Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gibson/Piazza

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

  • Mischa
    replied
    Originally posted by 538280
    Gibson could have definitely gotten lots of doubles, but he would have to have some real good luck and friendly scorekeeping (fielders misplaying the ball) to get a triple.
    I love when people don't bother checking the statistical record before downplaying Josh's skills, but Gibson was a pretty darned good triples hitter, just like Foxx and Ruth (players with similar speed and strength). In 1932, he was second in the East-West League in triples, trailing only Oscar Charleston. In '33, he was second in the Negro National League in triples, behind Charleston. He tied for third in the NNL in 1934. In 1937, he tied Wild Bill Wright for the NNL triple lead. He also tied for the Dominican League lead in triples that year. In 1938, he was part of a five-way tie for the NNL triple lead. In 1939, he tied for third in the NNL. In bad physical shape at age 32, he still was tied for 5th in the NNL in triples in 1943 and then led the league in 1944 with 12, five more than anyone else. In 1945, he was still third in the NNL, only two off of the lead. In his last season, terribly out of condition and 35 years old, he tied for second in the league - only Larry Doby beat him, by 2. So we have three league leaderships in triples, counting only US-based leagues, another three times as the runner-up and another two times in the top 3. So we have 8 top-3 finishes in his 16 seasons. I think that shows that Gibson was an excellent triples hitter. Next time, will people please view the record before either blasting or lauding Gibson inappropriately.

    Leave a comment:


  • 538280
    replied
    Gibson could have definitely gotten lots of doubles, but he would have to have some real good luck and friendly scorekeeping (fielders misplaying the ball) to get a triple.

    Gibson was probably very similar to Jimmie Foxx as a hitter, but he probably wouldn't have posted numbers quite like Foxx's because of the wear and tear catching gave to the body.

    Piazza's 1997 is a real tough standard, but I could see Gibson matching it in his best seasons and his normal season being more like Piazza's 1995 and 1996. It also has to be remembered with the catching equipment of the time it would be hard for Gibson to play 125+ games consistently, which may be a positive in his quest for a .700 slugging season.

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    Originally posted by blackout805
    Gibson would've been the first catcher to ever slug .700 before
    I'm not so sure. Even Piazza never really got close to slugging .700. And I don't see Gibson being any better than Pizza as a hitter.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sultan_1895-1948
    replied
    Originally posted by blackout805
    Gibson would've been the first catcher to ever slug .700 before
    Seems like a pretty safe prediction. How slow was he? Much of his SA would have had to come from running out doubles and triples regularly. Could he have stretched it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Blackout
    replied
    Gibson would've been the first catcher to ever slug .700 before

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    Gibson or Piazza? This is a tough question. Since most of us have seen Piazza play it's tough because we see all of Piazza, his strengths and his weaknesses. We never hear about Gibson's weaknesses since very little is written about that. This has the effect on inflating Gibson's "value" somewhat. Also, I believe Piazza is underrated here at BBF. But the man was an awesome hitter. Check out his career line.

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/piazzmi01.shtml

    His 1997 season was simply awesome

    .362/.431/.638, 40 HR, 124 RBI, 104 R, 201 H, 186 OPS+

    Are you fricking kidding me! Yes, Piazza played in an offensive era but he played his prime years in extreme pitcher's parks. I have a hard time believing that Gibson could have had seasons that would have dwarfed Mike's 1997 season. I tend to believe Gibson could have had seasons simliar to Mike's 1997 season but certainly not significantly better.
    Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 03-28-2006, 07:26 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • 538280
    replied
    Originally posted by Sashag
    I am a Huge Mike Piazza fan/supporter, and have been ever since he started playing, but I have to take Josh Gibson over Piazza. Gibson could field, hit- do everything! If there was ever proof that Gibson was better, what other ballplayer was ever called, "the black Babe Ruth?"
    I have Gibson over Piazza, but Gibson was never known as a great fielder and was a horrible runner for his whole career. Piazza probably would have received similar accolades to Gibson if he had played in the Negro Leagues.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sashag
    replied
    I am a Huge Mike Piazza fan/supporter, and have been ever since he started playing, but I have to take Josh Gibson over Piazza. Gibson could field, hit- do everything! If there was ever proof that Gibson was better, what other ballplayer was ever called, "the black Babe Ruth?"
    Last edited by Sashag; 03-06-2006, 10:22 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • leecemark
    replied
    --Nevermind then

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by leecemark
    --The 200 something HR are those documented in Negro League games for Gibson. The 800-900 are estimates based on his HR in all games. Since those include exhibitions against all levels of talent, some just town teams, as well as Mexican League and Winter Leagues the number is not very meanfull even if true. What does appear to be true is he was the best power hitter and perhaos the best hitter period of the Negro Leagues, Acheiving that from the catcher position is impressive whatever the actual numbers might be.
    Well I was writing up my previous post( post #84) and did not read this post of yours till I had already posted mine. I see we do agree that the number of home runs is not that meaningful since some were hit in games out of black baseball, exhibition and some in winter ball.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    On Gibson, think this one over.For those that believe he actually did hit 900+ home runs consider the following. Here is a player who hit more home runs than Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth and Barry Bonds who all hit the 700 club at the age of 39 and Gibson dided at the age of 35.

