@craig44 said:
There is only one real answer to this question. It has to be Barry Bonds. In fact, he was probably the correct answer last Thursday as well. Bonds did stuff at the plate only a couple of other guys could do. and both of those guys have been dead for decades.
People forget what a cultural phenomenon he was. They would break into programming when he was at bat. You would stop eating dinner and go watch him at the plate. There was just nothing else like it.
Like I said Koufax wouldn't be my choice, but you cannot argue that Koufax and Mattingly had the same career impact. There is no comparison, just on season awards alone 3 CY and 1 MVP over 4 years.
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
What’s odd is that we’re not saying anything all that different.
I said I was taking the word of Aaron and Morgan on Koufax. Why? Because I didn’t watch Koufax pitch but in videos.
And I said that I didn’t have Nolan Ryan in my top 10. I can think of a lot of better overall pitchers.
Marichal is underrated...and possibly Gibson who had an unbelievable year in 1968 (ERA = 1.12) and broke Koufax's record of 15 KKs in a WS game w/18 KKs against the Tigers in Game #1.
I think people reason that Koufax would have had more elite years if not for injury. He was great the last four years of his career, ending in his age 30 season. That disqualifies him from being the greatest, but he likely would have had a few more great years.
@craig44 said:
There is only one real answer to this question. It has to be Barry Bonds. In fact, he was probably the correct answer last Thursday as well. Bonds did stuff at the plate only a couple of other guys could do. and both of those guys have been dead for decades.
People forget what a cultural phenomenon he was. They would break into programming when he was at bat. You would stop eating dinner and go watch him at the plate. There was just nothing else like it.
They did the same thing with McGwire and Sosa about six seasons prior as they did with Bonds. With the amount of testosterone flowing through their veins, it was sort of like:
“…we’re cutting away from the game you’re watching to bring you this live coverage of a horse swinging a baseball bat. McGwire’s batting .268 with 46 HR, and this coming off a third place finish at the Belmont Stakes…”
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
What’s odd is that we’re not saying anything all that different.
I said I was taking the word of Aaron and Morgan on Koufax. Why? Because I didn’t watch Koufax pitch but in videos.
And I said that I didn’t have Nolan Ryan in my top 10. I can think of a lot of better overall pitchers.
Pretty benign opinion if I do say so.
My main point was that Koufax is being hugely over-rated here as an all time great. That's not really debatable.
Aaron and Morgan were commenting on how good Koufax was, not from 1955-1961 when he sucked, but 1963-1966 when he was dominant.
Sandy had a great 4 year run, no argument there, although he was injured for one of those years and not that great on the road.
What Koufax fans are ignoring are the 7 years of mediocrity.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
It's interesting that you used Marichal when Jim "Cakes" Palmer has nearly identical stats plus 3 Cy Young awards and 3 World Series rings. Marichal has 0.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
this. I think people get all wound up about the lore and majesty of Koufax. like the Beatles, he retired at his peak powers. there is always very strong nostalgia when that happens.
Koufax was GREAT for 3-4 seasons. thats it.
I will take Bob Gibson every single time. He had a higher peak and better career value.
I would also take Gibson over Koufax and I would also take Marichal over Koufax. Marichal's career was sneaky-impressive. He had 191 Wins in the 1960s alone. I thought that statistic was so impressive when I cracked a PSA 8 '61 Marichal to get signed a couple years ago that was the inscription I had added.
But, I also think Koufax was a great pitcher. Sure, it took him some time to figure it out, but from 1961 until he retired he was arguably the most dominant pitcher in MLB. What if his career wasn't cut short because of arthritis? Whether he's an all-time great because of a short career, or because of those many seasons of early struggles with command is debatable, but he did give us a string of 5 seasons of pitching mastery - which hasn't been matched. The closest I can think of would be Randy Johnson's 4 straight Cy Young seasons, and Pedro's string from the late 90s to the early 00s.
