Top 10 poll: #6 player ever

[calsnowskier]

It was a different game. Pitcher were expected to go nine innings, same as everyone else. No four or five man rotations. But, most 19th Century pitchers were junkballers. Throwing lollypop curves and doctored baseballs that had a shape closer to a baked potato than a modern ball

Were there even standards to the balls being used at that time? I seriously doubt there were. I believe that at that time, foul balls were not “souvenirs”, but were expected to be returned to the field of play, and using more than 1 or 2 balls for a complete game was pretty much unheard of at the time. Today, a SINGLE AB can go through a dozen or more balls.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If Ruth was so good he is able to remove an all time great like Gehrig out of the “top 10”, couldn’t the reverse be said as well? That the existence of Gehrig helped Ruth enough to drop him a few slots?

Well, we are now at 6, and he has not yet won... so at best you want to claim he is a bottom half of top 10... its not too far fetched that he would NOT make the top 10...

i did not say Ruth was the only reason...

i have stated in an earlier thread, that i despise the fact that the top 10 is dominated by older generational players... the biggest reason they are so high is because the overall talent in the leagues were not that good, thanks to the colour barrier, and other reasons...

so yes... a player who played in a time we look down upon, and was not the face of his team, and certainly not the face of his generation, and doesnt get the bonus for defense or baserunning

how can you say he is top 10??

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Great discussion for the spots that are coming up.

But can anyone put up a legit argument for anyone over Cobb at this spot? The nomination process is indicating that this will be a runaway for Cobb.

until we seriously start talking pitching... it would be very hard to beat Cobb...

 

[calsnowskier]

until we seriously start talking pitching... it would be very hard to beat Cobb...

Would you be able to make an argument for any pitcher to top Cobb?

Clemens? Walter? Maddux? Paige? Young?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Would you be able to make an argument for any pitcher to top Cobb?

Clemens? Walter? Maddux? Paige? Young?

well, the difference between a pitcher and a hitter is very subjective... as 1-1 stats are not going to work in a comparison.

i do think it would be harder to argue for a pitcher before 1950s against Cobb,... just for the argument... i mean, it would hard to say Johnson or Young over cobb... when you are spitting on the era of play....

so if it was vs Cobb, i would want to see Seaver, Maddux, Clemens, Randy, pedro, gibson type...

 

[TheGoodMan19]

My question is where to put in the players like Josh Gibson, Satchel Paige, Cool Papa Bell etc. There's no doubt that they were elite and could have excelled in the majors. But how to rate them? I took Oscar Charleston. .365 lifetime BA, tore his leagues to pieces in his prime. But only played more that 100 league games once. But, with barnstorming, probably played 200+ in a season. A factor that Ruth, Hornsby and his contemporaries didn't face. And, from what I've read, the competitive balance in the "segregated" leagues was laughable. The elite teams, KC Monarchs, Homestead Grays, Pitt Crawfords were light years above the bottom dwellers. The leagues were like the 1870's "majors" with teams dropping in and out like bouncy balls

 

[MilkSpiller22]

My question is where to put in the players like Josh Gibson, Satchel Paige, Cool Papa Bell etc. There's no doubt that they were elite and could have excelled in the majors. But how to rate them? I took Oscar Charleston. .365 lifetime BA, tore his leagues to pieces in his prime. But only played more that 100 league games once. But, with barnstorming, probably played 200+ in a season. A factor that Ruth, Hornsby and his contemporaries didn't face. And, from what I've read, the competitive balance in the "segregated" leagues was laughable. The elite teams, KC Monarchs, Homestead Grays, Pitt Crawfords were light years above the bottom dwellers. The leagues were like the 1870's "majors" with teams dropping in and out like bouncy balls

none are top 10.... which is all we are focusing on right now... i feel like it is easier to just call Gibson a top 5 catcher of all time... than it would be to find a real spot for him... the other problem when it comes to ***** leagues, not just the competition... but also the statistics... they did not have the best stats keepers... nor would we ever be able to understand any defensive metrics, that was not even good for white baseball back then....

so they are more legend/story than stats...

 

[calsnowskier]

none are top 10.... which is all we are focusing on right now... i feel like it is easier to just call Gibson a top 5 catcher of all time... than it would be to find a real spot for him... the other problem when it comes to ***** leagues, not just the competition... but also the statistics... they did not have the best stats keepers... nor would we ever be able to understand any defensive metrics, that was not even good for white baseball back then....

so they are more legend/story than stats...

