Cobb vs. Speaker - as 5 tool players

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Let's be clear and define "5-tools". It's quite close I think.

1- Hitting for average (Cobb)
2- Hitting for power (even?)
3- Baserunning skills and speed (Cobb)
4- Throwing ability (Speaker?)
5- Fielding abilities (Speaker)

I think you did pretty good there Adam. Power, in that era, and taking the extra base, was largely dependent on your #3, which Cobb had an edge in. Even aside from that however, if you had them go mano a mano in an old fashioned distance hitting exhibition, on the same field, vs a pitcher of their choice, I believe Cobb would outdistance Speaker. He studied hitting in and out...more focused on his desired technique which he honed to a T, but he understood the physics behind, and was capable of, a "controlled" swinging from the heels as well.

[toomanyhatz]

They each win in 2 1/2 of the skills matchups- Cobb for average and baserunning, Speaker for fielding and throwing, tossup for power. But even if you throw power to Speaker, Cobb has the more important skills, and the margins are probably at least similar.

I'd say Cobb by a safe distance, albeit not a huge one.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Let's be clear and define "5-tools". It's quite close I think.

1- Hitting for average (Cobb)
2- Hitting for power (even?)
3- Baserunning skills and speed (Cobb)
4- Throwing ability (Speaker?)
5- Fielding abilities (Speaker)

[Cowtipper]

The nod goes to Cobb here. His offensive prowess greatly overcomes any defensive shortcomings he may have had compared to Speaker.

[Bill Burgess]

Can I somehow change my vote to Ty??? No, Bill Burgess hasn't threatened me.

What? You didn't get the PM? I hate when that happens! Seriously, I changed the vote totals, but the software doesn't allow for moving your name into the other column.

Bill

[yanks0714]

Sorry, folks, but I messed up. I may have misinterpreted the question. I was thinking strictly in terms of the 5 tools.....I voted for Speaker.

The reason is that I didn't think Ty's arm was all that great whole Tris' was. Therefore, I voted for Speaker thinking that he had all 5 tools.

But Cobb was a better hitter for average, had as much or more power, was faster and a better base runner/stealer. Speaker had him on defense and throwing.

But Ty's edge in hitting and running surpass Tris' advantages of fielding and throwing.

Can I somehow change my vote to Ty??? No, Bill Burgess hasn't threatened me.

[Bill Burgess]

Trying to discern which of Ty's seasons were the most superior is not as easy as it might sound.

Relative BA------------Relative SLG.-------OPS+
1910---1.58%-----------1917--1.72%---------1917--209
1916---1.55%-----------1910--1.65%---------1910--206
1912---1.54%-----------1911--1.64%---------1912--200
1909---1.54%-----------1912--1.64%---------1911--196
1917---1.54%-----------1909--1.58%---------1909--194
1911---1.53%-----------1918--1.57%---------1913--194
-----------------------1913--1.54%---------1918--193
-------------------------------------------1914--190

Appears Win Shares must be placing an extremely inappropriate amount of weight on defense.

[CTaka]

Good point, CTaka. I sometimes make the mistake of viewing contact hitting and hitting for average as one and the same, but plate discipline's a big factor. Contact hitting is actually hit for average and plate discipline combined, and it's a very interesting comparison between Cobb and Speaker.

When we look at hitting for average, we also have to consider speed, and it's obvious that Cobb's speed heavily contributed to his high BA, winning him alot of BA races over Speaker and Shoeless Joe. More power to him there. But was Speaker better than Cobb with the bat alone, excluding speed? It's hard for me to rank him above Cobb even going by the bat alone. The difference in BA is just too high. And when we're talking about hitting for average, we also have to include speed, because that's the other big component, and when you do that, it's obvious Cobb was second to no one in hitting for average. All in all, when comparing the two in contact hitting - Speaker wins plate discipline. Cobb wins hitting for average, and by a bigger margin.

If we're going to compare Cobb to someone as a HITTER, meaning who was better with the bat, I think the most interesting comparison would be to Joe Jackson. Cobb and Ruth said Jackson was the best natural hitter they ever saw. Cobb vs. Jackson with the bat might be worthy of a poll. Whaddya think?

