Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

best season of the following

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • best season of the following

    which season was the best????

    ted williams 1949: .343/.490/.650 43 HR 159 RBI 192 OPS+

    jimmie foxx 1938: .349/.462/.704 50 HR 175 RBI 188 OPS+

    barry bonds 1993: .336/.458/.677 46 HR 123 RBI 205 OPS+

    willie mays 1958: .347/.419/.583 29 HR 96 RBI 165 OPS+

    mike scmidt 1981: .315/.435.644 31 HR 91 RBI 199 OPS+

    babe ruth 1919: .322/.456/.657 29 HR 114 RBI 219 OPS+

    george stone 1906: .358/.417/.501 6 HR 71 RBI 192 OPS+
    22
    ted williams
    9.09%
    2
    jimmie foxx
    50.00%
    11
    barry bonds
    18.18%
    4
    willie mays
    0%
    0
    mike schmidt
    13.64%
    3
    babe ruth
    4.55%
    1
    george stone
    4.55%
    1

  • #2
    --Gold Glove Ifer in a high quality league. I think Schmidt is the easy choice here.

    Comment


    • #3
      Others on the list played GG caliber defense in the years listed, including Ruth, Bonds, and probably Mays. If we're including park factors, defense, and all other contributions, it's a tough call...some good choices there.

      Comment


      • #4
        --Mays probably was a defensive match for Schmidt, but he gives up over 30 points of OPS+. Bonds was a GGer, but in LF. Don't know that Ruth was at a GG level in his first full season as an OFer, but even if he was a GG RFer is not worth as much as a GG 3B.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by leecemark View Post
          --Mays probably was a defensive match for Schmidt, but he gives up over 30 points of OPS+. Bonds was a GGer, but in LF. Don't know that Ruth was at a GG level in his first full season as an OFer, but even if he was a GG RFer is not worth as much as a GG 3B.
          Well, whether it was his first "full" season in the outfield or not, he showed how tremendously gifted he was. It was left field btw. Anyway, just one error (and I believe it was a throwing one) in 111 games in those rough/spacious outfields is pretty impressive from a pitcher turned outfielder. Not sure what numbers you want to use, but he had 222 putouts and 14 assists to go with that one error, and a 2.13 range factor. My point was that his defense was gold glove caliber, and he did that while making history at the plate, and also filling in on the mound. Like juggling three balls. Let him focus on defense and hitting and both get better. I'm cool with your Schmidt pick though. Wasn't saying it was a bad one. There are many good choices up there.

          Comment


          • #6
            very tough choice. Pretty much all of them are historically good seasons with very high OPS+, but for me im giving this one to foxx with his brilliant season, and it might not even be his best. Closely followed by bonds and Schmidt. If schmidt hadnt the misfortune of having his career year in a strike season he could have easily put up the totals to rival Foxx.

            Comment


            • #7
              Theres no way Schmidt would have kept up his rate stats if there had been no strike. His numbers would have been about on par with his 1980 numbers. Great season, but not up to the level of some of the others. Mays had better seasons, especially in the power department. Ruth DEFINITELY had beter seasons..in fact that was one of his worst seasons..why did u pick that one? For me its a toss up between Bonds, Foxx, and Williams..I went with Foxx because of the amazing RBI total.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by willshad View Post
                Theres no way Schmidt would have kept up his rate stats if there had been no strike. His numbers would have been about on par with his 1980 numbers. Great season, but not up to the level of some of the others.
                Although its common for rate numbers to slow in the second half of a season i think its a bit harsh on schmidt to say he definitely wouldn't have held up if he had played a full season. He already had 350 AB's under his belt and during the period he was getting between 510 and 550 AB's in a full season, he had around 2/3rds of his season already under him when the strike kicked in.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Based purely on statistics and nothing else, I go with Jimmy Foxxxxxxxxxxx.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Jimmie Foxx
                    "I was pitching one day when my glasses clouded up on me. I took them off to polish them. When I looked up to the plate, I saw Jimmie Foxx. The sight of him terrified me so much that I haven't been able to wear glasses since." - Left Gomez

                    "(Lou) Gehrig never learned that a ballplayer couldn't be good every day." - Hank Gowdy

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      no love for George?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bob View Post
                        Although its common for rate numbers to slow in the second half of a season i think its a bit harsh on schmidt to say he definitely wouldn't have held up if he had played a full season. He already had 350 AB's under his belt and during the period he was getting between 510 and 550 AB's in a full season, he had around 2/3rds of his season already under him when the strike kicked in.
                        It certainly wasnt impossible that Schmidt would have continued his pace, but it is unrealistic to assume it. He just wasnt the kind of guy who batted .320 with a .435 OBP and .644 slugging. He may have continued it and had a career year, but Id take someone who did it over a FULL season over someone who did it in 2/3 a season. His stats should be taken with a grain of salt...simliar to Brett in 1980, or Bagwell and Thomas in 1994.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          --Brett doesn't deserve credit for any games he didn't play because he missed them due to his own frailty. That is not the case with the others. They played all the games that were available to be played. Schmidt, in particular, I don't think its fair or reasonable to apply a "cooling off" factor too. The 1981 season was not cut short - it had a long break in the middle. If he could take a third of the season off and pick up where he left off there isn;t any reason to assume he wouldn't have kept it up had he kept playing.
                          - He simply had a career year in a season where there happended to be a strike. Except for his BA it was basically the same as the seasons on either side of it anyway. BA is subject to more variation than most stats. An extra bloop or dribbler find their way for a ht every week and you can beat your "true talent level" by 40 points. An extra liner goes right at somebody a little too often and you fall the same below it. Plus, of course, your "true talent level" does not stay the same throughout your career. Schmidt was on an upward arc leading to that season.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I Went For The Stone Man

                            Comment

                            Ad Widget

                            Collapse
                            Working...
                            X