Options
How Good was Toby Harrah?
PaulMaul
Posts: 4,710 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Interested in analysis from the usual experts around here. 😁
0
PaulMaul
Posts: 4,710 ✭✭✭✭✭
PaulMaul
Posts: 4,710 ✭✭✭✭✭
PaulMaul
Posts: 4,710 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
He's the second greatest baseball player that ever lived. I think you know who the first is.
Average at best.
You can pick your own subjective adjective, but I'd pick "near-great". He was a career .264 hitter, but his secondary (ironically, more important than batting) average was .307. In his best seasons he did hit .300 or so with an OBP of .400 or so, and with pretty good power. And he did this not just as a 3B/SS, but as a 3B/SS who could steal bases. Had he been a GOOD 3B/SS, I'd say he was "great".
He was Sal Bando, except Bando did it in the worst hitter's park in the league, and Bando was great. Or he was Barry Larkin, except Larkin could field much better. Larkin is in the HOF; Bando is right below the HOF line, and Harrah is a step below that.
Dallas is 50% of the experts around here, the other 50% is Skin so stay tuned to see if he chimes in.
Toby had a very nice career especially for the non juiced ball era....look at his stats. (1900 plus hits) But the Rangers were as close to a minor league team for a MLB team in the 70's and 80's. Everyone in Texas was focused on oil.... Not Toby.
He is nothing compared to Pete Rose. 4256 Hits 303 BA 1314 RBI's! We are talking playing stats here. Don't go to the gambling thing. Just between the lines please.
About as good as Buddy Bell. Solid, dependable player but never outstanding.
Very good player who had a few great years, 1975, 77 and 82.
Seems to have missed a few too many games early and late.
Yeah, Bell is a better comparison than Bando. Bell was a considerably better fielder than Harrah, but they were about equals at the plate.