Tris Speaker v The World (not quite)

[Windy City Fan]

In our latest "Greatest Player Poll" there has been some debate about where Tris Speaker fits in among the all time greats. However, the debate got lost as the polls have moved on, but it got me thinking. After the concensus top 3 (Ruth, Cobb, Mays) things do get a little murkier. In addition to the Grey Eagle, there are 12 other who are competing for the top spots behind the Big Three.

Wagner
Aaron
Williams
Gerhig
Bonds
Mantle
Collins
Hornsby
Morgan
Musial
Schimdt
Rodriguez

Obviously I don't rank all of these players equally, but I think a case can be made for or against Speaker in comparison to any of these players. I'd be curious to hear arguments from Speaker fans or from fans of the above 12 as to how Speaker compares to the above list.

[KCGHOST]

You know you have a tough row to hoe when the competition at your position includes Willie, Mickey and the Peach. To say nothing of the Clipper.

Anyway Speaker is 8th in career Win Shares and 11th in career WARP3. I think one would have to suspect that he could play. Bill James ranks him 11th all-time.

[Dodgerfan1]

What in the world are Schmidt and Morgan doing on this list? Are there those who really believe they belong vying for a top spot with the likes of Hornsby, Wagner, Gehrig and Williams?? Crazy.

[leecemark]

--Schmidt IS the best player ever at his position. He also is the best player of his generation. That is a pretty good combination to offer in vying for position amoung the all time greats. Morgan also has an arguement, if a less compellign an obvious one, for being the best at his position. He was the best player in baseball for a 5-6 year period and was a good one for a long time.

[TigerNation]

Joe Jackson was up there with Speaker.

[Windy City Fan]

--Schmidt IS the best player ever at his position. He also is the best player of his generation. That is a pretty good combination to offer in vying for position amoung the all time greats. Morgan also has an arguement, if a less compellign an obvious one, for being the best at his position. He was the best player in baseball for a 5-6 year period and was a good one for a long time.

Mark, I agree with you on the general argument for Schimdt and Morgan being among the all time best. Both make my top 15 buy fall short of the top 10.

I'm gonna pick on you because I know you won't mind. You rank Schimdt ahead of Speaker. Would you mind laying out a detailed argument for that case?

[leecemark]

--Schmidt was the best palyer of his generation. Speaker quite clearly was not. Schmidt was the best player ever to play his position. Speaker is at best 3rd at his position (before Mays and Cobb - with how you place him compared to Mantle depending on how you weigh peak vs career and how much league quality plays in for you). I wouldn't absolutely say Schmidt is better than Speaker. There are too many variables to say that with any certainty. I am more comfortable putting the best player of a 20 year period in my top 10 than going with a third deadballer though.

[csh19792001]

Anyway Speaker is 8th in career Win Shares.

Career Win Shares among position players, omitting Bonds*:
Ruth 756
Cobb 722
Wagner 655
Aaron 643
Mays 642
Speaker 630
Musial 604
Collins 574

Speaker also has the peak to match nearly any of these players. And 8 of his years were spent toiling as player-manager, and he was a damned good one, at that. He gets absolutely zero credit for that statistically, therefore gets zero credit from those going just by the numbers.

His 1912 season is one of the top few ever put together.

Speaker has it all, in my opinion.
-His relative BA, OBP, and SLG are incredible, especially given his career length.
-He was a great baserunner and stole a ton of bases.
-He was perhaps the greatest centerfielder (and outfielder) in baseball history.

He had no weaknesses as a player and most who had the pleasure of seeing him play said he was the best outfielder they ever witnessed. I value expert eyewitness opinion, well-roundedness, and a lack of weaknesses.

Maybe the most incredible thing about Speaker was his plate discipline and bat control. This is a player who averaged 13 strikeouts and 80 walks per year- and probably struck out about 280-300 times in 12,000 PA. To go along with 1,131 extra base hits. His career K/BB ratio was somewhat like the steroid Bonds of post 2000.

This was a premium.

Career slugging leaders among deadballers:
1. Dan Brouthers .519
2. Joe Jackson .517
3. Ty Cobb .512
4. Ed Delahanty .505
5. Sam Thompson .505
6. Tris Speaker .500

[csh19792001]

--Schmidt was the best palyer of his generation. Speaker quite clearly was not.

This is a red herring. Were the top few players of Schmidt's timeframe (1972-89) anywhere in the universe of Cobb and Ruth? Clearly not.

Speaker's career overlapped with Cobb's by 20 years and Ruth's by 14.

