@perkdog said:
I remember the good old days in elementary school when guys like Rod Carew, Mike Schmidt, George Brett, Pete Rose, Carl Yastrzemski and Robin Yount type guys were all considered the best and nobody would argue it lol
Yea, but in elementary school we didn't argue or fight over women either.
@1970s said:
Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, and George Brett belong to a special club.
All power hitters. None were as you say "streak hitters". That's why they call him the streak! LOL
When you say Schmidt was a "streak hitter", what you are saying was that he was very bad during long parts of the season, and postseason. The numbers prove that. The numbers also prove that Schmidt couldn't carry Brett's jock in the postseason, and they both were equal during the regular season.
I know it's hard to change one's mind, but the evidence clearly shows that Brett was a much more feared hitter then Schmidt, and both were equal in the field. Ask Steve Carlton how good George Brett was. LOL. Ask Ron Guidry. LOL.
Schmidt hit a nice .179 off of Nolan Ryan. LOL
Sorry George doesn't belong in that company.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
He may be in this "club", however he is nowhere near as good as these three as a baseball player. Not even close. Mays and Aaron's home run totals FAR outdistance George and Stan's OPS was 120 point higher.
1970s ARE you actually George Brett? You must be TOTALLY in love with him if you aren't.
I hadn't realized how many seasons George played 1B/DH. As long as we're including "part time" guys, I would take Killebrew over Brett as well as Schmidt and Matthews. ;-)
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@1970s said:
I'll say it again. Brett and Schmidt were like equals during the regular season.
But no matter how often you repeat this false statement, it will remain false. It is this false assumption that causes all of your arguments to fail. I point that out for the benefit of those who will understand what I'm saying; it is not directed at you.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Both Schmidt and Brett had higher HOF vote percentages than Babe Ruth and Ted Williams.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@1970s said:
George Brett is one of four players in MLB history to accumulate 3,000 hits, 300 home runs, and a career .300 batting average (the others being Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, and Stan Musial.)
Do you guys remember going to the dentist as a kid and they had the Highlights Magazine on the table? Towards the back of the magazine they had a page to pick out who or what doesn’t belong in this pictue. The statement above brought back that childhood memory
Hank Aaron 755 home runs
Willie Mays 660 home runs
Stan Musial 475 home runs
George Brett 317 home runs
When you average 15 home runs a season you are not a power hitter nor do you belong in this picture. Brett a great hitter but even he would be embarrassed by this non event. 300 homers puts him well outside of the top 100. The others were great power hitters who also hit for average. Brett hit for average but not not for power. Unless one thinks that one home run for every 36 plate appearances makes you a power hitter. If so you have a low bar.
Brett was great in his own right but let’s not make him into something he wasn’t.
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@1970s said:
George Brett is one of four players in MLB history to accumulate 3,000 hits, 300 home runs, and a career .300 batting average (the others being Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, and Stan Musial.)
Do you guys remember going to the dentist as a kid and they had the Highlights Magazine on the table? Towards the back of the magazine they had a page to pick out who or what doesn’t belong in this pictue. The statement above brought back that childhood memory
Hank Aaron 755 home runs
Willie Mays 660 home runs
Stan Musial 475 home runs
George Brett 317 home runs
When you average 15 home runs a season you are not a power hitter nor do you belong in this picture. Brett a great hitter but even he would be embarrassed by this non event. 300 homers puts him well outside of the top 100. The others were great power hitters who also hit for average. Brett hit for average but not not for power. Unless one thinks that one home run for every 36 plate appearances makes you a power hitter. If so you have a low bar.
Brett was great in his own right but let’s not make him into something he wasn’t.
m
It's interesting about Brett. He did have power if he wanted to use it. He was a strong guy.
I haven't heard Brett talk about this, but i have heard Pete Rose say about himself that he could have hit a lot more home runs during his career, but an attempt to do that would have negatively affected his batting average so he didn't do it. I think it's likely that Brett chose to do the same.
Which makes a guy such as Schmidt more valuable because he could hit for a relatively decent average, including getting a lot of walks, and yet hit all those home runs. Unless the game changed somehow and I didn't notice it, a home run is still the most lethal form of hit.
