Jump to content

Recommended Posts

i was having the discussion with a co-worker today that Griffey played with reckless abandon, which can be a good and bad thing. the good is he makes those amazing catches on balls that most people would give up on and let bounce off the wall or go out for a home run. the bad part is he makes those amazing catches by crashing into a wall and breaking his wrist or arm.

the knee injury he had in Cincy was just plain bad luck though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not to mention griffey was an incredible baserunner. not just speed (which he obviously had), but knowing situations. realizing the depth at which the opposition's outfield was playing and where they were positioned so he could take the extra base on a single to right-center.

to me, there have been 4 players in the history of the game to have been perfectly complete 5-tool players: Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Griffey, and Barry Bonds.

i think even with all the injuries he sustained (and the subsequently depleted statistics), Griffey still makes my top-10 list of best players ever. without the injuries, i'd have a hard time keeping him out of the top 3 i'm sure, but that's purely speculation. here's my top 10 best position players ever (in alphabetical order):

hank aaron

barry bonds

ty cobb

lou gehrig

ken griffey, jr.

mickey mantle

willie mays

pete rose

babe ruth

ted williams

honorable mention: stan musial

Good list. But I don't think Griffey quite makes the top 10. I'd definitely add Wagner to the top 10 (at Griffey's expense). And swap Musial for Rose. (Rose belongs much further down.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's the wonderful thing about sports (and, to me, baseball in particular as it's the easiest sport in which to compare players from different eras) is that we could talk about this for years and neither one of us is right or wrong. i'm not saying that in a snarky way, either. i legitimately love that about baseball.

it is interesting to me, though, that you replaced rose with musial. i'm assuming you did that because rose was more of a "statistics compiler" and that is how he ended up with such great numbers? am i correct in that assumption? why do you think musial should make it instead of rose?

(and wagner, without a doubt, is one of the best players of all time. i just haven't seen enough footage of his to really be able to make a strong enough case for my own personal beliefs. he's easily in my top 15, but top 10? i just can't be sure enough to make that statement. i won't disagree with your opinion, though. the man was a beast in an era where players just didn't put up numbers like his.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think he will forsure keep it up! his combination of nasty pitches and the difference between their speeds, unbelievable. plus, nl west hitting all around is horrible! its not like he came out of no where! he has been around for awhile and has shown amazing stuff! he is just now putting it all together! will he stay below1.00, probally not! haha but iforsure think he will stay under 1.5-1.75. serisouly, he is awesome to watch, nothing seems to rough his feathers ever!

I just don't see him, once he gets around to seeing all the other teams in the NL and some in the AL having this kind of dominance. That and the Dodgers can hit so the entire West isn't hitting deprived. I'm not ready to put him up with Bob Gibson quite yet.

well, i never said he was gonna be bob gibson! haha

he has seen all the other teams, this being his 3rd full year! he has two solid full seasons before this, including against entire nl west, includuing dodgers. his problem in the past is walks and not using all pitches, he has lowered that a bit, and is using all pitches! everyone has already seen him the past two years, there is nothing new! he has been talked about alot of someone just needing to put it togther! have seen him pitch numerous of times, i feel he is legit and for real. sub 1 era, no, bob gibson, no, best pitcher in baseball, no. top 5, yes! 98mph fast ball with crazy movemnet and all his other stuff, thats why he is dominating

i think he if for real and will keep this going. not sub 1 era, but he is pretty awesome

and as far as dodgers hitting, they are just as streaky i think as anyone else in the west.

i will give dodgers credit, there are only team to beat him this year

just my opinion, guess we will see

also, your hr stats on griffey, awesome! totaqlly agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it is interesting to me, though, that you replaced rose with musial. i'm assuming you did that because rose was more of a "statistics compiler" and that is how he ended up with such great numbers? am i correct in that assumption? why do you think musial should make it instead of rose?

I don't have a problem with the whole "compiler" thing -- if you're good enough for long enough, you're going to have gaudier stats. Can't fault someone for having longevity (although Rose was a bit selfish in the way he pursued Cobb).

I just think Musial was a freaking beast and was far more dominant during his peak than Rose.

If we're just comparing the two (Musial = 22 seasons; Rose = 24):

Runs = Rose

Hits = Rose

2B = Rose

3B = Musial

HR = Musial

RBI = Musial

SB = Rose

BB = Musial

SO = Musial

TB = Musial

BA = Musial

OBP = Musial

SLG = Musial

OPS+ = Musial

WAR = Musial

MVP = Musial

All-Star = Musial

World Championships = push

Plus there's the Triple Crown Musial barely missed out on in 1948 (he lost the 1 HR he needed to a rainout that was replayed from the start the next day).

(Bonus fun fact! Musial had 3,630 career hits -- 1,815 at home and 1,815 in the road.)

(Full disclosure: I'm also a Cards fan.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i know you're a cards fan, but i also know that you're a great baseball mind and that you use statistics to back up your opinions. i respect and value your thoughts. the thing that impresses me so much about rose is that he could play any position in the field, and do so at an all-star-caliber level. that's what pushes rose into the top 10 for me, and musial out.

