Freddie Freeman or Will Clark?

Darin

When you look at OPS, OPS+, OBP, BA etc. they are very similiar between
Freeman and Clark.
Of course I think if Baines got in the hall of fame then Will Clark should be in.
Freeman is Mr. Consistency, puts up solid numbers every year.
So who do you think is better?

daltex

Too early to tell. Depends how Freeman ages. If he's done today, Clark is far better. Baines isn't the standard and never was. Thee are hundred of players that statement applies to. Better to say if Mattingly is being considered on the Veterans ballot, Clark should be in. Clark was, IMO, both better than most people realize and by no mean a deserving HoFer.

larryallen73

As a Dodger fan I disliked Clark but the dude was a gamer for sure.

craig44

im a big hall guy. I would be happy if clark was in.

Tabe

If Will Clark goes in, put in John Olerud as well. Olerud was better.

JoeBanzai

@daltex said:
Too early to tell. Depends how Freeman ages. If he's done today, Clark is far better. Baines isn't the standard and never was. Thee are hundred of players that statement applies to. Better to say if Mattingly is being considered on the Veterans ballot, Clark should be in. Clark was, IMO, both better than most people realize and by no mean a deserving HoFer.

I hate to talk about Baines, basically a DH, I don't like seeing him in because now we are getting the "if Baines is in, so and so should be in" and you can't fault people for using that argument.

First I have heard of Freeman. Nice numbers. Especially SLG.

Five more years at or near this level and he'll be comparable to Clark. Will was more or less done hitting HR at 27.

@Tabe said:
If Will Clark goes in, put in John Olerud as well. Olerud was better.

Both look similar to me. At first glance I would say Clark was better, not by much though.

Why does Olerud get your vote?

Tabe

@JoeBanzai said:
Why does Olerud get your vote?

Higher peak, better defense. Olerud won a batting title and led the league in OPS+. A league that included Frank Thomas, Griffey Jr, Juan Gone, and others. He also hit .354 for the Mets another year. Clark was excellent on defense but Olerud was on another plane.

Note: I don't think Olerud belongs in the Hall.

Goldenage

There was something about will clark that I really liked. I think it was that he gave me the impression that he was a marginal athlete who worked his buns off to be great.

JoeBanzai

1993 was an awesome year for John, and the best single season either player had, but that season kind of came out of nowhere. Before and after that in Toronto he was very good, but not great. Olerud then really improved, and had his best years 1997-2002 with 1998 being a second standout year. His OPS+ over those 6 years was 136.

I would have given Griffey the MVP in 1993 and John 2nd. 1998 he could have won it if the juicers had played clean, but we'll never know.

Clark had a better 6 year run 1987-1992 when he averaged 152 OPS+, then started missing a lot of games until a nice comeback year in 1998. Will should have won the MVP over Gibson in 1988, and had a much higher WAR than Mitchell in 1989. Bonds should have won in '91, with Clark 2nd or 3rd.

Both guys seemed to be good/great fielders.

Olerud had a longer career, but he was pretty average from 2003-05.

Clark was playing at a very high level at the end of his career actually having a monster final 51 games with St. Louis. I am surprised he retired when he did. I guess he figured McGwire would take over at 1st base the next year?

My take is Clark wins, but certainly not by much. Better BA as well as SLG. Olerud walked more and struck out less, but that was about the only advantages he had in the raw numbers departments.

Had Olerud gotten off to a better start he wins easily, but had Clark not dropped off in the mid 1990's he would have won.

If both guys could have played closer to their peak 6 year periods longer the would be in the HOF and maybe I could get a little more passionate about the comparison.

Edited to add;
Note: I don't think Clark belongs in the Hall.

dallasactuary

This thread accentuates why letting "very good" players like Harold Baines in the HOF is such a terrible idea. All of the players mentioned in this thread were better than Baines, and now all of them have a "claim" to get in. None of them deserve to, but of everyone mentioned it would bother me the least if Clark got in. As pointed out in the OP, he's pretty comparable to Freddie Freeman, but Clark, at his peak, was truly a HOF-level player.

JoeBanzai

^this^

jay0791

I love Will the Thrill....

But I repeat what Dallas said.