Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

As Hitters: Gehrig vs. Hornsby

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

  • As Hitters: Gehrig vs. Hornsby

    Did we do this already? Discuss.
    66
    I believe that Lou Gehrig was the better hitter
    60.61%
    40
    I believe that Rogers Hornsby was the better hitter
    39.39%
    26

  • #2
    I say Gehrig...Hornsby had a nice 5 year run but Gehrig did it for 13 years.
    "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


    • #3
      Hornsby may have had the greatest 5 year run in the history of the game.... I give him the nod. Gherig was better over the long strech, but for a brief window, nobody was better than Hornsby. He gets my vote.
      "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

      Comment


      • #4
        Hornsby/Gehrig:
        Code:
        Hornsby-----BA---Hits-2B---3B--HR----R--RBI---TB--OBA--SLG--SB--BB-OPS+
        led league---8----4----4----2---7----7---3----7----9----9----0---3--12
        2nd league---2----1----1----1---2----1---1----2----1----1----0---1---1
        3rd----------1----1----1----1---3----0---2----0----1----1----0---0---0
        4th----------1----3----4----0---1----2---0----0----0----1----0---2---0
        5th----------0----0----0----0---5----0---0----0----0----1----0---0---0
        6th----------0----0----0----1---1----0---1----1----1----0----0---2---1
        
        Gehrig------BA---Hits-2B---3B---HR--Runs--RBI--TB---OBA-SLG--SB--BB-OPS+
        Led league---1----1----1----4----2----4----4----2----4----2---0---3--3
        2nd league---2----3----0----0----4----2----4----3----2----4---0---2--6
        3rd----------3----0----0----1----3----3----2----2----3----1---0---3--3
        4th----------0----1----0----0----1----2----2----0----0----3---0---0--0
        5th----------2----1----0----0----1----0----0----1----1----0---0---0--0
        6th----------1----0----1----0----1----0----0----1----0----0---0---1--0  
        -------------------------------------------------------------------------
        
        ------------------BA-------------Onbase----------SLG.
        Gehrig: Home ---.329-------------.436------------.620
        Hornsby: Home - .359-------------.437-----------.565
        
        Gehrig: Away - -.351-------------.458------------.644
        Hornsby:Away -- .358-------------.431------------.565
        
        
        -----------Rel.BA----Rel.Onbase-Rel.SLG.---OPS+---Black Ink----Grey Ink-----Plate Appearances
        Gehrig:------1.19-------1.25------1.53-----179------75----------315-------------9,660
        Hornsby------1.26-------1.27------1.47-----175-----125----------329-------------9,475
        
        
        
        2 Seasons of Epic Proportions:
        
        ---------Year Ag Tm  Lg  PA  Outs  G   AB    R    H   2B 3B  HR  RBI  SB CS  BB  SO   BA    OBP   SLG  TB   SH  Rel.BA  Rel.onb  Rel.Slg  Black Ink  Grey Ink
        Hornsby: 1922 26 STL NL 704  400  154  623  141  250  46 14  42  152  17 12  65  50  .401  .459  .722  450  15   1.35     1.30     1.76      23       30
        Gehrig:  1927 24 NYY AL 717  395  155  584  149  218  52 18  47  175  10  8 109  84  .373  .474  .765  447  21   1.29     1.32     1.88       6       28

        Rogers played a more important position, and was probably a better fielder. But his teams were less quality than Lou's. So Lou's had advantages in quality team mates with respect to his Runs/RBIs, WS championships, NYC media ballyhoo, Yankee bounce, a more flexible personality to get along with.

        Rogers was too blunt, which made him a traveler. He also had a problem with high fly popups.

        I'm not sure if association with Babe was a benefit for Lou or not. Helped his stats, but obscured his personal greatness. Or not? Lou also benefitted by being a Yankee during their glory days. Remember DiMag's saying. It was good to be young and a Yankee.

        If Lou had lived, he would have had maybe 3-4 good seasons, but then had maybe some decline seasons. So his OPS may or may not have moved up or down. Hard to say. Rogers was more versatile, but Lou more durable. Both charter members of Baseball's All-Time Infield, along with Wagner/Schmidt, so why does Lou receive all the intangible accolades? Babe, '27 Yankees, Big Apple, 20 newspapers, streak, early death legend? And finally - is it all fair?

        World Series Record:

        Rogers Hornsby-2 World Series:

        1926 7x28=.250
        1929 5x21=.238
        12x49=.244


        Lou Gehrig-7 World Series:

        1926 8x23=.348
        1927 4x13=.308
        1928 6x11=.545
        1932 9x17=.529
        1936 7x24=.292
        1937 5x17=.294
        1938 4x14=.286
        43x119=.361
        -------------------------------------------------
        I also submit that Rogers created the greater peak. Rogers consolidated his best years, while Lou scattered his. Behold below.

