POLL Top 10 poll: #14 player ever

[LHG]

What are the odds of Ohtani passing up Trout in terms of when their career is done? Maybe an important conversation coming up soon. I think we legitimately might be Ohtani as a top 10 player a decade from now but I have no idea how to judge that as its happening. 9 times out of 10 it doesn't happen.

And this is why I look at this as a point in time from now backward. Ohtani certainly looks to be top 10 all time when his career is over, assuming everything goes well for him. However, he's also had 2 TJ surgeries in the past 6 years and so he could just as easily pitch one more year, DH for 5 more years and not hit nearly as well as he did in 2024.

 

[calsnowskier]

What are the odds of Ohtani passing up Trout in terms of when their career is done? Maybe an important conversation coming up soon. I think we legitimately might be Ohtani as a top 10 player a decade from now but I have no idea how to judge that as its happening. 9 times out of 10 it doesn't happen.

Imho, that isn’t even a question. Ohtani, I think, will end up top 5 all time.

He just isn’t there yet. RIGHT NOW, Trout is higher.

 

[LHG]

Yeah…. About 1/2 of them get cut off upon initial perusal.

Have you looked at their careers are just saying that based off your first thoughts from memory? My list was very different when I first started voting in this poll. Digging into the different players' careers reminded me of some things I forgot and helped me learn other things I never knew about players.

 

[calsnowskier]

Here is an interesting (to me, at least) comparison between two former teammates:

OPS+ season comparisons for Trout/Pujols
190-199 - Trout (2); Pujols (1)
180-189 - Trout (2); Pujols (2)
170-179 - Trout (4); Pujols (3)
160-169 - Trout (3); Pujols (1)
150-159 - Trout (0); Pujols (4)
140-149 - Trout (1); Pujols (1)
130-139 - Trout (1); Pujols (1)

Career WAR - Trout (86.2); Pujols (101.4)
WAR7 - Trout (65.1); Pujols (61.7)
Career OPS+ - Trout (173); Pujols (145)

Career rate stats of current players vs retired players is almost laughable. Hell, career rate stats in general are pretty bad.

 

[Clayton]

Here is an interesting (to me, at least) comparison between two former teammates:

OPS+ season comparisons for Trout/Pujols
190-199 - Trout (2); Pujols (1)
180-189 - Trout (2); Pujols (2)
170-179 - Trout (4); Pujols (3)
160-169 - Trout (3); Pujols (1)
150-159 - Trout (0); Pujols (4)
140-149 - Trout (1); Pujols (1)
130-139 - Trout (1); Pujols (1)

Career WAR - Trout (86.2); Pujols (101.4)
WAR7 - Trout (65.1); Pujols (61.7)
Career OPS+ - Trout (173); Pujols (145)

Trout was certainly a way better Angel than Pujols.

Trout has the better prime. Best 5 years. Pujols is way better 6-10 years. 15 star years overall. Trout only has 10.

It depends on what you value. I think if Trout plays two more good years I think he is ahead of Pujols imo. A lot of all-time lists do have Trout ahead of Pujols, though.

 

[Clayton]

Imho, that isn’t even a question. Ohtani, I think, will end up top 5 all time.

He just isn’t there yet. RIGHT NOW, Trout is higher.

I'd guess he has about a 70% chance of getting above Trout and a 40% chance at the top 5. Its hard to say for sure but he is the most interesting player in all sports right now imo.

The list clearly values Centerfield. Speaker and Trout probably do need to be top 25.

 

[LHG]

Career rate stats of current players vs retired players is almost laughable. Hell, career rate stats in general are pretty bad.

Mildly disagree on the first. For most players, active vs retired, it is interesting to see how they stack up but the active player has likely either not hit the end of his peak and/or still has some mediocre seasons left that will drag down the numbers.
However, strongly disagree on the 2nd part of your statement. If your reason for that statement is because it weighs in the down years, I find that very valuable for comparing. Just about every player, unless his career gets cut short for some reason, is going to have some poor years at the end. Comparing rate stats at least shows who handled the down years better. For example, we all know that Pujols' 2nd half of his career was not great. It bears out in his career OPS+ number.
I do like how you've been showing "buckets" and am trying to incorporate that more in players I look at. Pujols' career rate stats reflect the 2nd half slide and should be considered as part of rankings. Best of all time, after all, is more than just ranking players' peaks. Otherwise, we would have a very different list if we only ranked players based on best season.

 

[LHG]

I kinda already gave my argument for Pujols over Foxx and Pujols over Trout.

I actually do have DiMaggio right ahead of him. I think he has traction to, so as soon as he gets enough votes I suspect DiMaggio will make the list.

Collins is a hard sell imo. Seaver maybe an interesting conversation. I do think you have too many older players high up.

I missed this post in my responses.

As I mentioned, I'm okay with him being ranked over probably half of these guys. I see a lot of them being just about at the same level, so if Pujols comes in at 20 instead of 30, I see that as not a problem.

As for too many older players, if their career suggests they belong then I think they belong. Mel Ott didn't have Pujols WAR7 (53.9 vs 61.7) but Ott hit better longer in his career than Pujols (155 OPS+ vs 145 OPS+). Again, either could be higher than the other, it does not matter a lot but they are in the same discussion. This going to happen when a sport has been played for 150 years. "Old" names are going to pop up.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I have Pujols at 18 and I think I'm the highest on him here. He really hasn't gotten any votes yet

I have Pujols within the next top 5 offensive players...

but I will admit that my next offensive player just happens to ARod. so I doubt he will be voted in before Pujols...