It's just speculation, but let's say that Brett decided to be a home run hitter. Likely he tried it in at least a few games. He then came to the conclusion that his batting average would suffer precipitously, and that he might become like say a Dave Kingman who bounced around with a number of teams during his career despite hitting 442 home runs.
It is crystal clear to those who understand MLB batters, that yes, Brett had better stats than Schmidt when it came to average, but Schmidt was a better hitter...and a much better fielder than George Brett. Which as I think i noted earlier, is why Schmidt is at the top of virtually every best all time third basemen list out there.
@1970s said:
George Brett is one of four players in MLB history to accumulate 3,000 hits, 300 home runs, and a career .300 batting average (the others being Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, and Stan Musial.)
Do you guys remember going to the dentist as a kid and they had the Highlights Magazine on the table? Towards the back of the magazine they had a page to pick out who or what doesn’t belong in this pictue. The statement above brought back that childhood memory
Hank Aaron 755 home runs
Willie Mays 660 home runs
Stan Musial 475 home runs
George Brett 317 home runs
When you average 15 home runs a season you are not a power hitter nor do you belong in this picture. Brett a great hitter but even he would be embarrassed by this non event. 300 homers puts him well outside of the top 100. The others were great power hitters who also hit for average. Brett hit for average but not not for power. Unless one thinks that one home run for every 36 plate appearances makes you a power hitter. If so you have a low bar.
Brett was great in his own right but let’s not make him into something he wasn’t.
m
justacommisioner- How about putting up their doubles totals? Brett hit more than Aaron or Mays.
Only Musial on that list hit more doubles than George.
Brett was 5th all time in doubles until that Astros player hung on way too long and passed him.
Brett also hit more than twice as many triples as Mike Schmidt did. And I'm pretty sure he stole more bases.
Just mentioning a few things because Dallasactuary stated that Schmidt did every thing better than Brett.
Brett was a better baserunner than Schmidt, because of those 665 doubles he hit, many could have been
singles that Brett, with his hustle, stretched into doubles.
Brett was better than Schmidt at getting extra base hits. Brett finished his career with over 100 more extra
base hits than Schmidt. That's odd? How did that happen.Brett staked him to a pretty good lead in the HR
department. But Brett still had 119 more extra base hits? Weird? Go ahead and look it up. Seems like contrary to what Dallas said, Brett actually did a lot of things better than Schmidt.
Won't even meniton how much better Brett was under playoff pressure than Schmidt, 1970's has done that enough.
But of course Schmidt backers gloss over that like it doesn't matter.LOL. Like how you perform under the
toughest of circumstances doesn't matter.
Darin, 1970’s didn’t list double in his “300 club” so I had no reason to even think about it. I was just responding to his post.
Doubles are the most common form of extra base hits. There are lots of great doubles hitters. Brett was certainly one of them
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@Darin said:
Brett was better than Schmidt at getting extra base hits.
This is false.
Per 162 games, Brett hit 40 doubles, 8 triples, 19 homers; 67 extra base hits, total of 113 extra bases.
Per 162 games, Schmidt hit 27 doubles, 4 triples, 37 homers; 68 extra base hits, total of 146 extra bases.
Per 162 games, Brett got to first base (or further) 257 times, Schmidt 258 times.
Per 162 games, Brett grounded into 14 double plays, Schmidt 11.
For his career, Brett had an OPS of .886 with men on base, .891 with runners in scoring position; Schmidt had an OPS of .925 with men on base, .931 with runners in scoring position.
Their extra base hits, while similar in number, were not very similar in quality and this is where the gap between Brett and Schmidt is the largest. Everywhere else you look - getting on base, avoiding double plays, hitting when it matters most - the gaps are small, but Schmidt beats Brett at everything. There is no argument to be made that Brett was better than Schmidt, but bless all of your hearts, that doesn't seem to stop people from making them anyway.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@1970s said:
George Brett is one of four players in MLB history to accumulate 3,000 hits, 300 home runs, and a career .300 batting average (the others being Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, and Stan Musial.)