Rose played at least 600 games at four different positions. He played 1,327 games in the outfield (50% in left field, 45% in RF, and 5% in CF); 939 games at first, mostly in his later years; 634 at third base; and 628 at second base, where he started.

i understand that musial played all positions in the outfield (mainly in left, though) and played over a thousand games at first the later years of his career. rose played all those positions, too, in addition to second base and third. maybe musial could have played those positions well, too, and was just never given the chance. who knows? but rose did it, and did it well. to me, that's an important aspect of the game.

rose also had 8 hitting streaks of 20+ games in his career, including the 44-gamer in 1978 that is the second best of all time. musial only had 4 such hitting streaks, and his career high was 30 games in 1950.

again, i'm not knocking stan musial. i put him at #11 all time in the history of the game haha. his stats are undeniable. in addition to the incredible numbers that are easily looked up on any statistics site, he also had 12 walk-off home runs (the most all time). and i also realize he missed the 1945 season due to the war. considering he won the MVP award in 1943 and 1946, he missed what probably would have been a decent statistical year. i totally get that. he was an incredible player, without question.

something i've always wondered, though (and maybe as a cards fan you can shine some light on this??), is why is he always overlooked? nobody really knows stan musial unless you're a true baseball fan. and even then, most people don't realize just how incredible his numbers are. why is that? why does nobody give a shit about him today? it's mind-boggling to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hank aaron

barry bonds

ty cobb

lou gehrig

ken griffey, jr.

mickey mantle

willie mays

pete rose

babe ruth

ted williams

honorable mention: stan musial

according to all the new fangled statistic barometers... you gotta include tris speaker, and dimaggio as way better than griffey... and thats just center fielders.

Pujols & A-rod will both end up with superior numbers to Griff as well.

altho it makes you wonder what ken's numbers would look like if he played on teams providing some protection/guys in front of him getting on base... i mean he would have some monster numbers if he was on the early nineties A's, late 90's Yanks/Jays or similar power houses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
according to all the new fangled statistic barometers... you gotta include tris speaker, and dimaggio as way better than griffey... and thats just center fielders.

Pujols & A-rod will both end up with superior numbers to Griff as well.

Pujols might be remembered as a better hitter, maybe. But he's not even close defensively or speeed-wise. Starting a team right now, both players in their prime setting health aside I'd take Griffey all-day, all-night over Poo-holes.

As for A-Rod, steroids or otherwise, he might go down as the best player ever.

And I'm not sure Joltin' Joe played as good of an outfield as Griffey and he also gets bonus negative points for ruining Mantle's career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ yeah, what he said. and let's not forget, pujols still has a LONG way to go before he reaches any of the numbers we're talking about here. yes, as of right this very instant he's on pace, but Griffey at one point was on pace for 800 home runs had he played long enough, and we all saw what injuries did to him. there's a reason these type of longevity numbers stand for so long... they're really fucking hard to reach. not only do you have to be really really good, you have to be really really lucky with your health. pujols is already starting to have minor nagging injuries. they might not seem like a big deal now because he's young enough to overcome them pretty quickly, but over the next 5-7 years, those things are going to take their toll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ yeah, what he said. and let's not forget, pujols still has a LONG way to go before he reaches any of the numbers we're talking about here. yes, as of right this very instant he's on pace, but Griffey at one point was on pace for 800 home runs had he played long enough, and we all saw what injuries did to him. there's a reason these type of longevity numbers stand for so long... they're really fucking hard to reach. not only do you have to be really really good, you have to be really really lucky with your health. pujols is already starting to have minor nagging injuries. they might not seem like a big deal now because he's young enough to overcome them pretty quickly, but over the next 5-7 years, those things are going to take their toll.

And with the Poo-holes body type, big and bulky, I'd imagine he's playing career won't quite be as long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Albert doesn't have the overall athletic ability of Griffey and would suck ass at center field, but he is a very good fielding first baseman and makes a lot of smart and good plays, he even runs the bases decently well for a large guy . So we are not comparing apples to apples. I was just stating that in my opinion Albert is the best player I have ever seen play. I know my opinion is likely biased and Albert does not have the track record that Griffey had, but each year Albert is consistent in putting up all around big numbers and has yet to slow down even through all of his nagging injuries. Only time will tell for Albert, but imho he is the best player in baseball right now and is not a flash in the pan and barring any significant injury he will continue to put up big numbers.

Sadly as a big NL fan and a bigger Cardinals fan you are probably correct in the fact that he will finish off his career in the AL being a DH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DRAFT DAY!

we better take the SS. even if harper is available, i think he's overhyped and could poison what's shaping up to be a great team in 2 years or so. kid has a terrible attitude from what i've read.

He's only 17, of course he a little immature. He's apparently WAY WAY WAY WAY better than anyone else in the draft too. I know Washington will take him #1 but if not Id be thrilled if my team landed this kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DRAFT DAY!

we better take the SS. even if harper is available, i think he's overhyped and could poison what's shaping up to be a great team in 2 years or so. kid has a terrible attitude from what i've read.

took the pitcher from texas from woodland hills. should have taken maccado

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×