    While he may have started playing at a young age, still to hard to believe, almost 150 more home runs than Aaron and almost 200 more home runs than Babe and Barry and never reached the age of 36.
    Then we hear that he may have played 200 games in some seasons and that makes it possible, 900+ career home runs. When his high career batting average is taken to task we hear that it's possible because some seasons were so short.

    It can't be both ways consider 200 game seasons and accept the fact thats why 900 is believable.

    Accept some of his .370+ career batting average sources because of the short seasons and not that many career at bats.

    This is the problem, too many different numbers, different sources we just don't know all the numbers, which are correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • leecemark
    replied
    --The 200 something HR are those documented in Negro League games for Gibson. The 800-900 are estimates based on his HR in all games. Since those include exhibitions against all levels of talent, some just town teams, as well as Mexican League and Winter Leagues the number is not very meanfull even if true. What does appear to be true is he was the best power hitter and perhaos the best hitter period of the Negro Leagues, Acheiving that from the catcher position is impressive whatever the actual numbers might be.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by Bench 5
    I have John Holway's "Complete Book of Baseball's Negor Leagues" out from the library. The book was printed in 2001. Here are the all time NL hiiting leaders per his book:

    He has Monte Irvin with a .345 average (1045 Abs) and Roy Campanella at .307 (610 Abs).
    This is what I have compiled by SABR

    Irvin .345 and 850 at bats.
    Campy .334 and 629 at bats.
    Not a big deal, your source may be correct, any way they are close, but again, different numbers and the difference gets bigger when we go back further than those two who played black baseball near the half century mark

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by Bench 5
    I have John Holway's "Complete Book of Baseball's Negor Leagues" out from the library. The book was printed in 2001. Here are the all time NL hiiting leaders per his book:

    Over 2,000 ABs
    Jud Wilson .354
    John Beckwith .352
    Josh Gibson .351
    Bullet Joe Rogan .348
    Mule Suttles .341
    Oscar Charleston .340
    Pop Lloyd .337
    Fats Jenkins .337
    Cristobal Torriente .336
    Buck Leonard .335

    For Under 2,000 ABs
    Chino Smith .434 (694)
    Larry Doby .384 (581)
    Lazaro Salazar .382 (338)
    Artie Wilson .377 (863)
    Pancho Coimbre .377 (616)

    He has Monte Irvin with a .345 average (1045 Abs) and Roy Campanella at .307 (610 Abs).
    Thats where the problem comes in, too many different numbers. This is why it's so difficult to make an accurate evaluation of black hitters.I have seen almost half a dozen different numbers for Gibson's career batting average and home runs. Some in the .370s, some in the .350s and one as high as .381, which one is correct. His career home runs, I've seen 932, 908, 881 and then some in the 700s. I have never seen any compilation of what is known at this point that gives him more than 230 to 250. Myself, I'm sure those 230-250 numbers are too low.

    I'm getting away from the point I was trying to drive home, one that can be seen when comparing those blacks that played in black baseball, AAA minor leagues and MLB. The numbers show that on average there is significant difference, most, almost all hit higher in black baseball than MLB and even AAA minor league baseball. It's the pitching and thats the point that should always be considered when we speak of batting averages of the best in black baseball.

    Leave a comment:


  • leecemark
    replied
    --It seems we more or less agree on the quality of the Negro Leagues and its best players. I also agree we can't rate them with the same precision (which in itself is hardly precise) as major leaguers. I think its worth the effort anyway.
    --I am a little more conservative than some though. I can't see Charleston higher than 4th - and as low as 6th amoung CFers. I've got Gibson 3rd amoung catchers and Lloyd 3rd amoung SS. I've got Stearnes 6th amoung LFers (and could see him a slot lower behind Delahanty) and only a few other Negro Leaguers as contenders for the all time top 10s at their positions. The Negro League pitchers I'm even more sceptical of, with only Paige and Williams in my top 25 (or possibly even top 50).

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X