and to correct ben, DD made 7 all star appearances in 11 seasons, not 9 - nevertheless, an impressive stat which makes me wonder why he fudged it
Again, without putting Dom into the Hall, it's clear that in the past, the defensive contributions of great defensive players were undervalued. Further, RBIs were (and still are, to an extent) exalted waaaay over runs scored. So I feel pretty confident in saying Dom was underrated in his day, much like Richie Ashburn.
Um, OK. So the range factors of left and right fielders were lowered. Look, Mays was fast and all, but I don't think the short foul lines cost him too many putouts. Mays is a good candidate for most overrated player of alltime. He has great career numbers because he was pretty old when his skills deteriorated. But he's not really a serious contender for greatest player ever or anything.
I can speak for Ben here. He's NOT NOT NOT saying Dom was a better player than Willie. He's saying he was a better defensive player. Pele was a better player than Friedel, but Friedel's a better goalie.
He made it 7 times in a nine season period (for him, excluding the seasons he was in the military). He didn't make it as a rookie and he didn't make it his last "season" where he had 3 ABs.
Ok, I'm not being clear. During a 9 season (arbitrary) period, he made it 7 times. Sorry if you consider that fudging. I'm not sure why you even mention the last "season" which was 3 ABs and he had already retired long before the AS game. So, if it makes you happy, he was an all-star 7 out of 10 times he was eligible. He failed in 1940 (rookie season),1947, and 1948.
Let me attempt to bring some closure to this DiMaggio topic. Dan said (to somebody else) "You sound like one of those 1940's Red Sox fans who sang "Dom, Dom DiMaggio, he's better than his brother Joe." I said, "Well, they weren't as far off as you might think" "weren't as far off" obviously means that they were off, but not as far off as Dan thinks. From sentence #1 I admit that Dom isn't as good as Joe, but that he was a f-ing great player. And then the thread went astray... So let's give a little love to Dom, who thankfully is still with us.
I don't think you know why this is true. You and Superdave think the guy stinks? Fine, you can have the guy you think is better, provided his name isn't Ruth or Josh Gibson. Nobody cares. Seriously. And he wasn't the best fielder, he was the best defensive outfielder. The best fielder of his era was, almost by definition, an infielder. (Or a catcher, maybe.) Because infield defense and catching matters, while outfield defense doesn't. Outfield defense is called "pitching." I have no idea whether Dom was better than anyone else in outfield in the 40's or not. I don't know whether Dom was the best defensive outfielder of all time. Although I doubt it - I haven't read anything about his arm, for example. Because no one cares. It's outfield defense. You just have to be better than Jose Canseco. Longevity matters in Hall of Fame voting, of course. Otherwise, where's Bo Jackson and Mark "The Bird" Fidrych? Quick, name a good fielding pitcher. Now, name the best fielding pitcher of all time. Now, explain why he belongs in the Hall of Fame. Superdave, think you'll find that until 1958, the fans voted. In 1957, they stuffed the box so that unworthy Cincinnati Reds could play. Oh, I insist. Don't let me off the hook for pointing that out. Like he was Joe Morgan and Rogers Hornsby or something.
That's easy Dan...Mickey Mantle. But since you mentioned 2 non-CFs, I'll mention Honus Wagner, the only player for whom you can construct an argument that he's better than the Babe. (I'm not saying he was, I'm saying you can construct an argument. You'd center it around comparing Honus to the next greatest SS ever, and Babe to the next greatest RF ever. But A-Rod looks like he's going to f*** that up.) Willie Mays made alot of outs for the runs he produced. Back then, writers didn't care about that, so he was rated more highly than he should have been.
Re: Re: Rush: "Pele Overrated Because He's Black" Anyone who can play every position in the game and play them well is NOT overrated. What you just said was equitable to saying that Bob Marley was overrated in the reggae world...
Willie: 3283 hits, 660 home runs, 1903 RBI, 338 stolen bases, .557 slugging, .302 lifetime over 22 years, plus defense. Mick: 2415 hits, 536 home runs, 1509 RBI, 153 stolen bases (wow, that's higher than I thought from the old drunk, but still), .557 slugging (Jesus, there's a coincidence), .298 lifetime over 18 seasons, plus liver trouble and a whole buncha rings. Willie was better. Ernie Banks? It's a silly comparison - the distance between best and second best isn't all that relevant. But Ruth stands alone, until Barry Bonds wins a Cy Young award.
Crook. Bill James said it best - people who want Jackson in the Hall are the same sort of people who write love letters to serial killers.
Rant over? Good. That's the key mistake! You should care, very much so. Yes, I meant outfielder, obviously. However, you're painfully mistaken when you say outfield defense is unimportant. If you turn 2.9s into 2.2s, you're giving up a shitload of hits a year. It makes all the difference in the world. This is just silly. How can you possibly not see that? Again, look at the numbers. Go to baseballreference.com and make a few calculations. Regarding arm strength, remember that assists are factored into the equation. Longevitiy matters, but it's not the only thing. You can't simply add up all the hits without considering all the outs. Again, I argue that you have to cut Dom slack for WW2. Greg Maddux. Do you need to ask if he belongs in the HOF? This actually raised a very difficult problem, namely that pitchers (pitching) stats are greatly affected by team fielding, including their own. Presumably, a good fielding pitcher will have better pitching stats as well. A great fielding pitcher like Maddux will save a hit a game, which will result in a lower ERA and WHIP. If Dom sucked as a hitter, then you might want to keep him out of the HOF. But he was an excellent hitter as well. Sandberg was a better fielder. Morgan was a better hitter. It's pretty close, actually. I hesitate to say this because I'm not up for a multi-hour argument over Sandberg, but he's unquestionably one of the best 2bmen of all time.