Do you guys remember going to the dentist as a kid and they had the Highlights Magazine on the table? Towards the back of the magazine they had a page to pick out who or what doesn’t belong in this pictue. The statement above brought back that childhood memory
Hank Aaron 755 home runs
Willie Mays 660 home runs
Stan Musial 475 home runs
George Brett 317 home runs
When you average 15 home runs a season you are not a power hitter nor do you belong in this picture. Brett a great hitter but even he would be embarrassed by this non event. 300 homers puts him well outside of the top 100. The others were great power hitters who also hit for average. Brett hit for average but not not for power. Unless one thinks that one home run for every 36 plate appearances makes you a power hitter. If so you have a low bar.
Brett was great in his own right but let’s not make him into something he wasn’t.
m
Won't even meniton how much better Brett was under playoff pressure than Schmidt, 1970's has done that enough.
But of course Schmidt backers gloss over that like it doesn't matter.LOL. Like how you perform under the
toughest of circumstances doesn't matter.
Concur. That's like saying winning at queen's club is just as important as winning Wimbledon LOL.
To be fair though, Schmidt is a WS MVP.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
This discussion is like picking what Charlie’s Angel you would have wanted to hook up with in 1980. Everyone is a winner
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Mark, I loved your reference to the Highlights magazines at the dentist office, I remember the pick out what doesn’t belong page but I was more of a Goofus and Gallant type of kid
Good grief we are actually going to debate which Charlie Angels is the GOAT aren’t we?
Put me down for Farrah.
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@Justacommeman said:
Good grief we are actually going to debate which Charlie Angels is the GOAT aren’t we?
Put me down for Farrah.
m
I'll take the blonde who replaced Farrah after the 1st season.
Kate Jackson was gorgeous when she played the nurse on The Rookies.
Cheryl Ladd —— I would rather get to third base with her then George Brett
m
Edited as hell that didn’t come out right
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Cheryl Ladd and I would rather get to third base with her over George Brett
m
If I ever meet any of you bastiges at a card show, i would be more than happy to talk some cards and sports with ya. However if you say that you prefer this guy over any of the angels, just don't ask me to go out with ya for a drink after the show. Okay?
@perkdog said:
Jaclyn Smith and Cheryl Ladd is comparable to a Mike Schmidt vs George Brett discussion, no matter who you take your winning.
If I ever had Jaclyn and Cheryl in a hot tub, the first thing I'd say to them is, "Girls, no need to fight over me, there's plenty of stevek for both of you." I've always been very kind and considerate in that way.
Of course the chances of that happening, are the exact same as me being named MVP of MLB this season.
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
1) If I see "crapped the bed" one more time I think I will scream!
rarely do i concur with 35-cent man, but i'm all-in on this. i read it so many times that i almost crapped the bed the other night. then i fell asleep and had a dream that george brett hit a home run against the phillies and when he reached third he stopped and started making out with mike schmidt
As long as no Cowboys are involved, it's possible, lol..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Brett was a much better (s)hitter and tells way better stories. While Schmidt only "crapped the bed" in the post season, Brett craps his pants twice a year.
@DIMEMAN said:
That's right I'm back. Here is my 35 cents (Dimeman who also collects Quarters) free of charge.
1) If I see "crapped the bed" one more time I think I will scream!
2) To say Dallasactuary doesn't know what he is talking about is silly.......keep up the good work DA.
3) Both men should be in the HOF and both men are!
4) Schmidt is a power hitter and Brett is a per centage hitter. DA explained why Schmidt is the better overall hitter.
5) If I had to chose which to play 3rd I would pick Schmidt because last I heard you want power from the corner players.
6) Neither one is the best 3rd Baseman....that would go to Brooks or Nettles.
7) Neither one is the best overall player ever......that would go to Mays with Williams, Mantle and Musual getting HM.
There you have it free of charge from the Dimeman....JMHO!
Not bad. I agree with 6 out of 7. Brooks and Nettles were better FIELDING 3rd baseman but overall Schmidt (then Mathews) was/were almost as good in the field, and much better offensively.
I love seeing someone mention Musial as one of the best ever!
Good comeback dman!
