record set by Cap Anson of the old Chicago NL team in 1884.[76] Cobb wanted to show that he could hit home runs when he wanted, but simply chose not to do so. At the end of the series, the 38-year-old veteran superstar had gone 12 for 19 with 29 total bases and then went happily back to his usual bunting and hitting-and-running

No challenge?.......So that says he was swinging for the fences,but decided not to anymore cause Ruth came along?does not make any sense.

there heave been plenty of players say they will hit a hr for cancer stricken patients and actually do it.
So why would you stop doing that if you can keep calling your own shots?

 

[wood20ks]

fascinating legend that surrounds the storied career of Ty Cobb centers on the time he hit five home runs over a two-game stretch in 1925. Prior to the game against the Browns on May 5 of that year, the Georgia Peach supposedly told St. Louis Star Sports Editor Sid Keener and Detroit News Sports Editor Harry Salsinger:

Gentlemen, pay close attention today. I'll show you something new. For the first time in my life, I will be deliberately going for home runs.
(Source: Al Stump, Algonquin Books, 01/03/1996, [ame="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/1565121449/baseballalmanac"]Cobb: A Biography[/ame], Page 361-362)
Cobb’s disdain for the post-1920 proliferation of the long ball was well-documented. In particular, he hated slugger Babe Ruth and how the Bambino had transformed the game. Cobb thought the deluge of home runs minimized the need for strategies he honed to perfection during the dead ball; skills like bunting, the hit-and-run, using the whole field, and the stolen base.
The Detroit star didn’t think it took a lot of talent to hit home runs and was convinced that his way of playing the game was vastly superior. So, as the legend goes, he took time in St. Louis to show that, if he had wanted to, he could hit a lot of homers, too.
Whether or not Cobb actually "called" his power outburst has been debated over the years but what actually happened at Sportsman's Park on those two days is a matter of record. In the 2nd inning of the May 5 game against the Browns, Tyrus Raymond smashed a pitch from Bullet Joe Bush for a long home run to right field. Later in the game, he launched a ball over the pavilion in right and added another "over-the-fence" homer in the 8th. Along with the three long balls, Cobb hit a double and two singles, finishing the day 6 for 6.
On May 6, the man from Royston slammed two more home runs, making it five round-trippers in two games.
If the legend is true, Cobb apparently thought he had proven his point and went back to what he called "real" baseball and finished the 1925 campaign with a lusty .378 average but "only" 12 home runs.
One of the people who had reportedly heard Ty Cobb predict his power surge, Sid Keener, was a respected sports journalist. He later served as the Director of Baseball’s Hall-of-Fame from 1952 to 1963 and might be considered a reliable source. One wonders if someone in the public eye like Keener, would stick to this false narrative like he did in subsequent years. If it had been proven that Cobb didn’t say those things before a game in St. Louis in 1925, Keener would have been discredited in his profession.
The other "witness" Harry Salsinger was somewhat friendly with Cobb and wrote two biographies about the ballplayer. However, just because they were on good terms doesn't necessarily mean he helped fabricate such an incredible story. Tons of people (including plenty of sportswriters) hated Cobb at the time and spinning glowing, untrue pieces about a major pain-in-the-butt was not part of the era’s zeitgeist. The story was unusual for a time when many sportswriters thought baseball would be better off without Ty Cobb.
Salsinger, like Keener, had his reputation as a journalist to think about. Was it worth risking his career to perpetrate such a big lie?
Coupled with the facts that Ty Cobb was impulsive, high strung and enormously egotistical, Keener and Salsinger's account rings true. One could easily see Cobb making such a boast and then having the talent (along with a little bit of luck) to pull it off.
Could Ty Cobb have been a big-time home run hitter had he decided to? We'll never know but based on the mountain of other offensive accomplishments credited to his name, it's certainly possible.

**********************

Some of the words used above show he may not of actually called those homers.​

 

[wood20ks]

I'd rather have Cobb. Over all but maybe two guys. As he was a HR hitter, since he won a HR title. Are you aware of the differences in eras? You know Babe Ruth hit more homers than some teams, right? Why the hell are we talking about Pujols? This isn't a worst contracts ever thread, is it?

this:

For people to discuss the greatest hitters of all-time,I think a player needs to hit for a great average and have power.(Not huge power but very good power.Great power with a great average is a plus).
There are few that fit this catagory.
Ichiro does not as someone posted as him being an all-time greatest,as i think Cobb does not.
Why not Cobb? Cause he falls in the Ichiro catagory...........Speed.

