POLL Top 10 poll #17: #17 player in history - Runoff

[calsnowskier]

Runoff for the #17 player in baseball history. Poll closes Tuesday AM.

Spoiler: Tags

@navamind @LHG @Stokes1931
@steveringo @broncosmitty @packerzrule
@Shanemansj13 @jarntt @redseat
@black francis @molsaniceman @Fountain City Blues
@Used 2 B Hu @MilkSpiller22 @chappee11
@CitySushi @Clayton @UK Cowboy
@Beengay fudgepackers @Hbomb @Maximus Rex
@Pure Steel @jon2tanman @Boglodyte
@nynasty @Hank Kingsley @Wamu
@Robotech @kcden @jwolt92
@Sportsguy9695 @DHoey @chillerdab
@DorianRo @socaljim242 @PolarVortex
@msgkings322 @Cedrique @BigFin
@catman @omarsrevenge @rmilia1
@obxyankeefan @femurov @Nosferatu
@Maverick426h @TheGoodMan19 @Bodega
@blstoker @Diamondeye @trojanfan12
@mr.hockey4242 @Janus @VikingFan2k2
@Stakesarehigh @eaglesnut @boogiewithstu2007

 

[calsnowskier]

Greg Maddux 1986 - 2010

4 CY, 5 top 5 CY, 2 top 5 MVP, 4 more season w MVP votes, 8 ASG, 18 GG

Bold: IP 5, ERA 4, WHIP 4, K/BB 3

355-227 W-L
3371/999 K/BB
740/109 GS/CG
5008.1 IP

Pedro Martinez 1992 - 2009

3 CY, 4 top 5 CY, 2 top 5 MVP, 4 more season w MVP votes, 8 ASG

Bold: ERA 5, K 3, WHIP 6, K/BB 5

219-100 W-L
3154/760 K/BB
409/46 GS/CG
2827.1 IP

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Pujols is the clear best hitter here. It’s only the position that helps the other 2. But just don’t see that difference being enough.

Pujols is the easy pick for me.

 

[calsnowskier]

Tris Speaker (CF) 1907 - 1928

1 MVP, 1 top 5 MVP, 1 top 10 MVP, 1 additional season receiving MVP votes (MVP only given in 4 years of his career)

135.0, 62.1

Bold: RBI 1, 2B 8, HR 1, OPS 1, TB 1, all time 2B

OPS+ buckets

180 - 3
160 - 6
140 - 6
120 - 2

Joe DiMaggio (CF) 1936 - 1951 (3 years lost to WWII)

3 MVP, 3 top 5 MVP, 4 top 10 MVP, 2 additional seasons with MVP votes, 13 ASG (AS every year of career)

79.1, 52.1

Bold: R 1, 3B 1, HR 2, RBI 2, TB 3

OPS+ buckets

180 - 2
160 - 3
140 - 4
120 - 2

Albert Pujols (1B) 2001 - 2022

3 MVP, 7 top 5 MVP, 1 top 10 MVP, 2 additional seasons with MVP votes, 11 ASG, ROY, 6 SS, 2 GG

101.5, 59.8

Bold: R 5, HR 2, RBI 1, OPS 3, TB 4, 2B 1

OPS+ buckets

200 - 0
180 - 3
160 - 4
140 - 5
120 - 2

 

[calsnowskier]

Pujols is the clear best hitter here. It’s only the position that helps the other 2. But just don’t see that difference being enough.

Pujols is the easy pick for me.

Speaker has the hands down best numbers (among the hitters). I like Pujols in this neighborhood, but for the hitters, I think Speaker is ahead of Pujols.

But for me, this spot needs to go to the Professor.

 

[calsnowskier]

Maddux
Martinez
Speaker
Pujols
DiMaggio

But all are deserving.

 

[calsnowskier]

This MIGHT be my legit top 5 still avail. Bench and Robinson, I think, might offer strong arguments for inclusion. Maybe Young as well.

 

[LHG]

This MIGHT be my legit top 5 still avail. Bench and Robinson, I think, might offer strong arguments for inclusion. Maybe Young as well.

Bench seems way too far down to be considered here, in my opinion. Yes, best catcher of all time and such, but I don't give extra credit for positions not yet represented on the list. This is all time best players, not all time best team.

 

[calsnowskier]

Bench seems way too far down to be considered here, in my opinion. Yes, best catcher of all time and such, but I don't give extra credit for positions not yet represented on the list. This is all time best players, not all time best team.

Catcher is something different, though. Any franchise that has had one knows this.

I dont think Posey belongs on this list (at this spot, at least), but he was MUCH more than his hitting numbers.

 

[Clayton]

Speaker has the hands down best numbers (among the hitters). I like Pujols in this neighborhood, but for the hitters, I think Speaker is ahead of Pujols.

But for me, this spot needs to go to the Professor.

If we're going by numbers, Speaker should've been off the board awhile back imo

 

[calsnowskier]

If we're going by numbers, Speaker should've been off the board awhile back imo

Agree. But numbers aren’t the only factor. If the other aspects weren’t a thing, we wouldn’t need a poll.

 

[calsnowskier]

If we're going by numbers, Speaker should've been off the board awhile back imo

Agree. But numbers aren’t the only factor. If the other aspects weren’t a thing, we wouldn’t need a poll.

And, tbf, I think ONLY Rickey is selected already who doesn’t have a strongly comparative bat to Tris. And he is so clearly a unicorn, so he is defendable at his spot.

