Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 112

Thread: My top 100 players (including pitchers)

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Burbank, IL
    Posts
    1,540
    Sorry, I thought you were someone else.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,185
    ^^ Another exercise in futility.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,640
    Not a good list.

    Unless we rename it "AlecBoy's 100 Favourite Players." Then it works fine.
    "In the end it all comes down to talent. You can talk all you want about intangibles, I just don't know what that means. Talent makes winners, not intangibles. Can nice guys win? Sure, nice guys can win - if they're nice guys with a lot of talent. Nice guys with a little talent finish fourth and nice guys with no talent finish last." --Sandy Koufax

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Burbank, IL
    Posts
    1,540
    Ummm no.

    George Kell and Red schoendienst are two of my favorites and are not where near top 100.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Berkeley
    Posts
    1,528
    I implore you once again, Alec, to construct a real, well-documented case why Al Kaline is better than Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle, and so forth. Not 2 words and some pastings from baseball-reference, a legitimate comparison.

    Foxx over Gehrig is sort of strange, but plausible I suppose. What is more strange, and what I haven't seen anyone mention, is the idea that Foxx is better than everyone except Ruth. It's extremely unusual for Foxx to climb above #10 or so.

    Eddie Mathews (one T) at #19 and (even moreso) Billy Williams at #29 are way, way too high. Billy Williams is a very low tier HoFer, arguably a borderline guy.

    Apparently, Alec has decided that Roger Maris, Juan Gonzalez, Dwight Evans, and at least 12 others fit in the not-so-narrow gap between #85 Harmon Killebrew and unranked Willie McCovey.
    "Hall of Famer Whitey Ford now on the field... pleading with the crowd for, for some kind of sanity!"

  6. Quote Originally Posted by Rickey_Henderson
    Mantle versus Kaline than?

    First of all Mantle won 3 more MVP's than him.

    Mantle had a career EQA of .341 to kaline's .300. Admittedly Kaline had much more games played but still. 40 points?

    Mantle's best EQA season was .400 to kaline's .346. Kaline's second best was .327 which was also a misnomer with his third best at .316. Mantle topped .346 7 times and was only 2 points away one year. Kaline had 0 seasons of at least .400 to Mantle's one. Mantle had more .375 seasons. Mantle had more .350 seasons. Mantle clearly had a better peak.

    The mark of longevity IMO is the ability to sustain a high level of play. Mantle had such a tremendous peak offensively that if kaline is truly better he will have a tremendous longevity edge. Mantle had 17 seasons with an EQA over .300. kaline had 13 seasons with an EQA over .300. Longevity edge offensively goes to Mantle

    The advantage offensively for Mantle is so huge it would take an amzing defensive edge to overcome it.

    Mantle was a good CF'er and Kaline was a very good RF'er. Kaline can't use this to overcome the offensive edge.

    FInally lets consider one last thing. Mantle without his injuries. Mantle without the knee injuries would have been faster and have been as fast as he was early in his career when he was a historically fast player. His range would increase making him a very good CF'er giving him a huge defensive edge over Kaline who was a very good defensive RF'er. Mantle also beats out more GB's increasing BA. he steals more bases. More singles turn to doubles and more doubles turn to triples and more triples turn to IPHR's. his offensive edge increases. How on earth is Kaline greater than Mantle?
    Please respond to this. I don't see how Kaline is better defensively, with longevity or with peak. How is Kaline better?

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Burbank, IL
    Posts
    1,540
    Billy Williams borderline? That's horsefeathers.

    I view Williams as the greatest Cub of all time, and VERY deserving of the Hall of Fame.

    Why was Kaline better? Well, they are very similar, but Mantle's career was shorter, he didn't get as many hits as Kaline, plus Mantle wasn't as great defensively as Kaline, AND Kaline could play more than one position in the outfield.


    EDIT: Mantle won 3 MVP's, even if one was undeserved.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Magrathea
    Posts
    6,157
    Blog Entries
    2
    Who cares if he has Foxx ranked ahead of Gehrig, or Kaline ahead of Speaker? It's his list, he can do what he wants with it. Sure, I disagree with some of the rankings; that's my opinion. This list is his opinion. The greatest players of all time - it doesn't matter where you place them as long as you acknowledge them as great.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by AlecBoy006
    Why was Kaline better? Well, they are very similar, but Mantle's career was shorter, he didn't get as many hits as Kaline, plus Mantle wasn't as great defensively as Kaline, AND Kaline could play more than one position in the outfield.
    Those aren't good enough reasons at all. Even if Kaline might have been a little better defensively, he was NOWHERE near the hitter Mantle was - whether he had more hits or not.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by AlecBoy006
    Billy Williams borderline? That's horsefeathers.

