Printable View
Carlos Delgado's best OPS+ was 181, but his average peak OPS+ was around 150. Rose's best OPS+ was 158 and he fluctuated a good deal, but it was around 130 or so at his peak, that's a good roundabout estimate. Adjust that for position a bit, and it's closer than you might think.
Still Delgado had a better peak, as I said... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Just because HGM said it doesn't make it true.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
I looked up the stats AS WELLQuote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Rose: 158, 152, 141, 138, 134, 132, 130, 130
Delg: 181, 161, 161, 150, 147, 146, 137, 131
Their best OPS+'s. Again, adjust for position, and it's closer. Add in Rose's superior defensive value and baserunning value, and I'd say Rose actually had the better peak.
Delgado just had the better offensive peak.
I didnt forget about Bonds. I have difficulty ranking him...for so many reasons. The key word in a previous post was "objective". I dont think I am very objective when it comes to Bonds. You have to deal with not only the "substance" issues, but also the slow-pitch-softball era in which he played, when offense exploded. I am not certain that the adjustments made to stats like OPS+ fully compensate for that.
Nonetheless, if I had to rank Bonds, it's clear that he would belong in my new Top 5, somewhere along with Ruth, Williams, Mantle, and Gehrig.
Pete Rose? Thats laughable. Without even trying I could list 50 hitters who were better than Rose...for either peak or career value.
Why mantle over Cobb? Why do you all overlook him!
He's in the top 10 or so, just not quite at the level of Ruth and Williams or Mantle.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
Mantle was simply a superior offensive force. Look at his stats objectively. Cobb was great, no doubt.
Its no insult to state that a player wasn't as good a hitter as Mickey Mantle. This, from a Red Sox fan now.
Mickey Mantle was a great player, but sorry, he's no Ty Cobb.
You're right. He couldn't steal bases like Cobb could, and was probably a worse defender.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Cobb was a great player, but sorry, he's no Mickey Mantle when it comes to hitting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Well, Mantle is a better hitter if we judge hitters by home runs, but that's stupid to do that, you need to use some other stats, like hits and average.
Well OK, lets look.
Cobb outhit Mantle by nearly 70 points in batting average. On the surface, that appears to be a huge advantage for Cobb. Cobb also appears to have a big advantage on the bases, with 892 career stolen bases to just 153 for Mantle. On the other hand, Mantle seems to have a large advantage in power stats.
They both played centerfield, and both had reputations as being fine outfielders. Mantle only won one Gold Glove. Cobb, of course, never had a chance to win one. Its unlikely he would have won many, competing with Tris Speaker and a couple of others, however.
Looking below the surface, despite Cobbs huge advantage on batting average, his on base percentage was .433 to Mantles .421. A very small advantage. Mantle outslugged Cobb by .557 to .512. And, of course, OPS+ gives Mantle the edge 172 to 167.
The basepaths is an interesting comparison. Cobb attempted far more stolen bases than Mantle, of course. But here's the odd thing. In the years that MLB actually tabulated Caught Stealing stats, Cobb was successful on only 60% of his stolen base attempts. Mantle, over his career, was successful on 80% of his SB attempts.
I'm sorry, but you are incorrect.
Its close. Cobb was great, but he was no Mickey Mantle.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Dude.
In this thread, I listed Gehrig's rank in numerous stats among first basemen. You quoted me and bolded his rank of 7th in home runs and said:
Do you have ANY idea what you're talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguys234
This thread is starting to make my head hurt.