POLL Top 10 poll: #27 player ever

[calsnowskier]

1) Babe Ruth (defeated Willie Mays 23-9)
2) Willie Mays (defeated Barry Bonds 26-11)
3) Ted Williams (defeated Barry Bonds 18-17)
4) Barry Bonds (defeated Hank Aaron and Ty Cobb 20-11-8)
5) Hank Aaron (defeated Ty Cobb 17-16)
6) Ty Cobb (defeated Lou Gehrig 24-9)
7) Lou Gehrig (defeated Walter Johnson 19-10)
8) Mickey Mantle (defeated Walter Johnson 17-12)
9) Walter Johnson (defeated Stan Musial and Rogers Hornsby 18-7-3)
10) Stan Musial (defeated Rogers Hornsby 15-10)
11) Rogers Hornsby (defeated H. Wagner, R. Henderson, M. Schmidt and R. Clemens 15-4-3-2-1)
12) Honus Wagner (defeated Roger Clemens 19-8)
13) Mike Schmidt (defeated Roger Clemens 16-12)
14) Rickey Henderson (defeated Roger Clemens 17-13)
15) Roger Clemens (defeated Ken Griffey Jr 16-14)
16) Randy Johnson (defeated Tris Speaker 16-11)
17) Tris Speaker (defeated Greg Maddux 18-12)
18) Greg Maddux (defeated Albert Pujols 17-9)
19) Joe DiMaggio (defeated Albert Pujols 17-13)
20) Albert Pujols (defeated Pedro Martinez 16-14)
21) Pedro Martinez (defeated Jimmie Foxx 20-10)
22) Jimmie Foxx (defeated Cy Young, Lefty Grove and Christy Mathewson 16-12-2-1)
23) Cy Young (defeated Lefty Grove 17-13)
24) Lefty Grove (defeated Ken Griffey Jr 21-9)
25) Ken Griffey Jr (defeated Alex Rodriguez 14-12)
26) Christy Mathewson (defeated Sandy Koufax and Alex Rodriguez 16-10-5)

Who is the #27 player ever? This poll will close Thursday AM.

VOTE FOR 3!!

Spoiler: Tags

@navamind @LHG
@steveringo @broncosmitty @packerzrule
@jarntt @redseat
@black francis @molsaniceman @Fountain City Blues
@Used 2 B Hu @MilkSpiller22
@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
@SF11704 @Hunter Montana

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Arod is now off my list... not worth ruining the runoffs..

my next three are more of a nomination than an actual vote for any of them

went with seaver and Gibson and Bench...

all three need to be discussed more at this point...

 

[LHG]

Updated for #25:
1) Babe Ruth (1914-1935)
2) Willie Mays (1951-1973)
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)
14) Rickey Henderson (1979-2003)
15) Roger Clemens (1984-2007)
16) Randy Johnson (1988-2009)
17) Tris Speaker (1907-1928)
18) Greg Maddux (1986-2008)
19) Joe DiMaggio (1936-1951)
20) Albert Pujols (2001-2022)
21) Pedro Martinez (1992-2009)
22) Jimmie Foxx (1925-1945)
23) Cy Young (1890-1911)
24) Lefty Grove (1925-1941)
25) Ken Griffey, Jr (1989-2010)

1876-1889
1890-1896 - 1
1897-1904 - 2
1905-1906 - 3
1907-1911 - 5
1912-1913 - 4
1914 - 5
1915-1917 - 6
1918-1922 - 5
1923-1924 - 6
1925-1927 - 8
1928 - 7
1929-1935 - 4
1936-1937 - 5
1938 - 3
1939 - 4
1940 - 3
1941 - 5
1942-1945 - 4
1946-1950 - 3
1951 - 5
1952-1953 - 4
1954-1960 - 5
1961-1963 - 4
1964-1968 - 3
1969-1971 - 2
1972-1973 - 3
1974-1976 - 2
1977-1978 - 1
1979-1983 - 2
1984-1985 - 3
1986-1987 - 5
1988 - 6
1989 - 7
1990-1991 - 6
1992-2000 - 7
2001-2003 - 8
2004-2007 - 7
2008 - 5
2009 - 4
2010 - 2
2011-2022 - 1
2023-2024 - 0

Updated for #26:
1) Babe Ruth (1914-1935)
2) Willie Mays (1951-1973)
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)
14) Rickey Henderson (1979-2003)
15) Roger Clemens (1984-2007)
16) Randy Johnson (1988-2009)
17) Tris Speaker (1907-1928)
18) Greg Maddux (1986-2008)
19) Joe DiMaggio (1936-1951)
20) Albert Pujols (2001-2022)
21) Pedro Martinez (1992-2009)
22) Jimmie Foxx (1925-1945)
23) Cy Young (1890-1911)
24) Lefty Grove (1925-1941)
25) Ken Griffey, Jr (1989-2010)
26) Christy Mathewson (1900-1916)