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@DIMEMAN said:
That's right I'm back. Here is my 35 cents (Dimeman who also collects Quarters) free of charge.
1) If I see "crapped the bed" one more time I think I will scream!
2) To say Dallasactuary doesn't know what he is talking about is silly.......keep up the good work DA.
3) Both men should be in the HOF and both men are!
4) Schmidt is a power hitter and Brett is a per centage hitter. DA explained why Schmidt is the better overall hitter.
5) If I had to chose which to play 3rd I would pick Schmidt because last I heard you want power from the corner players.
6) Neither one is the best 3rd Baseman....that would go to Brooks or Nettles.
7) Neither one is the best overall player ever......that would go to Mays with Williams, Mantle and Musual getting HM.
There you have it free of charge from the Dimeman....JMHO!
Not bad. I agree with 6 out of 7. Brooks and Nettles were better FIELDING 3rd baseman but overall Schmidt (then Mathews) was/were almost as good in the field, and much better offensively.
I love seeing someone mention Musial as one of the best ever!
Good comeback dman!
That's what I meant on #6.....defense only. And yes, Musial was a great player. Living close to STL I got to see him in person when I was a kid.
@DIMEMAN said:
That's right I'm back. Here is my 35 cents (Dimeman who also collects Quarters) free of charge.
1) If I see "crapped the bed" one more time I think I will scream!
2) To say Dallasactuary doesn't know what he is talking about is silly.......keep up the good work DA.
3) Both men should be in the HOF and both men are!
4) Schmidt is a power hitter and Brett is a per centage hitter. DA explained why Schmidt is the better overall hitter.
5) If I had to chose which to play 3rd I would pick Schmidt because last I heard you want power from the corner players.
6) Neither one is the best 3rd Baseman....that would go to Brooks or Nettles.
7) Neither one is the best overall player ever......that would go to Mays with Williams, Mantle and Musual getting HM.
There you have it free of charge from the Dimeman....JMHO!
Not bad. I agree with 6 out of 7. Brooks and Nettles were better FIELDING 3rd baseman but overall Schmidt (then Mathews) was/were almost as good in the field, and much better offensively.
I love seeing someone mention Musial as one of the best ever!
Good comeback dman!
That's what I meant on #6.....defense only. And yes, Musial was a great player. Living close to STL I got to see him in person when I was a kid.
Point taken on #6 and their great defense isn't possible to argue against.
That being said, I watched many hundreds of Phillies games with Schmidt at third base, and I'm telling ya, the guy was like a vacuum cleaner out there. One thing he did perhaps better than any third baseman I can think of is cover the bunt. He wasn't the quickest third baseman out there, but he had some sort of innate ability to get a jump on a bunt and make the right play. A number of times on a sacrifice bunt, he would grab the bunt and throw the lead runner out at second base. I saw this countless times. He rarely made a mistake or a throwing error, and when he got to the ball he rarely bobbled it or anything such as that. Plays that the scorer would rule a hit for most third baseman because they couldn't make the play or they fumbled the ball but it was a tough play so the scorer didn't give them an error...well Schmidt would make those plays for outs, time and time again. These are facts that stats will not show, but is further proof why those who watched him play, despite Brett's better offense in some categories, clearly rate Schmidt as the best third baseman of all time.
@DIMEMAN said:
That's right I'm back. Here is my 35 cents (Dimeman who also collects Quarters) free of charge.
1) If I see "crapped the bed" one more time I think I will scream!
2) To say Dallasactuary doesn't know what he is talking about is silly.......keep up the good work DA.
3) Both men should be in the HOF and both men are!
4) Schmidt is a power hitter and Brett is a per centage hitter. DA explained why Schmidt is the better overall hitter.
5) If I had to chose which to play 3rd I would pick Schmidt because last I heard you want power from the corner players.
6) Neither one is the best 3rd Baseman....that would go to Brooks or Nettles.
7) Neither one is the best overall player ever......that would go to Mays with Williams, Mantle and Musual getting HM.
There you have it free of charge from the Dimeman....JMHO!
Not bad. I agree with 6 out of 7. Brooks and Nettles were better FIELDING 3rd baseman but overall Schmidt (then Mathews) was/were almost as good in the field, and much better offensively.