Give me an Aaron,Ruth,Mays,Pujols,Williams,Musial and Gerigh over a cobb,Ichiro,Gwynn and a few others that were listed any day of the week.

cause I`d rather had albert over Cobb..............with what Albert did just a couple years ago,is what Ruth did back in the day...............unbelievable stats that few could put up.And Cobb could not do.

 

[soxfan1468927]

On a list of greatest hitters.. Edgar Martinez is somewhere in the realm of 150... There are so many hitters better than him its not even funny... You might as well of put Victor Martinez in the list... Seriously.. sometimes people try to hard... Miggy isn't there yet and I am a huge fan... if he keeps this up for the next 10 yrs.. he will be there.. not yet...

Cobb
Ruth
Williams
Musial
Gerhig

Top three are pretty much a lock to be on any legit list.. after that.. its all opinion

Cabrera doesn't just have to keep it up over the next 10 years, he has to get even better to get in the discussion. You can add Hornsby, Mantle, Foxx, Ott, Mays, Aaron, Bonds, and Robinson to that list. Guys who did it for an entire career.

Among players with at least 6500 plate appearances, Cabrera would rank 21st in wRC+ and the 20 players ahead of him have more plate appearances than him.

 

[navamind]

this:

For people to discuss the greatest hitters of all-time,I think a player needs to hit for a great average and have power.(Not huge power but very good power.Great power with a great average is a plus).
There are few that fit this catagory.
Ichiro does not as someone posted as him being an all-time greatest,as i think Cobb does not.
Why not Cobb? Cause he falls in the Ichiro catagory...........Speed.

Give me an Aaron,Ruth,Mays,Pujols,Williams,Musial and Gerigh over a cobb,Ichiro,Gwynn and a few others that were listed any day of the week.

cause I`d rather had albert over Cobb..............with what Albert did just a couple years ago,is what Ruth did back in the day...............unbelievable stats that few could put up.And Cobb could not do.

LOL

 

[rokketmn]

Sorry for being very late to this discussion. Too many posts to read through, so bear with me if I repeat something someone else said.

1. The best hitter I never saw play would have to be Ted Williams. He had the great average over .340 and he hit 521 Hr's. He did this while missing 3 prime seasons of his career to WWII and another 2 to the Korean War. He could have hit .700 Hr's and had an even higher Bavg.
2. The best hitter I have seen is a tough one. If you are talking about pure hitting, then I go with guys like Gwynn, Boggs, Carew, and Ichiro.
3. If you add power to the mix, it would be Miggy, Manny, Pujols of the current generation
4. If I go back to the '70's (and my Sox bias comes out), it would have to be Jim Rice. He was a .300 hitter, with 30+ HR power, and drove in 100 just about every full season. George Brett was good too. Not as much power, but a much higher average in his prime.

This is the cynic in me, and that is because of the baseball era we are in, but I must say I am a bit skeptical of Miggy's power, rbi, and average spikes these last 2 seasons. Some will say it has to do with Fielder protecting him, but I don't think that is the entire reason. He seems like a PED candidate to me. I know he never failed a test. They never do.

I will also say that if I was starting a team and could have one player, that player would be Mike Trout. The guy just does it all. Stuff that goes beyond the boxscores and the pretty stats.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Sorry for being very late to this discussion. Too many posts to read through, so bear with me if I repeat something someone else said.


4. If I go back to the '70's (and my Sox bias comes out), it would have to be Jim Rice. He was a .300 hitter, with 30+ HR power, and drove in 100 just about every full season.

That's quite a bit of bias there. If you are going back to the mid-70s to mid-80s era which many would consider Rice's prime, there was no better than Mike Schmidt in my opinion. 70s alone you would add Willie Stargell and Reggie Jackson to the mix.

 

[StanMarsh51]

4. If I go back to the '70's (and my Sox bias comes out), it would have to be Jim Rice. He was a .300 hitter, with 30+ HR power, and drove in 100 just about every full season. George Brett was good too. Not as much power, but a much higher average in his prime.


.

I don't know if Rice would even be top 10 since the '70s...

Pujols
Manny
Cabrera
Vlad
Chipper
Bonds
Brett
Thomas
Bagwell
Piazza

There's 10, and you could probably add a few more (Berkman, Edgar, Walker), and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few

 

[soxfan1468927]

I don't know if Rice would even be top 10 since the '70s...