This coming from the guy who finds it amusing to make jokes about Columbine and Nazi attrocities?!?!?! Anyway to the subject. Best player in the 1919 Series, never touched the money after he got it and was without a doubt one of the top players of all time. Second best average ever, great power for that era, unquestioningly the best defensive outfielder of his time, fast, with a powerfull arm. He was such a great hitter that the rumor (though likely false) is that Ruth copied his stance. Say what you want but he was one of the greatest ever. Oh and if you think he threw the Series then that just proves how great he was!
If you squint really hard, you can see a post made under the influence of mind-altering substances...
Wow. You're not bright. Ben - either I'm SERIOUSLY misinterpreting the range stat, or your definition of "shitload" is crazy. The difference between 2.9 and 2.2 is 0.7 of a hit per game. Like I said - who cares? Yeah, it's nice to have. But it's not going to get anyone into the Hall of Fame. Especially with a stat so amazingly dependent on stadium, pitcher, other members of the outfield, God knows what else. No one cares. No one should care. No one's going to care. Like, to pick an example completely at random, Greg Maddux. You think he won all those Cy Young awards for his fielding? You think that's what's going to get him into the Hall? His fielding may be one of the top fifteen or twenty things about him...right down there with "good hitter" and "wears glasses." Now...take a pitcher like, say, Paul Kilgus, and give him Greg Maddux's fielding stats. Hall of Fame? Of course not. Same deal with Dom's fielding stats. Yeah, they're cute and all. But it's gravy. That's all.
Ok, Dan. Let's think about this. Let's imagine a guy saves .7 hits per game. That's 113 hits per year. Now let's assume a great hitter bats .333. He goes 185 for 555. Take away 113 hits and your sure-fire HOFer is now a .130 hitter (72/555). That's an F-ING big deal. Or, to look at it differently, add 113 hits to the great fielding CFer and he is blowing Ty Cobb away. Seriously, you can't overstate how important that is. Again, think about it. Actually, without his great fielding, his pitching stats would be considerably worse, but Greg is a RARE example. You're making a fundamental error here. A pitcher handles far fewer balls than a CFer because he only plays every 5 games or so. A pitcher who saves .7 hits per game is nowhere near as valuable a FIELDER as a CFer who does that 160 games a season. You would need EVERY pitcher on your team doing that to equal the hits saved of the every day player. You see? No, they're as meaty as you can get. I hope you realize that now, but this is Bigsoccer where no human being has ever admitted error.
Correct me if I'm wrong (yeah right), didn't Jackson refuse the money? If I used your electoral strategy, I'd vote Yes on recalling Ty Cobb, on the faint hope that Steve Garvey will get in, even though everybody knows the entirely unqualified Dave Kingman, whom I loathe, will replace Cobb.
This is exactly like saying "Statistics show that a pedestrian gets hit by a car every seven seconds - he ought to look both ways before crossing." It's not going to be one guy. It's not always going to be a three run triple. By definition, it's not going to be a home run. It's three-quarters of a hit a game. And that's if the left and right fielders don't, you know. Help out. You've seriously got to get off this Range thing. It's bogus. I went to baseballreference.com, like you said. Did you see what happened to Mays' range stats when they went to Candlestick? My God! All the Giants outfielders started to SUCK for some reason! Here's the other thing I noticed - you'd think team range stats would be pretty significant, but the Boston Red Sox were during Dom's era usually only a few percentage points above the league average in range. I think only one time, in 1948 - Dom's best range season - were the Sox way above the AL range average, and it still didn't help them catch Larry Doby's Indians. Here’s another thing I looked up. The 1946 pennant winners, with Dom in center – their outfield got a team average of 2.39. The 1986 pennant winners, with Jim Rice, Dwight Evans and Tony Armas – they got an outfield average of 2.38. You'd think team range would be pretty important, but the stats don't bear it out. So what’s the big freaking deal about range? One defensive stud and two stiffs are a hundredth of a percentage point better than three stiffs. Of course, I think I’m not reading baseballreference.com correctly...because in 1948, every team in the majors was above the league average in outfield range. You’d think that was impossible. Sure you can. You’re doing a fantastic job. Considerably worse? Ho ho, it is to laugh. Yes, I do. However, the fielding ability would increase the stats of the pitcher himself, so his individual stats would shine. In theory. In practice, his job is not to get players out with his glove. That’s not his role on the team. Just like an outfielder must do more than simply catch the fly balls. Otherwise Doug Dascenzo would be a Hall of Famer, too. For the Hall of Fame? I say thee nay. And he certainly wasn’t as good as his brother Joe. When I make one, you be sure to point it out to me. But good luck with your crusade to get your zero-time batting champ, zero-time MVP, one-time stolen base leader (15 in his final year - American Leaguers, man, no wonder Rickey Henderson set the stolen base record, he was running against AL catchers who hadn’t seen a guy steal a base since Ty Cobb) into the Hall.
You are wrong, as a matter of fact. http://roadsidephotos.com/baseball/bb99-6.htm http://baseballcrank.com/archives/001147.php This is either a hugely depressing commentary on politics, or a hugely depressing commentary on baseball. Or both.
Re: Re: Re: Rush: "Pele Overrated Because He's Black" Since you brought him up, yes, Bob Marley sucks.