@bgr said:
I would also take Gibson over Koufax and I would also take Marichal over Koufax. Marichal's career was sneaky-impressive. He had 191 Wins in the 1960s alone. I thought that statistic was so impressive when I cracked a PSA 8 '61 Marichal to get signed a couple years ago that was the inscription I had added.
But, I also think Koufax was a great pitcher. Sure, it took him some time to figure it out, but from 1961 until he retired he was arguably the most dominant pitcher in MLB. What if his career wasn't cut short because of arthritis? Whether he's an all-time great because of a short career, or because of those many seasons of early struggles with command is debatable, but he did give us a string of 5 seasons of pitching mastery - which hasn't been matched. The closest I can think of would be Randy Johnson's 4 straight Cy Young seasons, and Pedro's string from the late 90s to the early 00s.
@bgr said:
I would also take Gibson over Koufax and I would also take Marichal over Koufax. Marichal's career was sneaky-impressive. He had 191 Wins in the 1960s alone. I thought that statistic was so impressive when I cracked a PSA 8 '61 Marichal to get signed a couple years ago that was the inscription I had added.
But, I also think Koufax was a great pitcher. Sure, it took him some time to figure it out, but from 1961 until he retired he was arguably the most dominant pitcher in MLB. What if his career wasn't cut short because of arthritis? Whether he's an all-time great because of a short career, or because of those many seasons of early struggles with command is debatable, but he did give us a string of 5 seasons of pitching mastery - which hasn't been matched. The closest I can think of would be Randy Johnson's 4 straight Cy Young seasons, and Pedro's string from the late 90s to the early 00s.
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
It's interesting that you used Marichal when Jim "Cakes" Palmer has nearly identical stats plus 3 Cy Young awards and 3 World Series rings. Marichal has 0.
Palmer was also better than Koufax, just didn't think of him.
Cy Young awards are nice, but I don't depend much on them. The voters get it wrong as often as they get it right.
Marichal was better than Koufax in 1965.
World Series wins are TOTALLY MEANINGLES when comparing players.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
I was more than a bit excited to see Reggie on TV last night, chatting with Joe Davis and Smoltzie in the booth at Rickwood Field. He mentioned during the discussion of "greatest player" how nice it is to even be included in the same way as Willie Mays. He seemed much more humble and eager to recall past experiences.
@bgr said:
I would also take Gibson over Koufax and I would also take Marichal over Koufax. Marichal's career was sneaky-impressive. He had 191 Wins in the 1960s alone. I thought that statistic was so impressive when I cracked a PSA 8 '61 Marichal to get signed a couple years ago that was the inscription I had added.
But, I also think Koufax was a great pitcher. Sure, it took him some time to figure it out, but from 1961 until he retired he was arguably the most dominant pitcher in MLB. What if his career wasn't cut short because of arthritis? Whether he's an all-time great because of a short career, or because of those many seasons of early struggles with command is debatable, but he did give us a string of 5 seasons of pitching mastery - which hasn't been matched. The closest I can think of would be Randy Johnson's 4 straight Cy Young seasons, and Pedro's string from the late 90s to the early 00s.
Not only did it take "some time" for him to figure it out, it took 7 years! After the 1961 season, his record was 54-53, ERA was 3.94 and WHIP was 1.368, NOT very good numbers.
1962 was not much better, even though he started to figure it out he made only 26 starts.
He was dominant from 1963-1966 (not 1961-66) and he was also hurt in 1964, missing about 25% of the season.
Looking at it realistically, he had only 3 dominant full years, was good in 2 others where he missed significant games and he pretty much sucked for the other 7 seasons.
This does NOT make a guy an all time great.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@mexpo75 said:
As much as I dislike the Braves and Cubs, Greg Maddox was pretty awesome AND won a ton of Gold Gloves.
A No-Hitter is called a No-No, but a complete game shutout with less than 100 pitches is a Maddux. When baseball coins a term for you, that's next level.
