Is this THE Jim Colyer from San Diego, SD?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Colyer
Printable View
Is this THE Jim Colyer from San Diego, SD?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Colyer
I hope not...
Okay apparently no one is arguing the same point and barely anyone is on the same page with the argument.
I'm not looking at just batter average, I'm talking about many other things. Debates like this are pointless though, because no one is ever going to change anyone elses mind. You can present all the evidence or reasoning behind any argument and someone is always going to have a reason for why that thought is wrong.
I have never said he wasn't a great player, I never said he couldn't hit, all I am saying is that I think he is overrated.
Compared to other players from his time and even his position, I feel that he his overrated by many people, but who really cares anyway...
If you remove race and the situation that he was playing in completely, and look at just the stats... sure, he's a marginal Hall Of Famer. Doing that though, you may as well completely ignore everything and use a computer to make HOF selections. Set a standard based on some specific criteria, and every player that ever played either meets it or doesn't.
*shrug*
I agree with that Ohms...my biggest beef was with the statement that he was overrated in the history books. That wasn't true. As a player only I still think he was the top side of marginal...he had that intrinsic value like a Derek Jeter.
Very true. Also, if he had been able to play his entire careen in MLB, it'd be a completely different story statistically as well.
Very Very True.....Unfortuantley this all boils down to how many Negro League Players could have had stellar, superstar careers if they were allowed in the majors earlier. Can you imagine a Paige or a Gibson spending their whole careers in MLB. An unfortunate injustice.
Which is part of the reason that this whole thread kind of bothers me.
:(
It is an unfortunate injustice. I totally agree with that, and I'm not sure what his other numbers were like, maybe he was completely dominant elsewhere. Debating Hall Of Fame worthiness is almost impossible as there is no defined requirements to be inducted.
Top side of marginal? I think Robbie Alomar is considered the best second baseman of the past 20 years (him or Biggio), and a definite HOF inductee. Looking at their stats, what did Alomar do better than Robinson on the playing field? Hitting for average? Batting eye? Hitting for power? Fielding (they're close, Alomar might have a slight edge there)? Baserunning? Better at their best? Durability? Versatility?Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD
He also served during WWII, and played in the negro leagues. For the relatively short time he played in the "major" leagues, Jackie Robinson dominated. And by 1950, any team, maybe not the Phillies or Red Sox, would have killed to have him on their team.
RIDICULOUS ! ! !Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD
If any player belongs in the hall of fame it's Jackie Robinson. To say he doesn't is blasphemy.
very well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by TacoBoy
OK this thread will probably go on for eternity. 1st if you have read this entire thread I originally posted in response to a statement that Robinson was overrated in the history books which I argued against stating he deserves his place in history AND in the Hall. I sited his numbers and how they made him a good player as well. My marginal statement was to Ohms post that he was a marginal Hall of Famer.....To which I replied he was the top side of marginal.
I think Robinson deserves to be there. Period.
D@mn straight ! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD
So can we close this thread now?
Pretty darn close between Robbie and Jackie. I guess that means Alomar was one of the greatest to every play the game?Code:Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
162 Game Avg 618 103 185 34 5 14 77 32 8 70 78 .300 .371 .443 116 274 10 7 4 3 14
162 Game Avg 572 111 178 32 6 16 86 23 4 87 34 .311 .409 .474 132 271 12 1 1 8 13
Keep in mind that is a 162 game average which I think is far better to look at than the career numbers.
Another thing to keep in mind Jackie was far from the best player in the Negro Leagues at the time. He just had the personality that would fit best in the MLB world.
The problem with saying someone is overrated is that it's totally dependent on the context - to evaluate it, we need to know how highly "rated" Jackie Robinson is. If it's conceded that he's the #9 2B ever, (not sure where that's from), for him to be overrated, someone would have to be saying he's in the top 8 of all time, and I'm not sure who is saying that.
If the general consensus was "Jackie Robinson was far and away the best baseball player ever", then I would agree he would be overrated. I haven't heard anyone say that. The media has gone on and on about him recently, but I think the focus was more on the social significance of his accomplishments, and not just the baseball. I don't think his importance socially has been overrated, at least not by anything I've seen or read.
