POLL Top 10 poll #16: #16 player in history - Runoff

[Clayton]

Oh, and when I said he was 37, I meant Pujols real age was 42 because we all know he lied about that

 

[calsnowskier]

Still a LOT of votes still to come (we are about 50% participation right now), but so far, I like the results. My faith in all you dumb fucks might be restored.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

His numbers are actually better than what I expected. And it does suck that he lost 3 PRIME years.

But the Yankee bump cannot be avoided.

He is a legit contender in this neighborhood, though.

its weird... he gets a yankees bump for winning so many championships... and makes a name for it.... But he was not a good post season player... the best he ever did was 5 RBIs... and that was in 7 games...

 

[calsnowskier]

its weird... he gets a yankees bump for winning so many championships... and makes a name for it.... But he was not a good post season player... the best he ever did was 5 RBIs... and that was in 7 games...

Bonds was not great in the post season either.

Does it matter, or is it just SSS? But then you see guys like Bumgarner or Morris who are post-season GODS. Is that just a SSS that they were able to maintain, or is there an actual skillset that those numbers represent? And does it work in both directions (those with strong skill sets will have superior numbers and those lacking that skillset with have crap numbers)?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Bonds was not great in the post season either.

Does it matter, or is it just SSS? But then you see guys like Bumgarner or Morris who are post-season GODS. Is that just a SSS that they were able to maintain, or is there an actual skillset that those numbers represent? And does it work in both directions (those with strong skill sets will have superior numbers and those lacking that skillset with have crap numbers)?

i have been clear that it is part of my analysis... i dont punish players for not being good, as they are being judged by the regular season anyway.... but when a player had specific good post seasons, i will give them extra points in my analysis... it is definitely more than just a tie breaker...

but i do sometimes get surprised by how some players reached legend status.... i think old school players got a weird boost... whether its based on nostalgia, or whatever... i have always assumed that post season creates legends... and for some of these players that is clearly not true...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Bonds was not great in the post season either.

Does it matter, or is it just SSS? But then you see guys like Bumgarner or Morris who are post-season GODS. Is that just a SSS that they were able to maintain, or is there an actual skillset that those numbers represent? And does it work in both directions (those with strong skill sets will have superior numbers and those lacking that skillset with have crap numbers)?

i guess i didnt answer your question at all in my post... i honestly had to read over your post a couple times to understand what SSS meant...

for most it is too small of a sample size to really matter... it would be similar to how some players have a VERY GOOD JUNE...,, or some players have a bad june

now some players will have larger sample sizes... so you would expect these players to be closer to their actual averages... but then you take into account the fact that we are talking about facing better players... as the better teams should have better pitching and/or better hitting...

so players in general should have WORSE numbers in the post sesason...

but at all times you expect your BEST players to step up when it matters... so you should always expect the best players to do better than they do in the regular sesaon...

i dont think skill set matters, its more mental than anything else... you can take the old Yogi Berra yogism "baseball is 90% mental, the other half is physical")... well in the playoffs it is even MORE mental...

but all this is irrelevant... i dont think taking a players overall post season numbers matters... i look at each WS separately... and see whether the player was a true reason the team won.... i dont even look too much on WS losses... Just wins...

 

[Cedrique]

Bonds was not great in the post season either.

Does it matter, or is it just SSS? But then you see guys like Bumgarner or Morris who are post-season GODS. Is that just a SSS that they were able to maintain, or is there an actual skillset that those numbers represent? And does it work in both directions (those with strong skill sets will have superior numbers and those lacking that skillset with have crap numbers)?

Definitely way to small of a sample size to be predictive of anything. For example, Mike Trout was 1-12 in his only postseason appearance. If he were to somehow have a bounce back season and the Angels miraculously were in the playoffs, I'm sure as hell not considering him an automatic out. And a lot of players who are "the guy" in a lineup have some tough postseason series because no one wants to get beat by them.

But after a career is over I have no problem giving a bump to guys if they performed well in the postseason.

 

[msgkings322]

some players i put more into military than others... Joe D is definitely one who you have to say it affected his career...

missing 3 seasons, is tough by itself... but 3 seasons at 28, 29 and 30... DAMN....

Ted Williams too...one reason he deserves such a high ranking

 

[msgkings322]

Still a LOT of votes still to come (we are about 50% participation right now), but so far, I like the results. My faith in all you dumb fucks might be restored.

