Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I think you missed the point. Cal played for a divisional rival...he had to be something special to get a standing O. He was old. People are nice to old men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullnelson9999 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Bonds. No question. Greatest hitter of all time. Ted Williams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 this is why ryan zimmerman is a juggernaut. the dude has put up 90+ RBIs with nobody batting in front of him. i can only dream of what he could produce with real leadoff batters or #2 batters. Zimmerman's OPS is slightly better than Carlos Gonzales'. He has slightly more RBIs and 2 more HRs. He has more RBIs than Aubrey Huff who is ahead of him So, Zimmerman is doing pretty much exactly as he should be. Baseball usually works that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 So' date=' grow the **** up. You're 42. Start looking at the world like a rational ****ing human being and not an 11 year old.[/quote']Dude, get a grip. You're the one starting to kick and scream like a 10 year old. Take a pill. You sound like you're about to explode because I have a favorite player. I think I've brought some very "grown up" conversation to this thread, but it won't change my view about Ripken. I SAID, there are alot of players better than him, but he's still my favorite. I still stand by the fact that I think he's great player and not a good one. You're 36, stop taking the internets so seriously. It will shorten your lifespan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forehead Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 If Bonds wasn't a roider, I think it would be an easier choice. Yeah he put up great numbers before he start juicing, but we don't know how many of his HRs were because of that. And we don't know how many SB's he lost, which I think are an underrated stat, getting yourself one base closer to scoring. I just checked, Barry Bonds had 445 steals going into his 14th season, in 1999. He even stole 52 bases in one of his younger seasons. He played 8-1/2 more seasons, presumably roided up, and was only able to steal another 69 bases, for a grand total of 514. At that same cutoff point (going into his 14th season) Bonds had 411 homeruns, an average of 31.5 per year. Even assuming that age dropped his production later in life to an average of 24 homers over the last 8 seasons, he would have still finished with (my basic estimate) around 615 homeruns. 445 steals per year was about 34 per season. Let's say that he maintains his trimmer figure, but loses some of his speed due to age, and only manages 20 steals per year over the last 8.5 years, obviously higher in season 14 and declining with age. That's another 170 steals instead of just 69, a final estimated total of....615. That was actually pure coincedence that both totals came out to 615, but the point is, he would have has a legit shot at the 600-600 club. That is absolutely untouchable, and I think Bonds could have made a case for greatest player ever even without the roids. He was too consumed with the homerun record, and turned himself into a pariah. 600-600...that is mind boggling. No one else even comes close to that sort of well-rounded game, especially considering that Bonds won a number of Gold Gloves when he was younger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Okay' date=' Joe Morgan.Do you also believe that Wins are the most important stat for pitchers? Seriously, this is idiotic. If I hit 1.000 and my teammates hit .000, in your world, I am not a clutch hitter and not very good because I have no RBIs. RBIs are utterly dependent on what others in your lineup are doing. RISP is meaningless as well, because there is no such thing as being a clutch hitter. Generally speaking, close and late stats and batting average with men on base, parallel hitting stats in bases empty situations.[/quote'] no, ERA and WHIP area the most important stats for a pitcher, because you can get to 20 wins with a 6.42 era as long as you play for the yankees or rangers. hitters are very different than pitchers obviously and play very different roles. the 7th batter is different than the 3rd. the 1st is different than the 4th. a SP has one job, dont allow hits or runs. a leadoff man has a very different job than a clean up guy. so for me? give me the #3 batter with 100 RBI batting 280 than the guy batting 310 with 75 RBI. give me the clean up batter hitting 260 with 40 HR and 120 RBI than the guy batting 290 with 30 HR and 100 RBI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SplashHit25 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Ted Williams. Not even in the same league. Ted had .344 and 521 dingers. The All Time Home Run King had .278 and 762. Walks: Ted - 2021 Bonds: 2558 Most walks in a season Ted: 162 Bonds: 232 Barry is the top 3 spots on most walks in a season. He would've easily hit another couple hundred homeruns had they pitched to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 600-600...that is mind boggling. No one else even comes close to that sort of well-rounded game, especially considering that Bonds won a number of Gold Gloves when he was younger. Incredible that he could have been the only 600-600. He was truly a 5 tool player when he first started, but succumed to the McGuire/Sosa pressure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SplashHit25 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 The on base percentage for Ted is higher than Barry in a career at 481 to 444. But single season best is Bonds at 609 to 551. Therefore, it is safe to say, that Barry could whip Ted's ass in ping-pong.... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 no, ERA and WHIP area the most important stats for a pitcher, because you can get to 20 wins with a 6.42 era as long as you play for the yankees or rangers.hitters are very different than pitchers obviously and play very different roles. the 7th batter is different than the 3rd. the 1st is different than the 4th. a SP has one job, dont allow hits or runs. a leadoff man has a very different job than a clean up guy. so for me? give me the #3 batter with 100 RBI batting 280 than the guy batting 310 with 75 RBI. give me the clean up batter hitting 260 with 40 HR and 120 RBI than the guy batting 290 with 30 HR and 100 RBI. Position in a lineup actually means very little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted August 25, 2010 Author Share Posted August 25, 2010 Not even in the same league. Ted had .344 and 521 dingers.The All Time Home Run King had .278 and 762. Walks: Ted - 2021 Bonds: 2558 Most walks in a season Ted: 162 Bonds: 232 Barry is the top 3 spots on most walks in a season. He would've easily hit another couple hundred homeruns had they pitched to him. Yeah because people were intentionally walking Bonds. Just because you walk doesn't mean you're a great hitter. And yeah he's the Home Run King with a giant * Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forehead Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 The on base percentage for Ted is higher than Barry in a career at 481 to 444.But single season best is Bonds at 609 to 551. Therefore, it is safe to say, that Barry could whip Ted's ass in ping-pong.... lol Well, give Teddy Ballgame credit for donating some prime playing time to the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Not even in the same league. Ted had .344 and 521 dingers. Why does that matter? Ted is easily top five in this discussion. I'm not sure why you care about cumulative stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Position in a lineup actually means very little. seriously? youre insane if you really believe that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SplashHit25 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Yeah because people were intentionally walking Bonds. Just because you walk doesn't mean you're a great hitter.And yeah he's the Home Run King with a giant * You're joking right? He wasn't walking from laying off outside pitches.....they were I N T E N T I O N A L. Yeah, I'd say that's a sign. jeez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SplashHit25 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Why does that matter?Ted is easily top five in this discussion. I'm not sure why you care about cumulative stats. I agree. I was being sarcastic. Stats definitely do matter though when comparing hitters of different generations. There's really no other objective way of comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SplashHit25 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Well, give Teddy Ballgame credit for donating some prime playing time to the war. That he did. A man to be respected. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullnelson9999 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I agree. I was being sarcastic. Stats definitely do matter though when comparing hitters of different generations. There's really no other objective way of comparison. You wanna compare stats? Do your homework and look at how many homeruns Williams would have hit in those 5 years he was out of the game. If you go by average homeruns per season its almost 700. Teddy blows Bonds out of the water when it comes to batting avg too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted August 25, 2010 Author Share Posted August 25, 2010 You're joking right? He wasn't walking from laying off outside pitches.....they were I N T E N T I O N A L.Yeah, I'd say that's a sign. jeez Please, Bonds was good, but he's not the best hitter of all-time. Look at his numbers right around where he started using riods (alledgedly), you see a huge spike in his numbers. Find me another player who hit 470 HRs over his last 12 seasons after only hitting 292 his first 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 seriously? youre insane if you really believe that. It's true. Bill James has wrote an essay in the 90s that showed that it does not matter where you put players in a lineup, a team will generally score the same amount of runs. People have been arguing that for years but it appears that James is right. As it was, the best lineup in the NL scored only 4.4% more runs than the worst, and in the AL the range was even narrower, as the best team scored only 2.4% more runs than the worst. And the difference between the best and the traditional lineup is negligible: in the NL it amounted to 0.38% more runs (or about 3 runs a season) and in the AL it was 0.24% more runs. These results seem to agree with the long-held belief that the ordering makes little difference. http://www.retrosheet.org/Research/RuaneT/lineup_art.htm Obviously lineup matter slightly more in the NL than in the AL as batting the pitcher lead-off would cause some problems. But, all in all, Albert Pujols in the 6 hole would still be a monster. (It's really amazing how far ahead of everyone Earl Weaver was). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I agree. I was being sarcastic. Stats definitely do matter though when comparing hitters of different generations. There's really no other objective way of comparison. But you are using the wrong stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 It's true. Bill James has wrote an essay in the 90s that showed that it does not matter where you put players in a lineup' date=' a team will generally score the same amount of runs.People have been arguing that for years but it appears that James is right. [url']http://www.retrosheet.org/Research/RuaneT/lineup_art.htm[/url] lol, thats asinine. maybe you should call the yankees and tell them derek jeter should bat 8th, arod should lead off, texieria bat 7th, and robinson cano bat 5th. afterall, it doesnt really matter who bats where. its not like different hitters have different skillsets or anything. jim riggleman is batting adam dunn in the leadoff spot tonight. afterall, all hitters are the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mufumonk Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 He kinda was.Your choices at that level are Bonds' date=' Ruth, Williams, Mantle, Aaron and Gerhig. I wouldn't yell at you for any of them. Pujols is on the short list at the moment. Presuming he does not get hurt, he will be in the discussion.[/quote'] The correct answer is Ken Griffey Jr. In his prime he was the best baseball player on the planet. Take away a bad decision to go play on that **** turf in Cincy and he shatters the HR record. And there wouldn't be a giant * next to his name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SplashHit25 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 But you are using the wrong stats. What stats would you prefer? Not being a smartass here either. Which ones would you rather use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SplashHit25 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 You wanna compare stats? Do your homework and look at how many homeruns Williams would have hit in those 5 years he was out of the game. If you go by average homeruns per season its almost 700. Teddy blows Bonds out of the water when it comes to batting avg too. Coulda Woulda Shoulda. He didn't. That leaves Bonds. And Mays as a 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.