Top 10 poll: #12 player ever

[calsnowskier]

I have 1 player clearly at the top. Wagner.

Behind him, I have a huge pool of players I would consider…

Clemens
Henderson
Robinson
Speaker
Maddux
Schmidt
Young
Bench

I am probably leaning towards Clemens and Henderson.

 

[calsnowskier]

I guess I'll probably just have to put in the work when making comparisons. I'm not entirely sold on WAR at this point other than to maybe boost Wagner. I guess its also really the case for Clemens as pitcher 2, imo.

Clemens checks a lot of boxes. Its just that the prime isnt quite up there with some others. I mentioned this is about where I'd consider ARod and I think Clemens is also right there. If we're getting into 'he was just playing the game at the time' conversation then Clemens probably a hair above ARod.

The 7 year metric...its a lot but Im not sure its everything. A lot of players put in 9-13 great years at this point. Would I rather have 12 great years than 7 slightly more great years? Basically Trout v Pujols.

I focus on WAR7 primarily out of laziness. 7 years is the generally accepted stat that most people like to define a peak. I think that WAR5, WAR6, WAR8, WAR9, etc can all offer good context as well. Hell, just looking at WAR1 is helpful. And the fact that players can have negative WAR seasons give career WAR a bit more umph, imho.

 

[msgkings322]

Young and speaker definitely bring the question of what is more important, being a great accumulator, or having a great peak.. sure both Young and speaker had great peaks, but there are players available with better...

Honestly, i am trying to figure out whether some things i think are myths or if they are facts...

1. stats were exaggerated due to weak players outside of the elite...
2. the difficulty of play allowed players to accumulate seasons- if the average fast ball was in the low 90s, high 80s, when players aged the decrease of the pitchers velocity did not change as much, and the reflexes of the batters didnt get as much affect...-
3. due to the lack of RP used it was easier for hitters as the game went... in general... now this would also mean pitchers would get the disadvantage as the game goes, but if the elite pitchers were able to minimize their batters faced, there should not be a big decline in energy as the game goes on...
4. there were only 8 teams in leagues, so players became very familiar with eachother... sure, they were not watching videos, or having great scouting reports, but players did have something... whether i know what that thing is or not...
5. also since there was only 8 teams, having bolded stats was not as difficult...



now, i have plenty of reasons to believe the above... and i am sure, there are more that i didnt list... but i am not sure how true any of it is...

but to summarize, my overal theories

1. As the baseball science has improved, and with the changes in rules, it is much harder to show consistency year to year, and aging players tend to be more aparaent in their decline

2. as the science improves and the rule changes(especially the usage of RP), it is harder to reach the exaggerated stats marks...

3. as more teams entered the league, bolded numbers became harder to achieve-this one might not be a myth, it is basically easy math...

Good post, theory #3 at the end there is a great point and #2 is too

 

[calsnowskier]

The pitchers right now have a bit of a Venn Diagram problem to a certain extent. Cy Young clearly has the longevity and just bulk stats. Pedro maybe has the best prime, Maddux best prime mixed with defense. Clemens checks the most boxes. Randy Johnson maybe just eyeball test. Clemens seems like the one who will come off the board first but maybe 3-4 come off the board shortly.

I like Pedro, but he just doesn’t belong with Johnson, Maddux, Clemens, Young, Gibson, Mathewson…. Maybe even Kershaw, Max or Verlander.

Same with Koufax. Koufax had an amazing peak, but the competition for the next top pitcher spot is multiple notches above Koufax.

 

[msgkings322]

I like Pedro, but he just doesn’t belong with Johnson, Maddux, Clemens, Young, Gibson, Mathewson…. Maybe even Kershaw, Max or Verlander.

Same with Koufax. Koufax had an amazing peak, but the competition for the next top pitcher spot is multiple notches above Koufax.

I was surprised that even Koufax's peak wasn't light years ahead of others.

Until 1961 he never had a year with over 2.3 WAR (yes I know WAR is flawed for pitchers)

Then it was:

1961: 5.6 WAR
1962: 4.4
1963: 10.8
1964: 7.8
1965: 8.2
1966: 10.8

He did win the Cy Young in 63, 65, and 66 unanimously and that was before they started giving it out to pitchers in both leagues (in 1967). I think he gets extra mystique for hanging it up after a 10.8 WAR year and a 3rd unanimous Cy.