This is why I am not thrilled that the N-Leagues have been promoted to MLB-status. We simply don’t know what happened and the statistics are not reliable. We can only look at guys like Gibson, Paige, Bell, Charleston, etc based on their legend. It is impossible to argue or debate their actual greatness.

Who was better at the BBQ pit, Churchill or Chamberlain? Go…

 

[DrewScott]

I'm going with Tony Gwynn. I just liked that dude.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

This is why I am not thrilled that the N-Leagues have been promoted to MLB-status. We simply don’t know what happened and the statistics are not reliable. We can only look at guys like Gibson, Paige, Bell, Charleston, etc based on their legend. It is impossible to argue or debate their actual greatness.

Who was better at the BBQ pit, Churchill or Chamberlain? Go…

i have no doubt that the best of the best would have been elite in the majors... I mean, Mays and Robinson proved that...

so i dont mind having Gibson as a top 10 catcher of all time, and things like that...

the shame is that even though we ding the MLB period, we somehow allow legends of that era dominate the top 10 overall... so at the same time, i think it would be fair to give charleston a top 10 overall... just in recognition to our hypocricy...

 

[LHG]

View attachment 384477

View attachment 384478


I still say it is a crime that the one that is only ahead in BA and career WAR is on this list and getting votes, but the other one is just completely ignored in these discussions.

False poll is false

In my opinion, neither should be considered yet.

 

[LHG]

I don’t trust WAR for pitchers in anything beyond a quick glance at a first attempt at sorting. At least in comparison to hitters.

I view Clemens the same as I view Bonds as far as the “blind eye” issue. He never broke a baseball rule (at least he was never got caught breaking a baseball rule).

I will not die on the Clemens hill vs Johnson, Paige, Young, etc, though. I agree that it is REALLY hard to compare pitchers of different eras. There isn’t a stat like OPS+ that is a good start for comparing eras.

You don't like ERA+?
Walter Johnson had an ERA+ of 147
Cy Young had an ERA+ of 138
Roger Clemens had an ERA+ of 143

 

[LHG]

Great discussion for the spots that are coming up.

But can anyone put up a legit argument for anyone over Cobb at this spot? The nomination process is indicating that this will be a runaway for Cobb.

I'm a fan of Walter Johnson in this spot. For all its warts, WAR does give some perspective and Johnson's 166.9 career WAR is 2nd only to Babe Ruth. That is saying a lot about a pitcher. And if you want to argue "accumulation stats", consider his WAR7 - 91.1. This is the best WAR7 you'll find among anyone who should even be considered top 50 players of all time.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I'm a fan of Walter Johnson in this spot. For all its warts, WAR does give some perspective and Johnson's 166.9 career WAR is 2nd only to Babe Ruth. That is saying a lot about a pitcher. And if you want to argue "accumulation stats", consider his WAR7 - 91.1. This is the best WAR7 you'll find among anyone who should even be considered top 50 players of all time.

Baseball-references addressed this older pitcher war issue. They created a new war7 based on a max of 250 innings.

 

[chappee11]

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)

Who is the #6 player ever? Vote for your top 3. This poll will close Saturday AM.

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

I went Cobb, Ohtani, Cy Young here.

Hard to compare Cobb to Ohtani but the best hitter and an elite pitcher in the same player is basically impossible to top.

 

[chappee11]

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)

Who is the #6 player ever? Vote for your top 3. This poll will close Saturday AM.

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

Based on this voting, this baseball card in my collection OFFICIALLY has 3 of the top 5 players of all-time on it. Such a cool card.

 

[msgkings322]

This is why I am not thrilled that the N-Leagues have been promoted to MLB-status. We simply don’t know what happened and the statistics are not reliable. We can only look at guys like Gibson, Paige, Bell, Charleston, etc based on their legend. It is impossible to argue or debate their actual greatness.

Who was better at the BBQ pit, Churchill or Chamberlain? Go…

Gotta go with Wilt there

 

[LHG]

Gotta go with Wilt there

No way. Churchill kept calm and BBQ'd on. Chamberlain just kept giving the best meats away to the random guy that wasn't invited to the party.

 

[msgkings322]

No way. Churchill kept calm and BBQ'd on. Chamberlain just kept giving the best meats away to the random guy that wasn't invited to the party.

Wilt Chamberlain definitely gave his meat to people he invited to party.

 

[calsnowskier]

Gotta go with Wilt there

Bring the stats. Defend your position!