 

[Clayton]

Agree. But numbers aren’t the only factor. If the other aspects weren’t a thing, we wouldn’t need a poll.

Sure, but the difficult part here is that Speaker put 15 OPS+ seasons above 140. Pujols 12. DiMaggio 11 above 139. Pedro 11 seasons of ERA+ above 140. Maddux only has 10 seasons of ERA+ above 140.

Just the optics of living through each era, I'd imagine fans would think Speaker was the best. Certainly if DiMaggio hadn't been in the war he'd be right there.

Is that fair to the pitchers? Probably not. Pedro in general has one of the best primes ever, really.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Speaker has the hands down best numbers (among the hitters). I like Pujols in this neighborhood, but for the hitters, I think Speaker is ahead of Pujols.

But for me, this spot needs to go to the Professor.

Here is another way to look at it.

Take OPS+ and WAR(position players)

Pujols war

6 best, 2 times top 5, 2 times top 10. 10 times ranked

In a 5-3-1 formula

38

Ops+

10 times ranked

4 times best, 4 times top 5, 2 times top 10=34

Speaker

War- 18 times ranked

3 times best, 12 times top 5, 3 times top 10=54

Ops+
16 times ranked.

1 best, 14 top 5, 1 top 10= 48

Joe d

12 times ranked.

3 times best, 5 times top 5, 4 times top 10= 34

OPS+

10 times ranked

1 time best, 7 times top 5, 2 times top 10= 28


The 5-3-1 formula shows speaker to be the best too. But pujols was the best more often than any of the other 3. And with position bonus it makes pujols even better because the other 2 were given it while pujols wasn’t.

So pujols having a 59 war7 to me is better than speaker’s 61 war7. Because it is so close.


All 3 players played in an era that would exaggerate their statistics. Pujols and Joe DiMaggio played in a big home run boom era.

Also reminder. That being on a ranked list when there was only 8 teams in your league is much easier than being on a ranked list when there is 15 teams in a league

 

[LHG]

Here is another way to look at it.

Take OPS+ and WAR(position players)

Pujols war

6 best, 2 times top 5, 2 times top 10. 10 times ranked

In a 5-3-1 formula

38

Ops+

10 times ranked

4 times best, 4 times top 5, 2 times top 10=34

Speaker

War- 18 times ranked

3 times best, 12 times top 5, 3 times top 10=54

Ops+
16 times ranked.

1 best, 14 top 5, 1 top 10= 48

Joe d

12 times ranked.

3 times best, 5 times top 5, 4 times top 10= 34

OPS+

10 times ranked

1 time best, 7 times top 5, 2 times top 10= 28


The 5-3-1 formula shows speaker to be the best too. But pujols was the best more often than any of the other 3. And with position bonus it makes pujols even better because the other 2 were given it while pujols wasn’t.

So pujols having a 59 war7 to me is better than speaker’s 61 war7. Because it is so close.


All 3 players played in an era that would exaggerate their statistics. Pujols and Joe DiMaggio played in a big home run boom era.

Also reminder. That being on a ranked list when there was only 8 teams in your league is much easier than being on a ranked list when there is 15 teams in a league

By your own formula, Speaker's scores a lot higher than Pujols. But you want to give him a lot of extra credit because he played 1st base? Seems weird when you have, in the past, wanted to give a player at a premium position extra credit when he was tied with another player (see Mantle, Mickey).

 

[MilkSpiller22]

By your own formula, Speaker's scores a lot higher than Pujols. But you want to give him a lot of extra credit because he played 1st base? Seems weird when you have, in the past, wanted to give a player at a premium position extra credit when he was tied with another player (see Mantle, Mickey).

My point about position is that it was more difficult to be best than it was for a cf. so the fact that pujols was best more often is much more telling.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

By your own formula, Speaker's scores a lot higher than Pujols. But you want to give him a lot of extra credit because he played 1st base? Seems weird when you have, in the past, wanted to give a player at a premium position extra credit when he was tied with another player (see Mantle, Mickey).

I also didn’t conclude anything in that post. I will admit that my pujols bias might have made it look pro pujols. But there was no actual conclusion. Just gave another way to look at it.

Next time I do it I will try to show no bias.

 

[LHG]

My point about position is that it was more difficult to be best than it was for a cf. so the fact that pujols was best more often is much more telling.

I may not understand your formula but isn't it weighted for being the best in a season? Who is better, the guy who has bigger peaks but also bigger gaps in performance? Or the guy who may not have been the best as often but was elite in more seasons?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I may not understand your formula but isn't it weighted for being the best in a season? Who is better, the guy who has bigger peaks but also bigger gaps in performance? Or the guy who may not have been the best as often but was elite in more seasons?

The actual 5-3-1 formula was just for show. You can’t conclude on that.

 

[SF11704]

Probably the most interesting thead I have ever had the pleasure of reading on thrse boards. Just amazing. A much more complicated task than I ever imagined. Very difficult to actually try and work through the selection process.

IBut I do have one question that I never saw actually addressed. Comparing players from different eras is a very very difficult tasl at best. Very hard to actually compare statistics from different eras but how does the poll address players from different leagues (prior to segration). There were some excellent players in the old ***** leagues. Some of the players mentioned here came from that league. I personallty wonder where Josh Gibson would fall in this poll. In some circles he is considered as the best player to ever play the game. Not sure I would agree but his overall performance statistics are something to be considered.. Just not sure how to look at players from a different league. That was also active at that time.