Wow, so much of what you said was wrong I don’t even know where to start. Branch Rickey was the most innovative, and probably the best, general manager in history. He put together the World Series winning Gashouse Gang in St. Louis, built the Boys of Summer World Champion team in Brooklyn, and laid the foundation for the Pirates’ 1960 title run. Not only that, but yeah, he built minor league baseball, broke the color barrier by playing Robinson, and drafted Roberto Clemente.
You criticize Rickey for being cheap, while failing to mention Mack’s reaction to the Federal League, which was basically him saying, “fuck it, I know I’ve been competing for World Series the last five years, but I don’t want to deal with this or pay any more for my players, they can all leave.” So his team sucked for a decade. Then they got good again in the late 20s, early 30s, and his ’30 team is one of the best ever, but after ’32 he stopped spending money and the A’s sucked until the left Philadelphia. I know he played a huge role in founding the American League, , and I tried to reflect the importance of that by ranking Ban Johnson and Charles Comiskey (especially Comiskey) higher than I otherwise would have.
As for having Landis ranked as high as I do, come on, he was the first commissioner of baseball. He pretty much created the office, and really brought the American and National Leagues together. Plus, he was able to guide the game through several huge challenges, like anti-trust lawsuits from the Federal League and gambling controversies involving some of the biggest players in the game, including Ty Cobb.
As for the catchers, there’s no way that Campanella should be higher than Gary Carter. Campanella may have been a better player, but he only played in 1200 games; he didn’t have the longevity to be put any higher. I know it’s not his fault, considering time spent in the Negro Leagues and time towards the end of his career he lost in the accident, but because of that I can’t put him any higher. You’re probably right about Dickey, though, he’s always been overshadowed by teammates like Gehrig and Dimaggio.
I’m comfortable with where I put Gibson, Seaver, and Feller. Gibson and Feller pitched about the same number of innings over their careers, 3884 and 3827. But Feller had a career ERA+ of 122, while Gibson’s was 127. They had a pretty substantial difference in WHIPs too, with Gibson putting up a 1.188 for his career, compared to the 1.316 for Feller. Also, and I understand that it’s a pretty small sample, but Feller’s postseason ERA was over 5, while Gibson’s was under 2. Seaver also had a great career, with an ERA+ of 127, WHIP of 1.121, and more than 3600 strikeouts. They all belong where I put them.
As for Mel Ott, come one, he’s easily one of the best outfielders of all time. He led the league in HRs six times, and was the first player in the NL to reach 500 career HRs. You say that he was helped out by playing in the Polo Grounds, but his career OPS+, a park adjusted stat, is 155, higher than Frank Robinson, and equal to Hank Aaron. He was great.
As for saying that Lou Gehrig doesn’t belong in the top tier, come on, he’s the best first baseman of all time. Two MVP awards, two second place finishes, and Offensive Win Percentage of .803, OPS+ of 179, he put up ridiculous numbers. He’s where he should be.
Klawchat 5/2/24.
12 hours ago
3 comments:
Gimpy, I see you don't deny the insult and accusation about being a Mets Fan. Once again you miss the mark. It is clear that your assesssments are based on new interpetations of certain stats.How they played the game and the role they had with their team and in comparison to other stars of their time does not seem to factor in your assessment.I did not deride Rickey's accomplishments but merely stated that they are not greater than Mack's. For brevity's sake I did not criticize your placement of Comiskey, but will do so now. He deserves to be in the last level, maybe the last level of hell too. His greed was directly responsible for the Black Sox scandel.
Feller was the best pitcher in the AL. for almost 2 decades, playing for teams with marginal talent. Also he missed several prime years to the war. Your assessment is wrong.
Your support of Landis rated so high,is also in error. He was tough on the Sox, but he caved in totally with respect to Cobb and Tris Speakers obvious gambling sins. They make pete Rose seem like an angel.His position on the anti- trust litigation???? Is that a good thing.?
Ott is on par with someone like Kiner or Killabrew.You rated him too high.As for Gehrig, if you put him in the first level then you should also place Joe D. and Frank Robinson with him since they were better ballplayers. Perhaps You did a disservice to Honus Wagner as well.
You strike me as very young.Perhaps with time your assessment might mature. Instead of Bill James and stats you might want to read books. Ther have been great bios recently of Mack , Clemente, and Dimaggio.
You're not anyone that I know, are you?
Gimpy, If you look at the stats alone Gehrig is so far superior to DiMaggio that a comparison is silly. Its like saying which is moe 496 or 361. But if one realizes that Joe batting right had a home field power alley of 440 feet compared to 360 a lefty like Gehrig had to contend with.
Dimaggio was a gold glove centerfielder who patroled a larger center field than any in the majors today. He was an impeccable base runner who never got tagged out going from first to third in his carreer. In 1941 he had over 540 at bats yet struck out only 13 times {take that Ryan Howard). He is regularly considered the greatest ballplayer of his era. An era that included Gehrig, Ted Williams and Hank Greenberg. Williams himself made this assessment on numerous occasions. Lastly HOFer Carl Hubbell stated: "Gehrig is great, of course. But somehow you don't get the same feeling when he's at the plate as when DiMaggio comes up."
As to your inquiry, Where do you think you got your brains Luke?
Post a Comment