I love seeing someone mention Musial as one of the best ever!
Good comeback dman!
That's what I meant on #6.....defense only. And yes, Musial was a great player. Living close to STL I got to see him in person when I was a kid.
Point taken on #6 and their great defense isn't possible to argue against.
That being said, I watched many hundreds of Phillies games with Schmidt at third base, and I'm telling ya, the guy was like a vacuum cleaner out there. One thing he did perhaps better than any third baseman I can think of is cover the bunt. He wasn't the quickest third baseman out there, but he had some sort of innate ability to get a jump on a bunt and make the right play. A number of times on a sacrifice bunt, he would grab the bunt and throw the lead runner out at second base. I saw this countless times. He rarely made a mistake or a throwing error, and when he got to the ball he rarely bobbled it or anything such as that. Plays that the scorer would rule a hit for most third baseman because they couldn't make the play or they fumbled the ball but it was a tough play so the scorer didn't give them an error...well Schmidt would make those plays for outs, time and time again. These are facts that stats will not show, but is further proof why those who watched him play, despite Brett's better offense in some categories, clearly rate Schmidt as the best third baseman of all time.
Sometime guys do things that don't show up on a stat sheet.
I used to be amazed at how Justin Morneau went from first to third on singles, for a big man he was amazing! His 2010 season was going to be EPIC until he was injured.> @DIMEMAN said:
Comments
Yea, but in elementary school we didn't argue or fight over women either.
The hostess fruit pies though, were always in contest.
When that Good Humor ice cream truck rang the bell, i was like a Pavlov dog. LOL
Sorry George doesn't belong in that company.
He may be in this "club", however he is nowhere near as good as these three as a baseball player. Not even close. Mays and Aaron's home run totals FAR outdistance George and Stan's OPS was 120 point higher.
1970s ARE you actually George Brett? You must be TOTALLY in love with him if you aren't.
I hadn't realized how many seasons George played 1B/DH. As long as we're including "part time" guys, I would take Killebrew over Brett as well as Schmidt and Matthews. ;-)
But no matter how often you repeat this false statement, it will remain false. It is this false assumption that causes all of your arguments to fail. I point that out for the benefit of those who will understand what I'm saying; it is not directed at you.
Killebrew; first player to be named at All-Star three different positions=best ballplayer ever.
Actually, Eddie Gaedel was the best baseball player ever in MLB.
Gaedel retired with a lusty 1.000 OBP. That is correct, you read it right, every time Gaedel stepped to the plate, he got on base. Simply incredible.
He is the GOAT, and the stats prove it.
Both Schmidt and Brett had higher HOF vote percentages than Babe Ruth and Ted Williams.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Reminds me of a book I read in H.S. "The Kid That Batted 1,000".
Do you guys remember going to the dentist as a kid and they had the Highlights Magazine on the table? Towards the back of the magazine they had a page to pick out who or what doesn’t belong in this pictue. The statement above brought back that childhood memory
Hank Aaron 755 home runs
Willie Mays 660 home runs
Stan Musial 475 home runs
George Brett 317 home runs
When you average 15 home runs a season you are not a power hitter nor do you belong in this picture. Brett a great hitter but even he would be embarrassed by this non event. 300 homers puts him well outside of the top 100. The others were great power hitters who also hit for average. Brett hit for average but not not for power. Unless one thinks that one home run for every 36 plate appearances makes you a power hitter. If so you have a low bar.
Brett was great in his own right but let’s not make him into something he wasn’t.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Short career.
Are you saying that only a moron would use HOF vote percentages to measure player greatness? Sad that it needed to be said, but apparently it did.
It's interesting about Brett. He did have power if he wanted to use it. He was a strong guy.
I haven't heard Brett talk about this, but i have heard Pete Rose say about himself that he could have hit a lot more home runs during his career, but an attempt to do that would have negatively affected his batting average so he didn't do it. I think it's likely that Brett chose to do the same.
Which makes a guy such as Schmidt more valuable because he could hit for a relatively decent average, including getting a lot of walks, and yet hit all those home runs. Unless the game changed somehow and I didn't notice it, a home run is still the most lethal form of hit.