His entire career coincided with that of Eddie Collins, arguably the greatest ever at his position and a legitimate top 10 player as well.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Career slugging leaders among deadballers:
1. Dan Brouthers .519
2. Joe Jackson .517
3. Ty Cobb .512
4. Ed Delahanty .505
5. Sam Thompson .505
6. Tris Speaker .500

This includes Cobb's and Speaker's "live ball" slugging percentages as well. That's really not fair to players like Brouthers and Delahanty. If we use 1919 as a cutoff, Speaker's slugging percentage is .476. After 1919 Speaker slugged .534. Cobb's live ball slugging actually lowered his career slugging percentage if you can believe that. Through 1919 Cobb's slugging percentage was .516 compared to .505 after 1919.

[yanks0714]

What in the world are Schmidt and Morgan doing on this list? Are there those who really believe they belong vying for a top spot with the likes of Hornsby, Wagner, Gehrig and Williams?? Crazy.

Schmidt absolutely, yes. Morgan has a very good argument as well. The two best players overall of a highly competitive era.

[yanks0714]

Joe Jackson was up there with Speaker.

Yup, he was in the majors around the same time. :cap:

[csh19792001]

Wagner
Aaron
Williams
Gerhig
Bonds
Mantle
Collins
Hornsby
Morgan
Musial
Schimdt
Rodriguez

All of these players had weaknesses; some are significant enough to knock them out of the class of "barely behind Ruth, Mays, and Cobb" as delineated it, WCF. We're talking about the ~99.9999th percentile of everyone who ever played in the major leagues, so this is truly splitting hairs in some cases....

-Wagner
-It is presumed by many that Wagner played in a very weak league for a "modern" player. Other than that, his career is pretty much flawless. He did it all well and had the skills and natural talent to be a superstar in any era.

-Aaron:
Again, not much to knock, but he played one of the weakest and least important positions on the diamond. Despite his reputation as one of the greatest sluggers ever, he wasn't great at drawing walks and his K/BB ratio isn't better than average.

-Williams
Was an indifferent, often lax fielder and only had respectable footspeed before WWII. Played the least important defensive position on the diamond, in the park with the least ground to traverse.

-Gehrig
Was not a great fielder- probably above average, though. He played the second least important position on the diamond. I can't hold the career length against him (unlike some who do) because I have a heart!!!

-Bonds
Was a .290 hitter before steroids. He only had 1 truly great season before expansion and silly-ball began. He never had a strong arm, and as a result played his entire career in LF, which is probably the least important/valued defensive position in baseball. A complete prima donna and was not even a star until 5 years in.

-Mantle
Not a great fielder, was above average, no better. He struck out a ton, enough to break Ruth's record which held for over three decades. He never played a full season in his career due to injury, drinking, and a general remiss attitude. Particularly for a post 1950 player, he had a short career. He was regularly hobbling on the field by age 34 and out of baseball at age 36.

-Collins
Had very little power. That's probably the only knock on him, as he was the consummate team leader, selfless player, and one of the greatest WS performers in history. Still, the lack of power precludes him from approaching the top 3 players ever.

-Hornsby
Very short career relative to the others. Played very few games after age 33, whereas many of the others here were productive regular players up until (and sometimes after) age 40. He was terrible with pop flies and was certainly not a top notch fielder.

-Morgan
Only hit .300 twice in a 22 year career. Very poor average hitter (by these standards) and not much slugging power, to boot. He had a few outstanding years but many (1969, 1978-84) which were very mediocre. From age 34 on- one third of his career- Morgan was a .248 hitter with a lousy .388 slugging.

His skills eroded after age 33.

-Musial
Not a great fielder, did not have a great arm. Played two weak positions on the defensive spectrum.

-Schmidt
Terrible hitter for average, relatively speaking. Never even hit .300 in a full season, excepting the strike year. Struck out an inordinate number of times. He had a short career in comparison to the guys in question (i.e., the top few ever).

-Rodriguez
Mid-career, but safe to say that he lacks plate discipline and can be pitched to. Played in the greatest HR era in history, mainly in bandbox parks. Judgment should be reserved until all is said and done.

[yanks0714]

-Collins
Had very little power. That's probably the only knock on him, as he was the consummate team leader, selfless player, and one of the greatest WS performers in history. Still, the lack of power precludes him from approaching the top 3 players ever.

That was an excellent rundown of the players listed. I can agree with almost your entire post.

I'm probably going to take some heat on this one because Edie Collins seems to be one of those guys everyone likes. To be perfectly honest, I do too.

The part I am going to question here is the "consummate team leader" comment. I'm currently reading 'Deadball Stars of the American League'. I've also read volumes on the Back Sox saga where Collins was a teammate albeit one of the 'Clean Sox'.

Collins' nickname was 'Cocky'. He had a swagger about him. Not just from his baseball ability but also from an educational standpoint. I'm not altogether sure he was viwed by all his teammates as their 'team leader' Some surely gravitated to him but it seems I've read more than a few blurbs about how he was viewed differently.

Anbody care to comment?

[leecemark]

--I'm not sure I could give too much leadership credit to a player whose team conspired to win a World Series. I think his managers loved what Collins brought to the table. Not so sure he had much positive influence on his teammates.