I will say this. ESPN should not have used the Dodgers-Giants game as a background for their interviews about Jackie Robinson. It's awesome to honor him and all, as they did with the pregame ceremony, but they should've done a SEPERATE show showcasing all the interviews, rather than putting the game on the backburner and focusing on the interviews, ya know?
The one key piece missing from this analysis is factoring in the eras that the two players played in. Baseball Reference has started making "neutralized" stats available now, which is a better place to start from:Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbarr
Code:Year G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB Avg OBP SLG OPS RC
Robinson 162 566 106 172 31 6 15 82 85 34 22 .305 .402 .463 .865 104
Alomar 162 615 100 183 34 5 14 74 69 77 32 .297 .368 .438 .806 100
That's the real point here. Robinson isn't really great because of his playing skills at all. That gave him the opportunity to be great, and he was a very good player, but his playing skills are not why he's a HOF'er.Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpower
It's definitely part of it. I mean, if he broke the color barrier, yet played like Mario Mendoza, I'm not so sure he'd be an actual member of the Hall of Fame...I'm sure he'd be honored likewise, but yeah. It can't be said for sure though.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
Well... his playing ability allowed him to actually have the opportunity to play at all, you know? His performance is very good. It's just, that was hardly the primary motivation to induct him into the Hall Of Fame. For most voters, I'm sure that his actual performance wasn't even a consideration. It was good enough for him to be remembered as a great player, and considering the time period that he played in and the fact that he did break the color barrier he really did play awesome. Look at those transformed numbers!
I don't think anyone can argue his merits as a man, I just think it is conceivable that his actual skill on the field may be overrated.
He was a great man, player and one of the most important things to ever happen to baseball. Those are three things that can and always will be said about him.
Well, his skills on the field are what they are. There are stats...
*shrug*
This thread was started under the pretext that Mogul somehow overrates Robinson in particular. Since Mogul bases (admittedly, somewhat loosely) ratings in game from the actual player stats, that's a patently absurd notion.
What's the expression that the OOTP community uses again, "Mogul doesn't know names."? Something like that. The game loads the stats (including the player's name) and creates an in game player based on those stats. There are no special circumstances, you know?
Makes plenty of sense to me. I haven't checked him in the game but I would be inclined to say that he is rated very fairly compared to other players with similar stats.
Jackie Robinson 1952 in Mogul - 89 (90 contact, 77 power, 81 speed, 89 eye, 80 arm, 91 range, 76 fielding, 88 health)Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbarr
Roberto Alomar, at the same stage of his career (6th season) 1993 - 92/95 (93 contact, 78 power, 85 speed, 84 eye, 84 arm, 91 range, 80 fielding, 91 health)
That'll differ between instances of each game as well though. It's probably fairly representative of what you'll usually see, however. Mogul isn't really perfect when it comes to dealing with historic players who didn't spend their entire careers playing MLB baseball, you know?
i know :D
Jackie Robinson also played in the negro leagues, and was in WWII..so some of his stats were lost. But for 10 years, he played some of the best 2nd base in the history of MLB. His career stats fall short and if it wasn't for the negro-leagues and WWII, then he would probably have stats to pile up....
His 10 years were not from 23-33, but rather 27-37, or something like that. And if you compare the eras, Jackie was a better player then Alomar, what Alomar has in his favor is more career stats...Jackie wasn't overated, but nobody has ever said he was the greatest player to ever live. THat would belong to Ruth, Cobb, and Williams. And if Williams never had to go to war, he would probably be concidered the best hitter ever, not just one of the best.
I have never heard of Jackie Robinson being concidered the greatest player ever lived, nor have I ever heard of him being concidered anything less than good until I read this thread... Jackie was one of the best 2nd baseman of all time. And if I were to select a 2nd baseman from any era, he would be in my top 5. Now I wonder how many 2nd baseman have ever played this game....my guess is 100,000 of thousands....since 1876...he he would be in my top 5, and others top 10.