Pujols
Manny
Cabrera
Vlad
Chipper
Bonds
Brett
Thomas
Bagwell
Piazza

There's 10, and you could probably add a few more (Berkman, Edgar, Walker), and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few

Thome

 

[Swangin]

You're right...the game IS different now...players are bigger...stronger...and hit for more power

Cobb might be considered a great power hitter in his era...but by definition he is not a power hitter

What if starting pitchers back then, their top speed fastball was only 75 mph. Would you consider those guys "hard throwers" compared to our guys now who throw 95 mph and some who even clock in at 100 mph?

a 75 mph pitch...is a 48 year old Jamie Moyer fastball...whew that dude was such a flame thrower!

Like I said earlier...I can see the arguments for Cobb being a better hitter than the guys discussed in this thread...but to say that he's a power hitter just because he topped the list in a very poor power hitting era is foolish

I understand what your typing, but a lot more comes in to play when talking about the lack of HR's other than just players being bigger and stronger. And I don't think it's a really fair comparison to throwing a ball hard

A few examples would be, baseballs were used over and over, they might only use a couple of balls in a game. the ball itself started off as dead, and after being used and hit over and over while pitchers doctored it up and spit on it over and over created a ball near impossible to do anything with. Ballpark dimensions played a factor, the style of play was different as well.

All I can go by, is Cobb was hitting as many or more HRs than most the players in the league, so he was a HR hitter in that era. It's hard to say what he would have done in a different era. Just like we don't know what someone that hits 28 HRs this season would have done in 1918.

Things are changing a little now. The last 2 seasons the leaders in HRs have the fewest number of HRs in the last 16 years. So what about the bigger and stronger players?

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Cobb being the hr leader in a very poor power hitting era doesn't make him a power hitter. It makes him one of the better power hitters..."in that era"

You can make the argument that Cobb is the better hitter because of his avg and his abilities to hit doubles and triples...but Cobb isn't by definition a power hitter

It wasn't a "poor power hitting era". Do you people have no understanding of baseball history? Hitters simply didn't try for home runs, parks were huge, and the conditions of the equipment made it all the more challenging. Additionally, home runs aren't the only measure of power. In the absence of HR, you look at SLG relative to league average to determine who was or wasn't a power hitter. Is that such a difficult concept?

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

You're right...the game IS different now...players are bigger...stronger...and hit for more power

Cobb might be considered a great power hitter in his era...but by definition he is not a power hitter

What if starting pitchers back then, their top speed fastball was only 75 mph. Would you consider those guys "hard throwers" compared to our guys now who throw 95 mph and some who even clock in at 100 mph?

a 75 mph pitch...is a 48 year old Jamie Moyer fastball...whew that dude was such a flame thrower!

Like I said earlier...I can see the arguments for Cobb being a better hitter than the guys discussed in this thread...but to say that he's a power hitter just because he topped the list in a very poor power hitting era is foolish

Who are you to say what the definition is?

To me, a power hitter is someone who compiles a lot of extra base hits relative to his peers.

Am I to believe there weren't any good hitters in the American League in 1968? I mean, Yaz won the batting titles with a .301 average. So did hitters just stop being good that year? Or did the conditions create it, and the players did the best they could given the circumstances?

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

No challenge?.......So that says he was swinging for the fences,but decided not to anymore cause Ruth came along?does not make any sense.

there heave been plenty of players say they will hit a hr for cancer stricken patients and actually do it.
So why would you stop doing that if you can keep calling your own shots?

You obviously didn't read the story.

 

[Swangin]

It wasn't a "poor power hitting era". Do you people have no understanding of baseball history? Hitters simply didn't try for home runs, parks were huge, and the conditions of the equipment made it all the more challenging. Additionally, home runs aren't the only measure of power. In the absence of HR, you look at SLG relative to league average to determine who was or wasn't a power hitter. Is that such a difficult concept?

There were some CFs that were 500 to 600+ ft. Could you imagine even looking at that today? hell, that alone would cut a guys HRs in half if his home field played that big. But not only that, you play the game different when your park is that big. A lot of other things to factor in as well, just started thinking how crazy it would be to stand at home plate and be looking out at CF

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Ted Williams
Tony Gwynn
Pete Rose
Everyone Else

Just noticed this. Hilarious.