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
It's interesting that you used Marichal when Jim "Cakes" Palmer has nearly identical stats plus 3 Cy Young awards and 3 World Series rings. Marichal has 0.
Palmer was also better than Koufax, just didn't think of him.
Cy Young awards are nice, but I don't depend much on them. The voters get it wrong as often as they get it right.
Marichal was better than Koufax in 1965.
World Series wins are TOTALLY MEANINGLES when comparing players.
You never including the hardware is meaningless, you clearly didn't play much and didn't care about winning. Guys like Palmer, Rose, etc. they win no matter what, and it matters, and no guy sitting at home with a pencil can take that away, no matter how hard they try to ignore it.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
@bgr said:
I would disagree with Koufax being overrated.
I'm going to side with Hank Aaron and Joe Morgan on that one... When I listen to some of the greatest hitters in MLB history sit around and talk about how dominant Koufax I think that says everything.
I don't have Nolan Ryan in my top 10, but I think his greatness is being overlooked a bit. He played on some pretty mediocre teams for the majority of his career. He was in the midst of his worst year in MLB when his arm finally fell apart... and he just walked off the mound, back to his ranch, and off to Cooperstown. But the guy also had WHIP of like 1.05 for 3 of his last 5 years when he was 40+. His strikeout total is the product of accumulation... sure, but he also led the league in SO/9 half his career. There may never be another Nolan Ryan. Plus I put him up there with Gibson and Pedro as one of the most intimidating pitchers all time.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
It's interesting that you used Marichal when Jim "Cakes" Palmer has nearly identical stats plus 3 Cy Young awards and 3 World Series rings. Marichal has 0.
Palmer was also better than Koufax, just didn't think of him.
Cy Young awards are nice, but I don't depend much on them. The voters get it wrong as often as they get it right.
Marichal was better than Koufax in 1965.
World Series wins are TOTALLY MEANINGLES when comparing players.
You never including the hardware is meaningless, you clearly didn't play much and didn't care about winning. Guys like Palmer, Rose, etc. they win no matter what, and it matters, and no guy sitting at home with a pencil can take that away, no matter how hard they try to ignore it.
That's idiotic. Championships is the WORST way to compare players ability.
I guess Ted Williams just didn't want to win championships, along with Banks, Killebrew, Mattingly and a bunch of other guys.
Awards are subjective. It's obvious some guys get them that don't deserve them. I'll bet that Marichal didn't have a chance in 1965 after hitting Roseboro with his bat.
Marichal should have won in BOTH 1965 and 1969, but didn't.
In 1969, Marichal had a lower ERA and WHIP, more complete games and shutout and a better ERA+ and WAR than Seaver, yet Seaver not only won the "award", Marichal didn't even get a vote. Don't tell me awards mean anything. They are more of a popularity contest than a true measure of greatness.
On a side note, Koufax was the opposing pitcher in that 1965 game and refused to throw at Giants batters. Roseboro then took matters in his own hands and allegedly hit Marichal in the ear with the ball when throwing it back to Sandy. Then Juan clobbered Roseboro.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@countdouglas said:
Trouty over here like, "Why am I catching strays in this conversation?" Lol
.
Trouty dominates the disabled list like nobody in history.
Before his reign is over he will set records for most time spent not earning his salary that will never be broken.
He was a “bonus baby”; that means the Dodgers signed him at 19 and had to keep him on the MLB roster or lose him. There was no minor league assignment available: due to the nature of rookie “bonus baby” contracts at the time, sending him to the minors would mean any team could simply take him.
The Dodgers had just lost Roberto Clemente to the Pirates in this fashion and did not want it to happen yet again.
His rookie year he was trying to crack a rotation that would go on to win a World Series, basically earning every starter an additional season.
From 1955-1960 he pitched a total of 691 innings bouncing between bullpen and rotation. That about 115 innings of usage a year.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Back to Pujols.... I know the playoff format is different, but Pujols played in 88 post season games.