As I indicated, I still give Cobb the edge over Speaker in hitting for average; I was just pointing out that Speaker's plate discipline makes it much closer than just comparing batting averages.

As for Jackson, I'd think that Cobb would win that one fairly easily. Remember that Jackson didn't have to face a decline phase. And even in his peak years, he had some comparatively low averages (.308 in 1915, .301 in 1917) among his high average years. After his rookie season in which Cobb only played in 41 games, Ty never hit that low in his entire career. Cobb, who played to the age of 41, still finished with a career batting average 93 points above league average and an OBP that was 92 points above league average. Jackson, with the benefit of never having a decline phase, was only 86 and 83 points above league average in those two categories respectively. If Shoeless had played a 20+ year career and finished that close to Cobb, I'd say they would be fairly comparable. But when that is essentially Jackson's peak compared to Cobb's 24 year career, I see Cobb as having a big advantage in terms of hitting for average.

[torez77]

Good point, CTaka. I sometimes make the mistake of viewing contact hitting and hitting for average as one and the same, but plate discipline's a big factor. Contact hitting is actually hit for average and plate discipline combined, and it's a very interesting comparison between Cobb and Speaker.

When we look at hitting for average, we also have to consider speed, and it's obvious that Cobb's speed heavily contributed to his high BA, winning him alot of BA races over Speaker and Shoeless Joe. More power to him there. But was Speaker better than Cobb with the bat alone, excluding speed? It's hard for me to rank him above Cobb even going by the bat alone. The difference in BA is just too high. And when we're talking about hitting for average, we also have to include speed, because that's the other big component, and when you do that, it's obvious Cobb was second to no one in hitting for average. All in all, when comparing the two in contact hitting - Speaker wins plate discipline. Cobb wins hitting for average, and by a bigger margin.

If we're going to compare Cobb to someone as a HITTER, meaning who was better with the bat, I think the most interesting comparison would be to Joe Jackson. Cobb and Ruth said Jackson was the best natural hitter they ever saw. Cobb vs. Jackson with the bat might be worthy of a poll. Whaddya think?

[CTaka]

One of the problems with the 5-tool system is that it doesn't give credit to those who walk more. Cobb was the better at hitting for average (one of the five tools), but I'm not sure about being a better contact hitter since Speaker typically struck out a tad fewer times than Cobb.

But Speaker was the more patient hitter. Despite Cobb holding a career batting average over 20 points higher than Spoke, Cobb's OBP is only 5 points higher than Tris. Cobb finished in the top ten in walks 5 times in his career compared to 14 times for Speaker.

I have them as fairly close in terms of the five tools. Cobb has the edge in hitting for average and baserunning, Speaker for fielding and throwing. They seem about a wash in terms of hitting for power, with perhaps a slight edge to Cobb since his slugging percentage for his career was 147 points above league average compared to 127 points for Speaker.

[Dontworry]

Well, Speaker's '12 season may have been better than Cobb's '15 season, but let's clear something up, 1915 wasn't Cobb's best season. In fact, there are a few seasons that could be considered better. For now, I'll just go with 1911 as his best, so let's compare seasons - Cobb's 1911 and Speakers 1912, and because they both played at the same time, in the same league, no adjustments need to be made.

Cobb beats speaker in: Runs, hits, triples, RBI, SB's, BA, OBP, SLG, (OPS), OPS+, RC, the list goes on...

Speaker beat cobb in: doubles, HR's, and walks.

Cobb was also more dominant compared to the league than Speaker, leading in: R, H, 2B, 3B, RBI, SB, BA, Slg, OPS, OPS+, RC, and again the list goes on...

Speaker did nothing like that, with only a few league leads, in: 2B, HR, OBP, and RC.

And at this time, while Speaker was the best defensively, Cobb wasn't TOO far behind, and nothing a 37 (!!!!!!!!!) point lead in BA can't make up.