        Rogers Hornsby - 1921-1925------202 OPS+
        Lou Gehrig ------1927-1934------193 OPS+
        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Here are the main Hornsby books of which I'm aware.

        My Kind of Baseball, by Rogers Hornsby, with R. Roy Stockton, 1953.
        My War With Baseball, by Rogers Hornsby, with Bill Surface, 1962

        Rogers Hornsby, by Jack Kavanagh, 1991
        Rogers Hornsby, by Charles Alexander, 1995
        Rogers Hornsby: A Biography, by Jonathan D'Amore, 2004
        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Chris Hallenbeck's contribution:

        WARP3:
        Gehrig: 142.3
        Hornsby: 151.6

        Win Shares:
        Gehrig: 489
        Hornsby: 502

        Win Shares per 648 PA (per season, roughly)
        Gehrig: 34.33
        Hornsby: 32.80

        (Below are offensive prowess stats only)
        EqA:
        Gehrig: .344
        Hornsby: .333

        Runs Created:
        Gehrig: 2367
        Hornsby: 2108

        OPS+
        Gehrig: 179
        Hornsby: 175

        My gut says Gehrig, since Hornsby was a bad teammate, a selfish person, and selfish player. Gehrig was also a team leader and a humble, self effacing guy. I'll wait to hear what people have to say.
        Last edited by Bill Burgess; 02-13-2009, 08:24 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          i'd say the early 20s NL was probably easier to get black ink in than in the AL in the late 20s and the 30s

          Comment


          • #6
            Bill:

            I am a little confused. Aren't we voting strictly in terms of offense? Defense, position, and character do not matter in this poll, do they?

            Strictly as a slugger, I choose Gehrig. As a player, I choose Hornsby (because he played second base). As a person, I chose Gehrig!

            Mark

            Comment


            • #7
              I voted for Gehrig. Gehrig never pee'd in the showers...:o
              Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

              Comment


              • #8
                Its closer than most people would assume. But on a long term bases Lou Gehrig was better and I would say a better slugger. But Hornsby was better in a shorter peroid of time (batting .400 in 3 out of 4 years!). But overall as a hitter I have to go with Gehrig.
                go sox.

                Pigskin-Fever

                Comment


                • #9
                  Gehrig. Hornsby was a great hitter, but he's on my big time overrated list.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by [email protected]
                    I'm not sure if association with Babe was a benefit for Lou or not. Helped his stats, but obscured his personal greatness. Or not?
                    I think it helped him greatly Bill. Gehrig's personality wasn't meant to be outfront and in the limelight. It suited him best to just go about his business. He learned a lot about hitting from Babe, and a lot about how to handle certain situations and fame in general.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Pghfan987
                      Bill:

                      I am a little confused. Aren't we voting strictly in terms of offense? Defense, position, and character do not matter in this poll, do they?

                      Strictly as a slugger, I choose Gehrig. As a player, I choose Hornsby (because he played second base). As a person, I chose Gehrig!

                      Mark
                      I guess I didn't actually vote. I just dragged that old post out, and it was then based on overall. As strictly a hitter, I'd go with The Rajah. If Rogers had played on Lou's teams, his Runs/RBIs would have went WAY up.

                      Bill

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I voted for Gehrig, but Hornsby's peak does make it close. Had Gehrig been able to have a decline period including a few more good seasons to add to his already prodigious number, I believe ther would be little debate as to whether Gehrig's bat deserves mention with Ruth and Williams.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Ooh I have a better one...

                          As hitters...who do you like more, Joe Morgan or Mark McLemore!



                          Gehrig vs. Hornsby? You guys are slipping...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by SABR Matt
                            Ooh I have a better one...

                            As hitters...who do you like more, Joe Morgan or Mark McLemore!



                            Gehrig vs. Hornsby? You guys are slipping...
                            I voted for Gehrig, but I think it is a lot closer than you think. Their OPS+ are 179 and 175 respectively. Hornsby's likely would have been higher than Gehrig if Gehrig had kept playing until he was 41. You could also say that Gehrig's slightly better numbers were the caused by the luxury of hitting in the Yankees lineup. Hornsby was the better contact hitter.

                            And, as stated by someone else, if Rogers had been in the Yankees lineup, his RBIs and runs would have exploded. If you include the fact that Hornsby was a 2Bman, I think that he has more value than Gehrig.

                            I did not include the position as a factor in my vote. I was strictly thinking in terms of who was the better hitter, and I think it is close, but Gehrig by a smudge.

                            Mark

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hornsby played in a much more favorable hitter's park...(although I believe that's accounted for in OPS+...sort of)...but if Hornsby had been in the Yankees line-up..he wouldn't have been the hitter he was in the NL...because the NL was a girly-man league as Arnold would say...the AL was SIGNIFICANTLY more competitive in Hornsby's era.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X