It's just speculation, but let's say that Brett decided to be a home run hitter. Likely he tried it in at least a few games. He then came to the conclusion that his batting average would suffer precipitously, and that he might become like say a Dave Kingman who bounced around with a number of teams during his career despite hitting 442 home runs.
It is crystal clear to those who understand MLB batters, that yes, Brett had better stats than Schmidt when it came to average, but Schmidt was a better hitter...and a much better fielder than George Brett. Which as I think i noted earlier, is why Schmidt is at the top of virtually every best all time third basemen list out there.
justacommisioner- How about putting up their doubles totals? Brett hit more than Aaron or Mays.
Only Musial on that list hit more doubles than George.
Brett was 5th all time in doubles until that Astros player hung on way too long and passed him.
Brett also hit more than twice as many triples as Mike Schmidt did. And I'm pretty sure he stole more bases.
Just mentioning a few things because Dallasactuary stated that Schmidt did every thing better than Brett.
Brett was a better baserunner than Schmidt, because of those 665 doubles he hit, many could have been
singles that Brett, with his hustle, stretched into doubles.
Brett was better than Schmidt at getting extra base hits. Brett finished his career with over 100 more extra
base hits than Schmidt. That's odd? How did that happen.Brett staked him to a pretty good lead in the HR
department. But Brett still had 119 more extra base hits? Weird? Go ahead and look it up. Seems like contrary to what Dallas said, Brett actually did a lot of things better than Schmidt.
Won't even meniton how much better Brett was under playoff pressure than Schmidt, 1970's has done that enough.
But of course Schmidt backers gloss over that like it doesn't matter.LOL. Like how you perform under the
toughest of circumstances doesn't matter.
It took Eddie around 10 minutes to jog to first base after that walk.
Darin, 1970’s didn’t list double in his “300 club” so I had no reason to even think about it. I was just responding to his post.
Doubles are the most common form of extra base hits. There are lots of great doubles hitters. Brett was certainly one of them
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
This is false.
Per 162 games, Brett hit 40 doubles, 8 triples, 19 homers; 67 extra base hits, total of 113 extra bases.
Per 162 games, Schmidt hit 27 doubles, 4 triples, 37 homers; 68 extra base hits, total of 146 extra bases.
Per 162 games, Brett got to first base (or further) 257 times, Schmidt 258 times.
Per 162 games, Brett grounded into 14 double plays, Schmidt 11.
For his career, Brett had an OPS of .886 with men on base, .891 with runners in scoring position; Schmidt had an OPS of .925 with men on base, .931 with runners in scoring position.
Their extra base hits, while similar in number, were not very similar in quality and this is where the gap between Brett and Schmidt is the largest. Everywhere else you look - getting on base, avoiding double plays, hitting when it matters most - the gaps are small, but Schmidt beats Brett at everything. There is no argument to be made that Brett was better than Schmidt, but bless all of your hearts, that doesn't seem to stop people from making them anyway.
How many players hit 390 in the last 60+ years?
I'll take Brett Over Schmidt any day.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Concur. That's like saying winning at queen's club is just as important as winning Wimbledon LOL.
To be fair though, Schmidt is a WS MVP.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
This discussion is like picking what Charlie’s Angel you would have wanted to hook up with in 1980. Everyone is a winner
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Only one right choice.
Mark, I loved your reference to the Highlights magazines at the dentist office, I remember the pick out what doesn’t belong page but I was more of a Goofus and Gallant type of kid
Good grief we are actually going to debate which Charlie Angels is the GOAT aren’t we?
Put me down for Farrah.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I’ll take Jaclyn Smith all day and twice on Sundays.
I'll take the blonde who replaced Farrah after the 1st season.
Kate Jackson was gorgeous when she played the nurse on The Rookies.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Paul of course is 100% right, and this shouldn't even be debatable.
Was that Cheryl Ladd?
I forget if Cheryl replaced Farrah or vice versa.
Despite the eye candy on the show, I think I may have watched it one time, maybe two at the most.
When i first saw the pic, I thought it was a photo of George Brett.