    I view Williams as the greatest Cub of all time, and VERY deserving of the Hall of Fame.

    Why was Kaline better? Well, they are very similar, but Mantle's career was shorter, he didn't get as many hits as Kaline, plus Mantle wasn't as great defensively as Kaline, AND Kaline could play more than one position in the outfield.


    EDIT: Mantle won 3 MVP's, even if one was undeserved.
    Mantle without his injuries is 10 times the fielder Kaline was. Mantle could play 3 positions as well. Mantle had a much much better peak. you didn't address my post at all. Mantle was also actually an AS caliber player for more years. Your list is insane.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Burbank, IL
    Posts
    1,540
    Insane? Lemme see your list big boy.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,640
    Quote Originally Posted by AstrosFan
    Who cares if he has Foxx ranked ahead of Gehrig, or Kaline ahead of Speaker? It's his list, he can do what he wants with it. Sure, I disagree with some of the rankings; that's my opinion. This list is his opinion.
    I'm not sure what your point is. No one said it his list was illegal and that jail time was warranted. Of course he has a right to place people where he wants. He posted his list on a discussion forum and solicited comments. He's getting comments, mostly critical. He posted his opinion, everyone else is posting their opinions.
    "In the end it all comes down to talent. You can talk all you want about intangibles, I just don't know what that means. Talent makes winners, not intangibles. Can nice guys win? Sure, nice guys can win - if they're nice guys with a lot of talent. Nice guys with a little talent finish fourth and nice guys with no talent finish last." --Sandy Koufax

  13. #73
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Western Massachusetts
    Posts
    11,560
    Quote Originally Posted by AlecBoy006
    Jackson was such horrid at striking out. Kaline never struck out more than 100 once.

    Didn't you say OBP was more important than slugging? Kaline was better in OBP.
    Alec, look at what I have quoted above for a second. That is your justification for the absolutely MASSIVE difference your list shows between Reggie Jackson and Al Kaline. I made a pretty long post telling you why I don't think it makes any sense-and you come back with two sentences that don't even begin to compare them (they just point out two facts which, by themselves, are nearly irrelevent).

    As for the first one, this to begin with doesn't have anything to do with Kaline having "MUCH better plate discipline" as you said before, but anyway to respond to the point striking out is not really much of a mark against a player at all. A strikeout is very slightly worse than a regular out because it can't advance a runner, but it also can't result in two outs, so the difference between a K and a regular out is so minimal (about 2%, if you make 100 regular outs that would be equivalent to 98 strikeouts in terms of damage to the team) that it's not going to have an effect on the team at all.

    As for the your second point, I do not think OBP is more important than slugging actually, slugging correlates with runs very slightly better than OBP does. What I do think is that in OPS OBP is undercompensated because it is always the smaller number-smaller to a large enough degree that it doesn't overcome SLG correlating slightly better. Kaline's edge in Reggie in relative OBP anyway is VERY small, it's just not a big difference between the players, and given that Reggie's edge in power is far larger it doesn't make any sense to, from that, claim that Kaline is actually the better hitter.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by AstrosFan
    Who cares if he has Foxx ranked ahead of Gehrig, or Kaline ahead of Speaker? It's his list, he can do what he wants with it. Sure, I disagree with some of the rankings; that's my opinion. This list is his opinion. The greatest players of all time - it doesn't matter where you place them as long as you acknowledge them as great.
    It does matter where you place them. That's what many of threads in this section are all about - debating who was greater than whom. If you're giving an opinion, you should 1)expect to get opinions in return, and 2)be prepared to defend your opinion.

    The problem with AlecBoy is NOT that he has a lot of opinions that are outside the mainstream. It's that he 1)doesn't back up his opinions with any sort of analysis of the facts, and 2)he runs away when someone asks him to elaborate or provide detail. I'm sure he has the intelligence to do this - but does he have the maturity? Maybe he will one of these days...