 

[steveringo]

I like Pedro, but he just doesn’t belong with Johnson, Maddux, Clemens, Young, Gibson, Mathewson…. Maybe even Kershaw, Max or Verlander.

Same with Koufax. Koufax had an amazing peak, but the competition for the next top pitcher spot is multiple notches above Koufax.

I mix Pedro & Koufax in with the others you mentioned...

How do you calculate WAR7? Seven consecutive years? Was anyone better than Pedro from 1997-2003?

 

[LHG]

I focus on WAR7 primarily out of laziness. 7 years is the generally accepted stat that most people like to define a peak. I think that WAR5, WAR6, WAR8, WAR9, etc can all offer good context as well. Hell, just looking at WAR1 is helpful. And the fact that players can have negative WAR seasons give career WAR a bit more umph, imho.

If WAR7 is your primary, why Henderson? Among hitters not yet ranked, there are still Mike Trout, Eddie Collins, Alex Rodriguez, Tris Speaker, Albert Pujols, Nap Lajoie, Joe Morgan, Mike Schmidt and Jimmie Foxx with better WAR7 than Henderson.

If Mickey Mantle was a travesty ranked as high as he was, then I'd say Henderson here (or #13) is three times as bad. Forget the best of all time for a moment, is Henderson really the 2nd or 3rd best player of his generation? Seems like swagger is playing way too high a role in ranking him. Yeah, he was good at stealing bases (and dancing along the base paths) and he hit a lot of lead off home runs. But he played 25 years and only has a 111.1 WAR to show for it. Good, but not #12 or #13 best of all time. There are 13 position players with higher WAR than his and all played fewer seasons (except Eddie Collins). Mel Ott's WAR is 0.2 lower and he played 3 fewer seasons. Frank Robinson's WAR was 3.9 lower and he played in 4 fewer seasons.

Henderson in the top 25 just seems way too high for a left fielder known for confidence, speed and some pop. Are we really going to devolve into recency bias and reputation when ranking these players?

 

[steveringo]

Side note... I tend to value starting pitchers more than position players (overrate?)...

And, I am glad Nolan Ryan is not even on the list!

 

[msgkings322]

If WAR7 is your primary, why Henderson? Among hitters not yet ranked, there are still Mike Trout, Eddie Collins, Alex Rodriguez, Tris Speaker, Albert Pujols, Nap Lajoie, Joe Morgan, Mike Schmidt and Jimmie Foxx with better WAR7 than Henderson.

If Mickey Mantle was a travesty ranked as high as he was, then I'd say Henderson here (or #13) is three times as bad. Forget the best of all time for a moment, is Henderson really the 2nd or 3rd best player of his generation? Seems like swagger is playing way too high a role in ranking him. Yeah, he was good at stealing bases (and dancing along the base paths) and he hit a lot of lead off home runs. But he played 25 years and only has a 111.1 WAR to show for it. Good, but not #12 or #13 best of all time. There are 13 position players with higher WAR than his and all played fewer seasons (except Eddie Collins). Mel Ott's WAR is 0.2 lower and he played 3 fewer seasons. Frank Robinson's WAR was 3.9 lower and he played in 4 fewer seasons.

Henderson in the top 25 just seems way too high for a left fielder known for confidence, speed and some pop. Are we really going to devolve into recency bias and reputation when ranking these players?

Some of us are, sure. I'm doing that with Ohtani. It's not science.

 

[Clayton]

I mix Pedro & Koufax in with the others you mentioned...

How do you calculate WAR7? Seven consecutive years? Was anyone better than Pedro from 1997-2003?

Id imagine he has the best 7 consecutive. Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux maybe the best 6 consecutive. The cutoff seems somewhat arbitrary. It really seems like splitting hairs imo.

 

[steveringo]

If WAR7 is your primary, why Henderson? Among hitters not yet ranked, there are still Mike Trout, Eddie Collins, Alex Rodriguez, Tris Speaker, Albert Pujols, Nap Lajoie, Joe Morgan, Mike Schmidt and Jimmie Foxx with better WAR7 than Henderson.

If Mickey Mantle was a travesty ranked as high as he was, then I'd say Henderson here (or #13) is three times as bad. Forget the best of all time for a moment, is Henderson really the 2nd or 3rd best player of his generation? Seems like swagger is playing way too high a role in ranking him. Yeah, he was good at stealing bases (and dancing along the base paths) and he hit a lot of lead off home runs. But he played 25 years and only has a 111.1 WAR to show for it. Good, but not #12 or #13 best of all time. There are 13 position players with higher WAR than his and all played fewer seasons (except Eddie Collins). Mel Ott's WAR is 0.2 lower and he played 3 fewer seasons. Frank Robinson's WAR was 3.9 lower and he played in 4 fewer seasons.

Henderson in the top 25 just seems way too high for a left fielder known for confidence, speed and some pop. Are we really going to devolve into recency bias and reputation when ranking these players?

I am actually very shocked that Rickey is getting votes at this stage.... I'll take half of that list before I pick Henderson...

 

[LHG]

I mix Pedro & Koufax in with the others you mentioned...

How do you calculate WAR7? Seven consecutive years? Was anyone better than Pedro from 1997-2003?

Pedro's WAR7 is 58.2. Here are the starting pitchers with better WAR7 (not counting early pitchers since milkspiller doesn't like them not adjusted):
Tom Seaver (59.3)
Randy Johnson (61.5)
Roger Clemens (65.9)

If you include the WAR7adjusted, the following are also better:
Lefty Grove (59.2)
Walter Johnson (66.2)

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I was surprised that even Koufax's peak wasn't light years ahead of others.

Until 1961 he never had a year with over 2.3 WAR (yes I know WAR is flawed for pitchers)

Then it was:

1961: 5.6 WAR
1962: 4.4
1963: 10.8
1964: 7.8
1965: 8.2
1966: 10.8

He did win the Cy Young in 63, 65, and 66 unanimously and that was before they started giving it out to pitchers in both leagues (in 1967). I think he gets extra mystique for hanging it up after a 10.8 WAR year and a 3rd unanimous Cy.

he gets big bonus for also being elite in the postseason... it was just continuous with him...

 

[calsnowskier]

I mix Pedro & Koufax in with the others you mentioned...

How do you calculate WAR7? Seven consecutive years? Was anyone better than Pedro from 1997-2003?

I just take a players top 7 WAR seasons. Very simple. A consecutive WAR# would be very interesting to see, but no sites list WAR# dynamically, so it would be VERY labor intensive to see that.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I am actually very shocked that Rickey is getting votes at this stage.... I'll take half of that list before I pick Henderson...

sometimes the vote in the nomination round doesnt represent who you would vote for in the runoff...

not saying this is why... but Henderson is such a unicorn that he can really be ranked anywhere...

i voted for him... but he was my third ranked of the three i voted for...

 

[calsnowskier]

sometimes the vote in the nomination round doesnt represent who you would vote for in the runoff...

not saying this is why... but Henderson is such a unicorn that he can really be ranked anywhere...

i voted for him... but he was my third ranked of the three i voted for...

I think Ricky is a legit consideration here, but as we have been mentioning for the last few spots, he is a unicorn who can’t be viewed simply by his numbers.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Pedro's WAR7 is 58.2. Here are the starting pitchers with better WAR7 (not counting early pitchers since milkspiller doesn't like them not adjusted):
Tom Seaver (59.3)
Randy Johnson (61.5)
Roger Clemens (65.9)

If you include the WAR7adjusted, the following are also better:
Lefty Grove (59.2)
Walter Johnson (66.2)

oh... i dont care how you judge... i was just bringing up the adjusted to show you how it may not be as black and white...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I think Ricky is a legit consideration here, but as we have been mentioning for the last few spots, he is a unicorn who can’t be viewed simply by his numbers.

ore we need to find an accurate way to measure his baserunning...

 

[calsnowskier]

ore we need to find an accurate way to measure his baserunning...

But he isn’t ONLY his baserunning. He distracted the pitcher so the guy at bat got an advantage. There is no possible way something like that could ever be measured. But anyone who ever saw him play KNOWS that he did that.

 

[steveringo]

ore we need to find an accurate way to measure his baserunning...