1876-1889 - 0
1890-1896 - 1
1897-1899 - 2
1900-1904 - 3
1905-1906 - 4
1907-1911 - 6
1912-1913 - 5
1914 - 6
1915-1916 - 7
1917 - 6
1918-1922 - 5
1923-1924 - 6
1925-1927 - 8
1928 - 7
1929-1935 - 4
1936-1937 - 5
1938 - 3
1939 - 4
1940 - 3
1941 - 5
1942-1945 - 4
1946-1950 - 3
1951 - 5
1952-1953 - 4
1954-1960 - 5
1961-1963 - 4
1964-1968 - 3
1969-1971 - 2
1972-1973 - 3
1974-1976 - 2
1977-1978 - 1
1979-1983 - 2
1984-1985 - 3
1986-1987 - 5
1988 - 6
1989 - 7
1990-1991 - 6
1992-2000 - 7
2001-2003 - 8
2004-2007 - 7
2008 - 5
2009 - 4
2010 - 2
2011-2022 - 1
2023-2024 - 0

 

[LHG]

Arod is now off my list... not worth ruining the runoffs..

my next three are more of a nomination than an actual vote for any of them

went with seaver and Gibson and Bench...

all three need to be discussed more at this point...

The next 5 pitchers I'd say should be considered I think are in this order: Kershaw, Alexander, Seaver, Gibson, Nichols.
I still think it is too early for catchers and Collins, Trout, Ott, Lajoie and Robinson should be seriously considered right now.

 

[Clayton]

Robinson, J Gibson, Trout

I think Im finally at the point where Trout should be considered. I'll probably wait on Arod until at least 30

 

[MilkSpiller22]

The next 5 pitchers I'd say should be considered I think are in this order: Kershaw, Alexander, Seaver, Gibson, Nichols.
I still think it is too early for catchers and Collins, Trout, Ott, Lajoie and Robinson should be seriously considered right now.

kid nichols is nowhhere near my next 5... he is entirely a pitcher of the times where he just pitched 300+, and often 400+ innings every year... but his numbers are not very good


he was only top 5 in ERA 6 times and never best

remember there was only 8 teams in his division... and pitchers were all able to pitch significantly more innings... in fact, he only lead the league once in innings...

he is probably not even top 10 next pitchers

 

[msgkings322]

Arod is now off my list... not worth ruining the runoffs..

my next three are more of a nomination than an actual vote for any of them

went with seaver and Gibson and Bench...

all three need to be discussed more at this point...

It’s bizarre you rate Seaver over Kershaw. Kershaw is pretty easily the best pitcher left on the board IMO

 

[MilkSpiller22]

It’s bizarre you rate Seaver over Kershaw. Kershaw is pretty easily the best pitcher left on the board IMO

i didnt to an analysis in a while between the 2... and when i made the comment a few threads ago that seaver was my next pitcher, i will admit, i didnt realize Kershaw had a BPOT WS title...

so i may change my mind if they are both up... might do another pitching analysis later today/tonight... to see if my mind changed...

 

[calsnowskier]

I still think it is too early for catchers and Collins,

I agree re: Collins. His WAR is a real aberration. I would be interested in hearing someone who REALLY understands the WAR calc to explain why it is so off base, or defend why it isn’t. It just doesn’t seem to jive with his numbers.

As for the catchers, I could not disagree more. I understand passing on Gibson because we are ALL too ignorant about him, but I absolutely think we are past the point of them getting on the board. It is the most important position on the field. How can we be at 27 and have yet to put up our first catcher? I like Bench, but I could absolutely get behind Yogi.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

and yes i am trying to coin the term/stat BPOT WS title...

Best player/pitcher on team when that team wins the WS...

now, there are going to be times a BPOT gets credit even though he may not actually be BPOT...

for example the 2001 diamondbacks rode the backs of Randy Johnson AND Curt Schilling...

they both deserve BPOT even though one clearly cant be BPOT...

 

[Clayton]

Regular season Kershaw is a top 20 player. Post season Kershaw is an average starter

 

[redseat]

#Done

 

[calsnowskier]

Regular season Kershaw is a top 20 player. Post season Kershaw is an average starter

Thanks to Doc.

Doc done “Shaw dirty.

 

[LHG]

kid nichols is nowhhere near my next 5... he is entirely a pitcher of the times where he just pitched 300+, and often 400+ innings every year... but his numbers are not very good


he was only top 5 in ERA 6 times and never best

remember there was only 8 teams in his division... and pitchers were all able to pitch significantly more innings... in fact, he only lead the league once in innings...

he is probably not even top 10 next pitchers

I'm not completely sold on Nichols and could easily replace him with Warren Spahn or Justin Verlander.

 

[LHG]

I agree re: Collins. His WAR is a real aberration. I would be interested in hearing someone who REALLY understands the WAR calc to explain why it is so off base, or defend why it isn’t. It just doesn’t seem to jive with his numbers.

As for the catchers, I could not disagree more. I understand passing on Gibson because we are ALL too ignorant about him, but I absolutely think we are past the point of them getting on the board. It is the most important position on the field. How can we be at 27 and have yet to put up our first catcher? I like Bench, but I could absolutely get behind Yogi.