  15. Quote Originally Posted by AlecBoy006
    Insane? Lemme see your list big boy.
    Greatest Position Players of All-Time


    1) Babe Ruth

    2) Honus Wagner

    3) Ty Cobb

    4) Mickey Mantle

    5) Willie Mays

    6) Ted Williams

    7) Lou Gehrig

    8) Hank Aaron

    9) Stan Musial

    10) Tris Speaker

    11) Eddie Collins

    12) Alex Rodriguez

    13a) Joe DiMaggio

    13b) Rogers Hornsby

    14) Joe Morgan

    15) Rickey Henderson

    16) Nap Lajoie

    17a) Jimmie Foxx

    17b) Mel Ott

    19) Frank Robinson

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Burbank, IL
    Posts
    1,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Rickey_Henderson
    Greatest Position Players of All-Time


    1) Babe Ruth

    2) Honus Wagner

    3) Ty Cobb

    4) Mickey Mantle

    5) Willie Mays

    6) Ted Williams

    7) Lou Gehrig

    8) Hank Aaron

    9) Stan Musial

    10) Tris Speaker

    11) Eddie Collins

    12) Alex Rodriguez

    13a) Joe DiMaggio

    13b) Rogers Hornsby

    14) Joe Morgan

    15) Rickey Henderson

    16) Nap Lajoie

    17a) Jimmie Foxx

    17b) Mel Ott

    19) Frank Robinson
    I agree Ruth at #1. But Chris ain't gonna like A-Rod over Morgan.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Magrathea
    Posts
    6,157
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Wee Willie
    It does matter where you place them. That's what many of threads in this section are all about - debating who was greater than whom. If you're giving an opinion, you should 1)expect to get opinions in return, and 2)be prepared to defend your opinion.

    The problem with AlecBoy is NOT that he has a lot of opinions that are outside the mainstream. It's that he 1)doesn't back up his opinions with any sort of analysis of the facts, and 2)he runs away when someone asks him to elaborate or provide detail. I'm sure he has the intelligence to do this - but does he have the maturity? Maybe he will one of these days...
    I'm not quite sure if I disagree with you here. It doesn't matter where you place certain players as a matter of a factual ranking of them, because there is no such thing. Hornsby over Morgan, for example, is not a fact, it is an opinion.
    But the purpose of these rankings is to open up discussion, and if you venture into that, you should be prepared to defend your logic. If that was your point, I agree completely.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Magrathea
    Posts
    6,157
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Minstrel
    I'm not sure what your point is. No one said it his list was illegal and that jail time was warranted. Of course he has a right to place people where he wants. He posted his list on a discussion forum and solicited comments. He's getting comments, mostly critical. He posted his opinion, everyone else is posting their opinions.
    I think it's fine to post criticism of his list. But notice Rickey's comment that the list is "insane". Admittedly, that came after my post. But I think criticism should be more about forcing him to defend the logic of his list, which several people have done, rather than simply disagreeing with it, which is boring.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by AstrosFan
    I think it's fine to post criticism of his list. But notice Rickey's comment that the list is "insane". Admittedly, that came after my post. But I think criticism should be more about forcing him to defend the logic of his list, which several people have done, rather than simply disagreeing with it, which is boring.
    I agree. Someone's opinion should not be labeled as "insane" or "rediculous". You may disagree with it and post your reasons for doing so. By the same token, the individual who posted the statement that seems to be in the minority should defend their position.

    My objection is that people have taken the time to lay out good arguments as to why they disagree with a position, such as refuting the ranking that had Kaline ahead of Speaker (since reversed), Gehrig, Hornsby, Teddy Ballgame, Mickey Mantle, etc. But despite taking the time to detail a cogent rationale, the response is often a one-liner that doesn't address the issue at all, such as "Kaline had more hits", or "Kaline played longer", or "Kaline had more rbis". It is as if this trumps all the previous arguments that clearly laid out one's position, or the irrelevant one-liner makes it seem as if the responder didn't even read the entire post because they are ignoring 99% of it.

    I came to Fever because there are very knowledgeable posters here and I have learned quite a bit. Changed my opinions on a number of players based on the detailed historical knowledgeable that has been presented. These irrelevant one-liners seem particularly aggravating under those conditions. If (hopefully) newbies come to this forum to experience and learn from the depth of knowledge here, how long do you think they'd stay if they saw a statement (which HASN'T actually been posted thankfully ) that said "Campaneris was a better player than Lou Gehrig". Detailed posts followed showing numerous methodologies that have Gehrig as the far superior player, and the original poster responded with "Campaneris was faster." Do you think those folks would stick around and join Fever?

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Burbank, IL
    Posts
    1,540
    Well, Campaneris was faster and played a harder position.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •