Pete Rose or Ichiro
4for4
Posts: 675 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Who was better ?
Forum members on ignore
Erba - coolstanley-dallasactuary-SDsportsfan
daltex
0
Comments
I will take pete. He could give me more flexibility in defensive positions. afaik Ichiro was only a RF. Pete played 4 or 5 different. they seem similarly skilled as hitters. Both held on too long.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Rose was better, and by a mile.
Using the same metric I used in another thread:
Runs Created: Ichiro 1,501 - Rose 2,219
Runs Created per 27 Outs: Ichiro 5.6 - Rose 5.8
Adjusted for Park/Era: Ichiro 5.6 - Rose 6.0
So only looking at their rates of production, Rose wins relatively easily. But Rose did it for about 50% longer.
They were both corner outfielders for most of their careers, and they were both fine. WAR penalizes Rose for being good enough to play the infield as well, which results in WAR showing them as even in the same ballpark. They weren't; WAR is crap, and Rose was much better then Ichiro.
🌹
Ichiro was in RF because he had a cannon for an arm, he could have played anywhere in the OF with his absurd speed.
Ichiro probably is actually the better player, the problem is he played so long in Japan and then ended up playing way to long in MLB with a bunch of bad years at the end.
Had he started his career in the MLB the answer would very likely be Ichiro, but since he didnt the answer is Rose
Wisconsin 2-6 against the SEC since 2007
Pete
pete played infield too though. 2b and 3b
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Yea but itd be a waste of speed to have someone like Ichiro in the infield which is one of the reasons Tatis got moved to the outfield as well. You really want guys with elite speed like that in the outfield
Wisconsin 2-6 against the SEC since 2007
Pete Rose and he is one of the best ever.
Don't get me wrong Ichiro was also great but not as great as Rose.
Ichiro played over 300 games in CF. Probably plays more games there if Mike Cameron wasn't there his first three years in Seattle (Cameron was outstanding for those who've forgotten). He also played 117 in LF.
I'll give Pete credit for playing 3B. No credit for 1B, an easy position.
Pete was better - more pop at the plate.
that is not why tatis got moved to the of. it was an attempt to save him from injury on his surgically repaired shoulder.
2b and 3b, are more valuable than RF. The plan is to eventually move him back to the more valuable infield position.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Ichiro, and it's not particularly close.
It is pretty humorous, though, the same people who want to assume stats for Ted Williams losing years to the war do not offer the same courtesy to Ichrio losing NINE YEARS in Japan.
If Ichiro plays in MLB his entire career, he crushes Rose's hit record.
Rose had obviously a marvelous career, but Ichrio was a better player.
I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary
Maybe he does. Maybe he has a career ending injury at age 25 and becomes a footnote to history. I am not one of those people who "assume stats"
What did Iciro do better than Pete? steal more bases?
Pete was much more versitile in the field. Got on base at a higher clip and had more pop than Ichiro.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Rose easy.
On top of the lead Rose already has, Ichiro's infield singles don't do as much as typical single. > @Mistlin said:
Ichiro would have had to prove he could excel at hitting MLB pitching at age 19 at the same rate(or close) as he did in Japan. It was not an assumption what Ted would do in his missing war years, he proved it before and after. It is a huge assumption that Ichiro does anything at the MLB level at age 19, 20, or 21. Don't even know about 22.
We don't even know if Ichiro would have been drafted growing up in the states(without the benefit of MLB seeing he could at least handle pro pitching).
Fact is, Japan was easier to hit in, and that is why guys like Tuffy Rhodes went there and became Babe Ruth.
Ichiro himself in Japan had a .943 OPS. He hit 118 Home Runs there in 3,619 at bats, compared to 117 in MLB in 9,934 at bats.
As an aside, Ichiro was a singles hitter where many of his singles were infield singles that do not do the same damage was outfield singles. He also hit a lot of shallow singles to the OF. As a result, his stats don't carry the same weight as other hitters who have the same percentages.
Heck, Ichiro only hit 30 doubles three times in his career and batted 740 times a year. Speed? Didn't help there.
It's amusing to watch the mental gymnastics people will perform in these types of debates. By the way, an outfield single is no more valuable than an infield single.
You claim his speed didn't help in regards to doubles, then conveniently ignore than he stole more than 500 bases in his career which averaged out to about 30 a year. A single + stolen base = a double. His speed sure helped there. Throw in the stress his speed applied to pitchers, it sure helped the batters behind him, too.
Ichiro was a more complete and more dominant player than Rose. He just was. He did it an era of specialized relievers that Rose didn't.
This repeated pattern of some members here continually bashing modern players while deifying players from the past is just so mystifying.
Players from the 40s - 70s had a MUCH easier time to be great than modern players. From the lack of international players to lack of specialized pitchers, today's players have a much harder time than ever.
I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary
I stopped reading there. I would feel stupid even explaining why you're wrong, given how obvious it is why you're wrong. I can't even imagine how you feel having actually written it. Ouch!
Regarding giving credit for playing in Japan, it's not wrong to do so but what credit to give is entirely a guess with no facts upon which to anchor that guess. Japanese baseball is somewhere in the A-AA minor league spectrum, and lots and lots of players get stuck in the minors without ever getting to the big leagues. When was Ichiro good enough to play in MLB? I don't know, you don't know, nobody knows. Well, I know he was good enough in 2001, but before that I have no idea. When Felix Millan wasn't good enough to play MLB anymore he went to Japan and led the league in batting average. Success in Japan means nothing with respect to giving credit for hypothetical MLB success. To say that Ichiro is better than Rose "and it's not particularly close" requires an extreme assumption with no facts to support it. You aren't wrong since you're just making an assumption, but you're making an assumption that very few people would be comfortable making.
So obvious yet cannot explain why I am wrong. Why? Because you cannot back it up with any empirical evidence that I am wrong. In addition, there is no official scoring of infield vs. outfield singles. Again, no way to definitively express how many of each Rose and Ichiro had.
The argument that Ichiro was simply a weak singles hitter negates his stolen base acumen, Over 500 in his career effectively turned all of those "weak singles" into doubles, while also undoubtedly affecting the pitcher's concentration to batters while he was on base.
Your condescension is neither warranted nor wanted, and makes clear you are uninterested in a discussion and instead more interested in belittling anyone with an opposing viewpoint. I can take the hint - those you oppose are unwanted here.
Good luck.
I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary
Pete Rose = did it
Ichiro = maybe could have done it
Maybe does not mean much in life.
I did a bachelor's degree but but maybe I could have done a masters or a PHD....maybe. But when applying for a job I can't write I could have done it possibly (they don't care). It means NOTHING in life like I said. You can say maybe to almost everything in life but only the final results truly matter.
NHL Mario Lemieux could have maybe passed Wayne Gretzky if he stayed healthy long enough.....MAYBE!!! Reality is he did not pass him and never will. What is done is done.
Only if you misunderstand his argument. Ichiro can get credit for being a weak singles hitter and credit for being a great base stealer, and @1948_Swell_Robinson knows that, and does give him the proper credit for both. The argument for Ichiro being better than Rose (unless we pretend Japanese baseball means anything) requires that we give Ichiro credit for being a great hitter and a great base stealer. But he wasn't a great hitter, he was a weak singles hitter whose actual value is vastly overstated by his batting average. While Ichiro often got an extra base by stealing it, his teammates rarely got an extra base (first to third, second to home) because the balls Ichiro hit didn't go far enough.
This is going to be an unfair comparison right off the bat.
Rose had over 5,000 more plate appearances than Ichiro, and Ichiro "lost" 5 or so years playing on Japan. Pete played at least(?) 5 years too long chasing the hits record.
Ichiro hung on too long as well.
Let's look at how they performed in a 162 game period; Rose got more at bats, hits, doubles and walks.
Ichiro had a higher batting average and stole 31 bases a year (being thrown out 7).
They tied in triples and HR.
As hitters, they are about equal;
Rose had 10 seasons in the top 10 in BA.
Ichiro had 9.
Rose had 13 seasons, top 10 in hits.