Yep, no Griffey votes yet (big meanie steroid guy Clemens not being there anymore probably a factor)

 

[Cedrique]

Definitely way to small of a sample size to be predictive of anything. For example, Mike Trout was 1-12 in his only postseason appearance. If he were to somehow have a bounce back season and the Angels miraculously were in the playoffs, I'm sure as hell not considering him an automatic out. And a lot of players who are "the guy" in a lineup have some tough postseason series because no one wants to get beat by them.

But after a career is over I have no problem giving a bump to guys if they performed well in the postseason.

Quick edit to my post: With the playoffs being expanded and the Dodgers in it most years I am almost at the point where I CAN predict that there will be a game in every postseason where Clayton Kershaw implodes.

 

[Cedrique]

Ted Williams too...one reason he deserves such a high ranking

Yeah I don't think he even needs any extra consideration but it's shocking every time I look at Williams' stats. He put up a 10.5 WAR and led all the hitting and power categories, then took 3 years off and came back and put up a 10.6 and led pretty much all the hitting and power categories.
IMO the best Hitter of all time and if he had those 3 years it would be even more clear.

 

[msgkings322]

Yeah I don't think he even needs any extra consideration but it's shocking every time I look at Williams' stats. He put up a 10.5 WAR and led all the hitting and power categories, then took 3 years off and came back and put up a 10.6 and led pretty much all the hitting and power categories.
IMO the best Hitter of all time and if he had those 3 years it would be even more clear.

Not to mention those 3 years he wasn't just doing PR or whatever, he was flying literal combat missions and risking his life.

 

[calsnowskier]

i guess i didnt answer your question at all in my post... i honestly had to read over your post a couple times to understand what SSS meant...

Sorry. That is a regularly used term on the Giants forum. I should have specified what it meant when I used it here.

That said, the reason I try to avoid putting active players (pitchers specifically) into this list is because tinstaapp.


(@LHG and @msgkings322 get this one)

 

[chappee11]

Bonds was not great in the post season either.

Does it matter, or is it just SSS? But then you see guys like Bumgarner or Morris who are post-season GODS. Is that just a SSS that they were able to maintain, or is there an actual skillset that those numbers represent? And does it work in both directions (those with strong skill sets will have superior numbers and those lacking that skillset with have crap numbers)?

It’s SSS, sure, but it definitely matters. When superstars(like Aaron Judge recently) go missing in the postseason, it definitely raises some eyebrows. It was always that way for Bonds who was the best player and then couldn’t do anything in the playoffs. The best should be the best in the biggest games. I wouldn’t count it against Judge, but it’s a big plus for guys who do excel in the playoffs.

 

[calsnowskier]

It’s SSS, sure, but it definitely matters. When superstars(like Aaron Judge recently) go missing in the postseason, it definitely raises some eyebrows. It was always that way for Bonds who was the best player and then couldn’t do anything in the playoffs. The best should be the best in the biggest games. I wouldn’t count it against Judge, but it’s a big plus for guys who do excel in the playoffs.

That’s how Morris got into the Hall. And why Giants fans love Bumgarner so much, even though even Giants fans will admit that he was a huge asshole.

But neither of these guys belong on this list.

 

[chappee11]

That’s how Morris got into the Hall. And why Giants fans love Bumgarner so much, even though even Giants fans will admit that he was a huge asshole.

But neither of these guys belong on this list.

For the Red Sox it was Jon Lester who was a very good pitcher but became a great pitcher in the playoffs. Schilling elevated his game in the playoffs, too. That’s what these guys are paid for.

Yankees fans love Judge, of course, but come playoff time it seems to always be Giancarlo Stanton driving in all the runs. It’s weird.

Kiké Hernandez is another like this. He basically only seems to show up in the playoffs.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

That’s how Morris got into the Hall. And why Giants fans love Bumgarner so much, even though even Giants fans will admit that he was a huge asshole.

But neither of these guys belong on this list.

But a perfect example of a big boost was for Gehrig. I don’t think he would have been so high if he wasn’t arguably the best post season hitter of all time.

 

[calsnowskier]

But a perfect example of a big boost was for Gehrig. I don’t think he would have been so high if he wasn’t arguably the best post season hitter of all time.

Good point

 

[msgkings322]

Pretty clear evidence the Griffey votes were 'fuck you Clemens' votes. SSS though

 

[calsnowskier]

A quick summary of what I think each of these 6 players’ arguments to take this spot may be…

Johnson - Greatest LHSP ever. 5 CYs.
Speaker - Possibly the best hitter still available.
Martinez - Possibly the greatest peak pitcher of all time.
Maddux - The last great innings eater ever. Greatest control pitcher ever.
Griffey - Really, really nice guy.
DiMaggio - great numbers, but 3 lost years during his PRIME.