Hal McRae vs Cecil Cooper

[JR Hart]

Here are 2 players who are very close statistically

Hal McRae (1968-1987)
2084 games
7218 At bats
940 runs
484 doubles
66 triples
191 hrs
1097 RBI
109 SB
648 BB
779 SO
.290/351/.454
OPS .805
OPS+ 123
TB 3280
Career WAR 24.7
Led league RBI, 2B (2x), OBP, OPS
3x All Star
Top 10 MVP (4th, 4th)
SS
Played only 516 games in the field

Cecil Cooper (1971-87)
1876 games
7339 At bats
1012 runs
415 doubles
47 triples
241 home runs
1125 RBI
89 SB
448 BB
911 SO
.298/.337/.466
OPS .803
OPS+ 121
TB 3424
Career WAR 32.6
Led League 2B, RBI (2x)
5x All Star
Top 10 MVP (5th, 5th, 8th, 5th)
2x GG
3x SS
1475 games at 1B


please vote and comment

[TomBodet]

I'll say Cooper, mostly due to being a fine 1b vs Hal's Dh duties. As hitters not much to choose here, as a kid I preferred McRae.

[JR Hart]

Both players had a great loooking stroke

Coopers was similar to Carew. McRae similar to Madlock.

[TomBodet]

How was Hal's OF defense pre-broken leg?

Always wondered.

[brett]

Always wondered.

He came up as a second baseman but struggled with 5 errors in 16 games. I always wondered about the outfield though. He did injure his leg but he was a decent baserunner with 11 triples in '77 and 8 as late as '82. I was told he didn't have much of an arm, but he had 31 outfield assists in a little under 480 games. In '76 and '77 he played significant time in the OF, but if he had a weak arm with Wilson in left field they may have wanted to avoid him playing in right. Seemed to be adequate in left.

[GiambiJuice]

meh, can't decide.

[PVNICK]

Cooper was a plus fielding first-baseman, McRae a Dh or a weak armed LF. McRae was among the most aggressive and feared baserunners of his day. Whether it is true or not, he is typically given credit for instilling an aggressive baserunning mindset on the late 70s Royals. Cooper also, at least early in his career was platooned which would (in a logical world) help his rate stats. I give McRae the tiniest of edges.