A lot of people discount Jackie's Eye. He could walk, and walks and he didn't strike out that often. That might be cause of the era he played in and the game is played differently, but Alomar didn't have the eye, and Alomar based on his stats verses era, are not that glamorous.
If jackie played in a different era, or if he were white with the same skill set. He would have *probably* put up Alomar career stats, and probably better...also, if Jackie didn't have to deal with the War...it would even be more....but what we can assume doesn't always come true.
Jackie Robinson in the context of when he played. He was the best 2nd baseman of his time while he played. That is why he is in the HOF.
you know? :D
(sorry the you know is a jab at ohms cause he uses the that phrase a lot) :p
Yea, I can't help it for whatever reason. Just a mannerism of mine that I picked up somewhere along the line...
*shrug*
*un-shrug* you know :D : D :D
just joking ohms :)
lol
No argument here on over rating or not for #42. Just some facts. Robinson actually came up in 1947 and played exclusively at first base that season. He moved to second base in 148 and was the Dodger regular there through 1952, five years. In those six years as a regular he played in over 140+ games a season. In 1953 and 54 he was primarily an outfielder and playing time greatly reduced (136 in '53, 118 in '54). In '55 he was the regular thirdbaseman, but played in only 96 games. In his final year, 1956,at age 37, he was a reserve playing in 105 games, mostly at third.
We all agree that he had a relatively short career (not of his choosing) with above average statistics. His election ot the HOF was not based on his player "body of work", but on his contribution (and that of Dodger GM Branch Rickey) to the future of the game.
By the way, Robinson was not the first "black" player in major league baseball. That distinction goes to the brother Fleet and Welday Walker, who played for Toledo in the 1884 American Association that was considered a "major" league at that time.
By coinsidence, Hank Thompson, became the second black player in the American League (behind Larry Doby of the Indians) when he and Wendall Brown joined the St. Louis Browns in 1947, and was the first black to play for the Dodgers cross town rivals, the New York Giants when he joined the team in 1949.
He was the first black player to break actual segregation...Quote:
By the way, Robinson was not the first "black" player in major league baseball. That distinction goes to the brother Fleet and Welday Walker, who played for Toledo in the 1884 American Association that was considered a "major" league at that time.
There was no segregation law in the MLB, so you can't actually say that.
It was an institutionalized standard though. There were (and, unfortunately still are) plenty of places around the country that instituted segregation via custom or "rules" rather than giving them the full force and attention of codifying them into actual laws, especially prior to the 60's. Implying that it wasn't a law so therefore there wasn't actually segregation is revisionist history. That may not be, and probably isn't, what either one of you intends to convey. It is part of what comes across, however.
It was voluntary. As was the integration of baseball. I am a stickler for accurate and verbatim information which leads to comments such as the one I just made.
He was sought out by Rickey and brought in to baseball. It was a planned thing, as Rickey looked through tons of ball players and finally decided on Jackie's personality as the one that fit best with his intentions. He even had an agreement with Jackie that he would hold off "being himself" until he was somewhat accepted within the league.
Not to take anything away from what the guy did and what he accomplished, but those are the facts. If nothing else Rickey deserves just as much credit as Robinson when it comes to "breaking" segragation in baseball.
Where's the love for Bobby Estalella?:D ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
I agree 100%.Quote:
Not to take anything away from what the guy did and what he accomplished, but those are the facts. If nothing else Rickey deserves just as much credit as Robinson when it comes to "breaking" segragation in baseball.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. It kind of sounds like you're saying... well, I'm not sure what and I'd rather not speculate because this could go in a very bad direction from here.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbarr
All that I will say is that you should explain this further because it makes you look really bad. I'm sure, based on the tome that I think you're using, that you don't intend it to be so. That's why I'm saying something here, since now that all of this has been posted it'll be around for years and years for folks to come along and read...
Don't get me wrong things needed to change, and things still need to change even more before we get everything in this world on the right track. I just think that in a lot of instances involving matters such as this, people tend to place all the credit on one person, and that is, more often then not, not how it actually happened.
Baseball wouldn't be what it is today without Jackie, and sadly, it is starting to regress again. I'm glad that MLB is making efforts to get the African American community more interested and involved in the major leagues.