Is Chipping the greatest hitting 3B ever?

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Willshad inspired this thread. He made this interesting post.

It appears to me that Jones is to Third basemen as Mike Piazza is to catchers... bad in the field, but the best hitter ever at his position. Id take him offensively over Schmidt any day (Schmidt just stood out more by playing in a low offense league with few star hitters). He is basically Schmidt with about 30 points added to his batting average. But Im afraid even if he goes on to hit more homers and drive in more runs than Schmidt, while still hitting .300 lifetime, people still wont rank him ahead of Schmidt on all time lists..just like how they will never put Piazza over Bench.

It caught my attention because I had never really pondered the idea that Jones could perhaps be the greatest hitting third baseman ever? Willshad may be right on this. I just don't know at the moment. I really do have to sit down and really think about it. what say you BBF?

[rockin500]

no. OPS+ is four points different with 2000 less plate appearances for chipper. lets see what happens after those 2000 PA's and where they are at.

[willshad]

They are very close comparison -wise after 14 seasons, the only glaring difference being Jones' batting average advantage (.266 to .307). Schmidt has a home run advantage, but I believe that OPS+ overrates Schmidt and probably underrates Jones, so id say Jones is better all around offensively. id say at simliar stages in their careers, Jones has the edge. If he can hit at last seasons' level a few more years he would surpass Schmidt career-wise. Then again, if he falls off the table then Mike would rank above him.

[Ubiquitous]

Being a better "all around" hitter doesn't necessarily mean one is a better hitter overall. That being said I don't think Mike Schmidt's batting average weakness is as glaring as it is made out to be. Schmidt in his day was a league average hitter. Jones is better then average and does have somewhat of a chance at being a better offensive player. It is a longshot but it depends on how he ages. Obviously if he keeps up his current level of output he has a good shot of being better but that is a tall order for a 36 year old to do.

[Los Bravos]

No. As much as I despised him, Schmidt still holds the edge. The question, however, isn't as absurd as a lot of people would initially believe. Chipper is in the conversation.

And he's nowhere near as bad a third baseman as Piazza is a catcher. Mike's like Dick Stuart with the ability to make contact.

[AstrosFan]

OPS+ overrates Schmidt when one takes the perspective that low offensive league averages come from a dearth of quality hitters, rather than the conditions of the game. You're fighting an uphill battle when you take this stance, Willshad.

Schmidt's OPS+ through the same number of PA as Jones's was 150. That's seven points higher than Chipper. Unless I convince myself that the conditions of the game don't change, and any increases in offense are the result of an increase in the number of good hitters, I feel I must give Schmidt the edge.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

No. As much as I despised him, Schmidt still holds the edge. The question, however, isn't as absurd as a lot of people would initially believe. Chipper is in the conversation.

And he's nowhere near as bad a third baseman as Piazza is a catcher. Mike's like Dick Stuart with the ability to make contact.

I guess a good question is what does Chipper Jones have to do the rest of his career to surpass Schmidt as a hitter? Over the past three seasons he's put up OPS+'s of 151, 154, and 166. He's playing among the best baseball of his career. The '08 season will only his age 36 season so he could still put up several HoF type seasons between now and say age 40 or 41.

[MDog795]

For now, Schmidt is still the best hitter ever at
3B, but if you give Chipper a few more good seasons, maybe he will be able to make a case for that title. They aren't really that far apart:
Chipper Schmidt
BA: .307 .267
RBI: 1305 1595
HR: 387 548
OBP: .404 .380
SLG: .546 .527
OPS+:143 147

So it's not that big of a difference, but you could make an argument about how Chipper's era gives him an advantage.

[Blackout]

i can see taking Chipper over Schmidt offensively

[Edgartohof]

Still Mike Schmidt for me. And it would take a lot for Chipper to surpass him.

But it's not wrong to say that he is in the running. He is one of the top hitters for his position no doubt, but it's something else for him to nock off the #1 guy at his position.

[Los Bravos]

I guess a good question is what does Chipper Jones have to do the rest of his career to surpass Schmidt as a hitter? Over the past three seasons he's put up OPS+'s of 151, 154, and 166. He's playing among the best baseball of his career. The '08 season will only his age 36 season so he could still put up several HoF type seasons between now and say age 40 or 41.

Dude, look at the screen name...you're preaching to the choir here. I'll happily agree that he's a better all around hitter. In that, he reminds me of Brett (who I usually rank, completely unscientifically, ahead of Schmidt.)

Having said that, this question would probably take many fans aback, at least initially. It's human nature to think most anything contemporary isn't as good as some legendary thing or person from the past. That's the source of my use of the term "absurd."

Currently holding the career lead (all players, not just active) in OPS and Slugging at the position (unless Peter Gammons lied to me on ESPN...) puts him squarely into the conversation. Unless he suffers a catastrophic injury, he's going to wind up atop the heap among third basemen and near it among switch hitters.