Ichiro had 11.
Base Running is all Ichiro with 10 seasons in the top 5.
I couldn't find any years where Pete was in the top 10.
Defense is hard to compare here, but Pete played most of his career at First base and a lot in LF, I don't give him too much credit for that.
Ichiro played almost exclusively in RF a bit tougher than left and he had a great arm.
Hitting, slight edge to Rose.
Fielding, slight edge to Ichiro.
Baserunning not close. Ichiro
Throwing, not close. Ichiro
Hitting with power, slight edge to Rose.
It might have been a great debate had Ichiro come to the MLB 5 seasons earlier, but he didn't.
Had Pete retired 5 years sooner, he probably would look a lot better hitting wise, but he didn't.
Looking at their prime 10-12 years, I'll say they are pretty equal as hitters, giving Pete the edge, while Ichiro was better in the field and certainly on the base paths.
Exactly.
Dallas, would you say that the better question would be, who was better, Ichiro or Tony Phillips?
Those two are closer than Rose and Ichiro are...then Phillips would be better based on their rationale of having more rings, lol.
You aren't using the hitting metrics I'd use, but that's a quibble.
But fielding? Yes, what you're saying is correct, he did spend a lot of time at 1B, but certainly not "most" of his career - it was barely 1/4th and it was entirely as an old man. More importantly, he spent more of his career at 2B/3B than at 1B, and almost as much at 2B/3B as he spent in the outfield. My overall point being, Rose was a very good fielder, and a player that his manager could put almost anywhere and be comfortable that Rose would do just fine. I'll add that when Rose played LF he was excellent there; he was far too good to waste in LF but the Big Red Machine was so loaded with fielding talent that some good fielder was going to have to play LF, and it happened to be Rose.
Ichiro threw very well. There endeth his list of fielding advantages over Rose. I give Rose a comfortable nod over Ichiro as fielders.
I think Ichiro/Phillips = Rose/Ichiro, or pretty close anyway. All fine players with different skill sets, but I think Ichiro was better than Phillips by roughly the same order of magnitude that Rose was better than Ichiro.
All of the above is based on averages only; that Rose was able to maintain that average over so long a career creates a chasm between him and players like Ichiro and Phillips. So in that sense, yes, I do think Ichiro/Phillips is a more interesting comparison that Rose/Ichiro.
That is what got Tatis moved to the OF. He was moved for several reasons. They always wanted him in the OF but he was opposed to it until he got his big contract knowing he would have gotten paid more in arbitration and free agency as a SS. They also didnt have a better option at the start of his career. The whole were trying to keep him healthy thing is PR talk that isnt the talk that happens with the player. If it was all about health he would be DHing.
The plan is not to move him back to the infield unless Preller is even worse than even I think he possible is, but that has never had significant traction. If that was the plan he would be playing SS this year and they wouldnt have signed Bogi (who should be playing 1st with Kim at SS and Cron at 2nd) unless Bogi would play 1st. Manny and Bogi have a decade on their contracts, Cron has 7 more years, they dont need infielders they need outfielders and elite speed is wasted in the infield. Same reason the Dodgers moved Belli to CF, his speed was wasted as a 1st basemen and he is more valuable in the OF than the infield.
Wisconsin 2-6 against the SEC since 2007
Ichiro didn't "lose" 9 years in Japan. His first 2 years there, he was awful. He hit .188 the second year. No way he'd have been in the majors in either year - and likely not his third year after hitting .188. At the very least, he'd have spent a good chunk of year 3 in the minors. Minimum.
Ichiro was certainly MLB ready by the time he arrived.
I think the most we can "give" him is 5-7 years missed.
He didn't get here though. Too bad, it would have been interesting.
Rose by a good margin.
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
I will always have a soft spot for Pete Rose. He was the last piece to the puzzle when the Phillies won their first World Series ever in 1980. The franchise came to Philadelphia in 1883.
I will take Ichiro.
Erik
Rose.
The 1960's and 1970's baseball was much more physical. Players were injured on the bases more back then , then they are now. They have changed many of the rules because of the collisions and injuries.