 

[LHG]

Updated for #11:
1) Babe Ruth (1914-1935)
2) Willie Mays (1948-1973)
3) Ted Williams (1939-1960)
4) Barry Bonds (1986-2007)
5) Hank Aaron (1954-1976)
6) Ty Cobb (1905-1928)
7) Lou Gehrig (1923-1939)
8) Mickey Mantle (1951-1968)
9) Walter Johnson (1907-1927)
10) Stan Musial (1941-1963)
11) Rogers Hornsby (1915-1937)

1876-1904 - 0
1905-1906 - 1
1907-1913 - 2
1914 - 3
1915-1922 - 4
1923-1927 - 5
1928 - 4
1929-1935 - 3
1936-1937 - 2
1938 - 1
1939 - 2
1940 - 1
1941-1947 - 2
1948-1950 - 3
1951-1953 - 4
1954-1960 - 5
1961-1963 - 4
1964-1968 - 3
1969-1973 - 2
1974-1976 - 1
1977-1985 - 0
1986-2007 - 1
2007-2024 - 0

Updated for #12 & #13:
1) Babe Ruth (1914-1935)
2) Willie Mays (1948-1973)
3) Ted Williams (1939-1960)
4) Barry Bonds (1986-2007)
5) Hank Aaron (1954-1976)
6) Ty Cobb (1905-1928)
7) Lou Gehrig (1923-1939)
8) Mickey Mantle (1951-1968)
9) Walter Johnson (1907-1927)
10) Stan Musial (1941-1963)
11) Rogers Hornsby (1915-1937)
12) Honus Wagner (1897-1917)
13) Mike Schmidt (1972-1989)

1876-1896 - 0
1897-1904 - 1
1905-1906 - 2
1907-1913 - 3
1914 - 4
1915-1917 - 5
1918-1922 - 4
1923-1927 - 5
1928 - 4
1929-1935 - 3
1936-1937 - 2
1938 - 1
1939 - 2
1940 - 1
1941-1947 - 2
1948-1950 - 3
1951-1953 - 4
1954-1960 - 5
1961-1963 - 4
1964-1968 - 3
1969-1971 - 2
1972-1973 - 3
1974-1976 - 2
1977-1985 - 1
1986-1989 - 2
1990-2007 - 1
2007-2024 - 0

 

[calsnowskier]

Mildly disagree on the first. For most players, active vs retired, it is interesting to see how they stack up but the active player has likely either not hit the end of his peak and/or still has some mediocre seasons left that will drag down the numbers.
However, strongly disagree on the 2nd part of your statement. If your reason for that statement is because it weighs in the down years, I find that very valuable for comparing. Just about every player, unless his career gets cut short for some reason, is going to have some poor years at the end. Comparing rate stats at least shows who handled the down years better. For example, we all know that Pujols' 2nd half of his career was not great. It bears out in his career OPS+ number.
I do like how you've been showing "buckets" and am trying to incorporate that more in players I look at. Pujols' career rate stats reflect the 2nd half slide and should be considered as part of rankings. Best of all time, after all, is more than just ranking players' peaks. Otherwise, we would have a very different list if we only ranked players based on best season.

I just don’t care about a great players twilight years. He plays because he is able to put asses in seats or because he loves the game. That shouldn’t effect who he was when he was there to actually help the team win.

 

[msgkings322]

Decided to go with Speaker as my 3rd nomination just because, hat tip to @LHG

Might change it next one, lots of guys can make a case

 

[calsnowskier]

Decided to go with Speaker as my 3rd nomination just because, hat tip to @LHG

Might change it next one, lots of guys can make a case

Traffic gets very heavy once you get out of the top 10.

 

[msgkings322]

Traffic gets very heavy once you get out of the top 10.

Yeah we've gone past the 'obvious' consensus top level guys, the order can be debated but no one is missing from the top 10 hitters. Now there's like a dozen plausible names for each slot. And like 5-6 different pitchers have a claim on best pitchers left.

 

[Clayton]

Someone sell me on Randy Johnson being the 2nd best pitcher of all time.

 

[calsnowskier]

Yeah we've gone past the 'obvious' consensus top level guys, the order can be debated but no one is missing from the top 10 hitters. Now there's like a dozen plausible names for each slot. And like 5-6 different pitchers have a claim on best pitchers left.

I would argue that a couple guys (Gehrig and Mantle, really) were over-ranked, but I am not sure that they were over-ranked enough that I wouldn’t put them in the top 14, though. I think the best BAT still on the board is probably Pujols, but Speaker and Robinson deserve to at least be in that discussion and to be debated. ARod, as well, but he is completely off my board, so I will let you guys debate him.

 

[calsnowskier]

And where do we list Sosa, Thome, McGwire…? They all fall within my “Bonds exemption”, but I never felt they were ever ELITE players.

 

[calsnowskier]

Someone sell me on Randy Johnson being the 2nd best pitcher of all time.

@DHoey did a good job of that. I think he should take that mantle moving forward. He made some very good points.

 

[Cedrique]

And where do we list Sosa, Thome, McGwire…? They all fall within my “Bonds exemption”, but I never felt they were ever ELITE players.

I don't think Thome needs an "exemption", but yeah none of them had the really gaudy WAR numbers, probably because a big part of their game was hitting homeruns in an era where a lot of people hit homeruns.

 

[Clayton]

And where do we list Sosa, Thome, McGwire…? They all fall within my “Bonds exemption”, but I never felt they were ever ELITE players.

McGwire is tough to make an argument for top 50. Injuries took two years off his prime and everything after that is boosted. His 98 season is one of the all time great batting seasons but for an obvious reason. Even if I'm not factoring in the roids he is below Joe Medwick which means McGwire is likely fringe top 100.