But who do you measure the intangibles? Just because Berra and Bench are the best of the catching bunch we want to elevate them now because, well, catchers do a lot and they are the best and there is this arbitrary idea that a catcher must be in the Top 30! Of course, I wasn't convinced that Henderson should have been ranked where he was because of his intangibles. But at least with Henderson there was something specific to his style of play that made the high ranking justified. With Bench and Berra it is just the generic "they are catchers!".
I'd be fine if both eke in at the end of the Top 50 but I've still not heard an argument that puts them in now. Do all catchers get this boost?

 

[Clayton]

But who do you measure the intangibles? Just because Berra and Bench are the best of the catching bunch we want to elevate them now because, well, catchers do a lot and they are the best and there is this arbitrary idea that a catcher must be in the Top 30! Of course, I wasn't convinced that Henderson should have been ranked where he was because of his intangibles. But at least with Henderson there was something specific to his style of play that made the high ranking justified. With Bench and Berra it is just the generic "they are catchers!".
I'd be fine if both eke in at the end of the Top 50 but I've still not heard an argument that puts them in now. Do all catchers get this boost?

I thought Bench was considered one of the three best at throwing guys out and controlling the bases. From there, being a solid bat seems to provide value beyond 'just a catcher'.

 

[calsnowskier]

But who do you measure the intangibles? Just because Berra and Bench are the best of the catching bunch we want to elevate them now because, well, catchers do a lot and they are the best and there is this arbitrary idea that a catcher must be in the Top 30! Of course, I wasn't convinced that Henderson should have been ranked where he was because of his intangibles. But at least with Henderson there was something specific to his style of play that made the high ranking justified. With Bench and Berra it is just the generic "they are catchers!".
I'd be fine if both eke in at the end of the Top 50 but I've still not heard an argument that puts them in now. Do all catchers get this boost?

With catchers of yesteryear, we are stuck with going by legend for the most part, unfortunately. We don’t have framing stats. We don’t have non-slobbering first person accounts of their abilities. But we have a lot more on Bench/Yogi than we do on Gibson, at least.

 

[LHG]

I thought Bench was considered one of the three best at throwing guys out and controlling the bases. From there, being a solid bat seems to provide value beyond 'just a catcher'.

With catchers of yesteryear, we are stuck with going by legend for the most part, unfortunately. We don’t have framing stats. We don’t have non-slobbering first person accounts of their abilities. But we have a lot more on Bench/Yogi than we do on Gibson, at least.

And this is where my ignorance of full understanding of WAR comes in. Doesn't it include defensive value in it estimation? If so, is your arguments that these guys get added consideration due to being a catcher come with the idea that WAR doesn't fully give value to the defensive prowess of these guys or is it that there are other considerations besides defensive value?

 

[calsnowskier]

And this is where my ignorance of full understanding of WAR comes in. Doesn't it include defensive value in it estimation? If so, is your arguments that these guys get added consideration due to being a catcher come with the idea that WAR doesn't fully give value to the defensive prowess of these guys or is it that there are other considerations besides defensive value?

I have never been a fan of defensive metrics (Belt had bad metrics, and anyone who saw him play would say he was just south of GG quality). And I have never claimed WAR is a perfect stat. I like the stat because it tends to agree with my personal opinions more often than not. Collins is a great example where I don’t like it. I suspect his play somehow found a perfect storm within the calc.

Unicorns don’t translate well to WAR. And WAR doesn’t capture catchers well.

IMHO

 

[LHG]

I have never been a fan of defensive metrics (Belt had bad metrics, and anyone who saw him play would say he was just south of GG quality). And I have never claimed WAR is a perfect stat. I like the stat because it tends to agree with my personal opinions more often than not. Collins is a great example where I don’t like it. I suspect his play somehow found a perfect storm within the calc.

Unicorns don’t translate well to WAR. And WAR doesn’t capture catchers well.

IMHO

I agree that there is no perfect stat and WAR definitely has its flaws but baseball is a stat-centric sport and WAR, with its flaws, is a good starting point to figure out which players should duke it out in the next 10 spots. Even if Collins' WAR is 20 points too high, he would be one of 6 position players with a career WAR north of 100. Bench, with the highest WAR among careers, is at 75.1. Are you suggesting that the intangibles are unaccounted in the equivalent of 25 to 35 WAR? That's huge! Berra's WAR is 59.5. These 6 that I referenced have career WARs double (or very close) that number!
Bench's best offensive season (1972) saw him post a 8.6 WAR. Berra's best offensive season (1956) saw him post a 6.2 WAR. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that these intangibles somehow give each of these guys two more best season equivalent WARs. That puts Bench at 92.3 and Berra at 71.9. Further, let's say that no other position player brought any kind of intangibles that was missed in the WAR calculations. That still puts 13 position players with better WAR than Bench and 39 position players with better WAR than Berra.
Seems way too soon for me to vote for them and for them to be even considered.
IMHO