So yes, Speaker's best season in 1912 may have been better than Cobb's 1915 season, but as we just went over, that wasn't his best, so while you tried to slip that in, I just had to point that out.

So Cobb had the better career, and the better peak (1, 2, 3 year, etc...).

Top twenty offensive seasons according to Batting WS -
1 Bonds 2001
2 Bonds 2004
3 Wagner 1908
4 Ruth 1923
5 Ruth 1920
6 Ruth 1921
7 Mantle 1957
8 Bonds 2002
9 T. Williams 1946
10 Bonds 1993
11 Mantle 1956
12 Mantle 1961
13 Hornsby 1922
14 Ruth 1928
15 Ruth 1926
16 Musial 1948
17 Ruth 1924
18 Speaker 1912
19 Ty Cobb 1915
20 T. Williams 1942

Cobb's second and third best seasons rank after 20, so as you can see, going by batting WS, cobb's 15 is his best, and speaker's 12 was better.

Total WS also sees it that way, speaker had 51 (!) in 12, cobb had 48 in 15.

I dont have the time right now to explain why speaker had more WS than cobb, and why cobb's 15 is his best, but I promise I will later.

[Edgartohof]

Cobb careerwise is easily better, despite speaker's advantage in defense.

However speaker's best year ( 1912) was better than cobb's best year ( 1915).

Well, Speaker's '12 season may have been better than Cobb's '15 season, but let's clear something up, 1915 wasn't Cobb's best season. In fact, there are a few seasons that could be considered better. For now, I'll just go with 1911 as his best, so let's compare seasons - Cobb's 1911 and Speakers 1912, and because they both played at the same time, in the same league, no adjustments need to be made.

Cobb beats speaker in: Runs, hits, triples, RBI, SB's, BA, OBP, SLG, (OPS), OPS+, RC, the list goes on...

Speaker beat cobb in: doubles, HR's, and walks.

Cobb was also more dominant compared to the league than Speaker, leading in: R, H, 2B, 3B, RBI, SB, BA, Slg, OPS, OPS+, RC, and again the list goes on...

Speaker did nothing like that, with only a few league leads, in: 2B, HR, OBP, and RC.

And at this time, while Speaker was the best defensively, Cobb wasn't TOO far behind, and nothing a 37 (!!!!!!!!!) point lead in BA can't make up.

So yes, Speaker's best season in 1912 may have been better than Cobb's 1915 season, but as we just went over, that wasn't his best, so while you tried to slip that in, I just had to point that out.

So Cobb had the better career, and the better peak (1, 2, 3 year, etc...).

[Bill Burgess]

Both players had ALL the tools. Neither one had a discernable weakness, until Ty hurt his arm.

Both had equal tools, but Ty had superior skills, by comparison. He had practiced so exhaustively, that he had developed his tools better than Tris did.

But that is not to say that Tris was in any way weak. He had broken his arm in his youth, and learned to throw with his other arm. So Tris had good tenacity also, simply not as intensely obsessed as Ty.

In summary, neither lacked any tools, but Ty strove more intensely to develope his. Tris' tools were not inferior to Ty's. If their minds had been transplanted, Tris would have ended up with the better skills.

Bill

[Dontworry]

Cobb careerwise is easily better, despite speaker's advantage in defense.

However speaker's best year ( 1912) was better than cobb's best year ( 1915).

[Bill Burgess]

Bill, question. Cobb ruptured the ligaments in the right knee in '20 correct? How did that affect him? He couldn't have ever been the same again, but how much did he lose?

In 1920, Ty incurred one of his few serious injuries. During a game on June 6, while chasing a fly ball in right center, Ty collided with his RFer, Ira Flagstead, and sprained his left knee so badly, he was out of action till July 31, save a couple of games. That is why he lost so many games in 1920. He was also a slow starter, and built up to his high BA at the end. This interrupted that process, resulting in his low BA for the year.

It was a very serious injury. He tried to come back and re-injured it. He may have lost a step due to this. He had already lost a step or two by 1918, if that tells you something. He was already showing his age in that his speed was slowly leaving him, and that injury sure didn't help him any.

Bill Burgess