Come on now...it's just a joke. LOL
Cheryl Ladd —— I would rather get to third base with her then George Brett
m
Edited as hell that didn’t come out right
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Jaclyn Smith and Cheryl Ladd is comparable to a Mike Schmidt vs George Brett discussion, no matter who you take your winning.
If I ever meet any of you bastiges at a card show, i would be more than happy to talk some cards and sports with ya. However if you say that you prefer this guy over any of the angels, just don't ask me to go out with ya for a drink after the show. Okay?
Hahahahahahaha I’m with Steve 1000%
If I ever had Jaclyn and Cheryl in a hot tub, the first thing I'd say to them is, "Girls, no need to fight over me, there's plenty of stevek for both of you." I've always been very kind and considerate in that way.
Of course the chances of that happening, are the exact same as me being named MVP of MLB this season.
That's right I'm back. Here is my 35 cents (Dimeman who also collects Quarters) free of charge.
1) If I see "crapped the bed" one more time I think I will scream!
2) To say Dallasactuary doesn't know what he is talking about is silly.......keep up the good work DA.
3) Both men should be in the HOF and both men are!
4) Schmidt is a power hitter and Brett is a per centage hitter. DA explained why Schmidt is the better overall hitter.
5) If I had to chose which to play 3rd I would pick Schmidt because last I heard you want power from the corner players.
6) Neither one is the best 3rd Baseman....that would go to Brooks or Nettles.
7) Neither one is the best overall player ever......that would go to Mays with Williams, Mantle and Musual getting HM.
There you have it free of charge from the Dimeman....JMHO!
See...I told everybody that a Charlie's Angels discussion would get Dimeman back.
Jon...i hope Charlie (your dog) is doing well.
At least none of them are covered in pine tar.
Glad to see Dime back!
Me too! He even got a few of those right
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I even agree with him this time, LOL..> @Justacommeman said:
+1
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
rarely do i concur with 35-cent man, but i'm all-in on this. i read it so many times that i almost crapped the bed the other night. then i fell asleep and had a dream that george brett hit a home run against the phillies and when he reached third he stopped and started making out with mike schmidt
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
I like Dimeman.....
.....just as long as he never says anything good about the stinkin' Dallas Cowboys.
Thanks Mark......I tried to be objective.
As long as no Cowboys are involved, it's possible, lol..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Brett was a much better (s)hitter and tells way better stories. While Schmidt only "crapped the bed" in the post season, Brett craps his pants twice a year.
I used to do that often, throughout the day, it was horrible.
Of course I was only a few weeks old at the time.
Not bad. I agree with 6 out of 7. Brooks and Nettles were better FIELDING 3rd baseman but overall Schmidt (then Mathews) was/were almost as good in the field, and much better offensively.
I love seeing someone mention Musial as one of the best ever!
Good comeback dman!
That's what I meant on #6.....defense only. And yes, Musial was a great player. Living close to STL I got to see him in person when I was a kid.
Point taken on #6 and their great defense isn't possible to argue against.
That being said, I watched many hundreds of Phillies games with Schmidt at third base, and I'm telling ya, the guy was like a vacuum cleaner out there. One thing he did perhaps better than any third baseman I can think of is cover the bunt. He wasn't the quickest third baseman out there, but he had some sort of innate ability to get a jump on a bunt and make the right play. A number of times on a sacrifice bunt, he would grab the bunt and throw the lead runner out at second base. I saw this countless times. He rarely made a mistake or a throwing error, and when he got to the ball he rarely bobbled it or anything such as that. Plays that the scorer would rule a hit for most third baseman because they couldn't make the play or they fumbled the ball but it was a tough play so the scorer didn't give them an error...well Schmidt would make those plays for outs, time and time again. These are facts that stats will not show, but is further proof why those who watched him play, despite Brett's better offense in some categories, clearly rate Schmidt as the best third baseman of all time.
Sometime guys do things that don't show up on a stat sheet.
I used to be amazed at how Justin Morneau went from first to third on singles, for a big man he was amazing! His 2010 season was going to be EPIC until he was injured.> @DIMEMAN said:
Wow, that must have been a TREAT!