Someone was saying that championships don't matter..... I agree that there are benchwarmers that get championship rings that didn't contribute much. And there are starters that did not help much. But when you are the driving force that gets your team a championship ring, that matters dramatically.
Albert Pujols owns 2, got to another World Series, and almost got to a couple of more. He had THE single greatest offensive World Series Game in history. In game 3 of the 2011 World Series, he was 5 for 6 with 3 HR, 2 singles, 6 RBIs, and 14 total bases.
In the playoffs for his career, he played in 88 games, which is a tiny bit more than a half of a season. He had 19 HR, 38 extra base hits, batted .319, 54 RBIs, on base percentage was .422, slugged .572, with an OPS of .995. Those are MVP numbers for a regular season IN JUST THE PLAYOFFS when it is crunch time.
Back to regular season stats.... if he had a full covid year he passes Babe Ruth home runs for third all time. His time with the Angels was marred with bad knees that never gets talked about. His first 10 years with the Cardinals are literally unmatched offensively in the history of baseball. His second half of 2022, he was the MVP of the National League (don't believe me, look at the numbers) at the age of 42. He just got off to a terrible start. He tweaked one thing with his swing at the All Star break, and BAM!
As great as Albert Pujols is I truly feel like he is underrated as a living legend.
@frankhardy said:
Back to Pujols.... I know the playoff format is different, but Pujols played in 88 post season games.
Someone was saying that championships don't matter..... I agree that there are benchwarmers that get championship rings that didn't contribute much. And there are starters that did not help much. But when you are the driving force that gets your team a championship ring, that matters dramatically.
>
>
For comparing or evaluating players, team sport championships are simply a very poor way to determine greatness. My main objection is guys who were some of the all time greats (Williams, Cobb, Griffey, Gwynn, Bonds, Frank Thomas etc.) never won a championship because their teammates weren't good enough. Even Mickey Mantle in his book "All my Octobers" says he feels he never dominated in a WS to lead his team to victory, and he has a good point, he played his best mostly in series' the Yankees lost.
>
>
>
Albert Pujols owns 2, got to another World Series, and almost got to a couple of more. He had THE single greatest offensive World Series Game in history. In game 3 of the 2011 World Series, he was 5 for 6 with 3 HR, 2 singles, 6 RBIs, and 14 total bases.
In the playoffs for his career, he played in 88 games, which is a tiny bit more than a half of a season. He had 19 HR, 38 extra base hits, batted .319, 54 RBIs, on base percentage was .422, slugged .572, with an OPS of .995. Those are MVP numbers for a regular season IN JUST THE PLAYOFFS when it is crunch time.
Back to regular season stats.... if he had a full covid year he passes Babe Ruth home runs for third all time. His time with the Angels was marred with bad knees that never gets talked about. His first 10 years with the Cardinals are literally unmatched offensively in the history of baseball. His second half of 2022, he was the MVP of the National League (don't believe me, look at the numbers) at the age of 42. He just got off to a terrible start. He tweaked one thing with his swing at the All Star break, and BAM!
As great as Albert Pujols is I truly feel like he is underrated as a living legend.
>
>
>
Totally agree on Pujols. For some reason, people have forgotten about him. Maybe it's because he had seven years with an OPS+ below 100?
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
I think his contract made his performance look worse than it was. But it was really two different careers. If he wouldn’t have had such a decline with the Halos he would have more all time records than just GIDP. Like RBIs.
I’m curious where everyone ranks his career. I’m not sure he would crack my top 25 but he’s top 50. That he won 2 GGs is a mystery to me because his defense was barely average.
@bgr said:
I think his contract made his performance look worse than it was. But it was really two different careers. If he wouldn’t have had such a decline with the Halos he would have more all time records than just GIDP. Like RBIs.
I’m curious where everyone ranks his career. I’m not sure he would crack my top 25 but he’s top 50. That he won 2 GGs is a mystery to me because his defense was barely average.
I respectfully disagree. I watched 99% of every game Albert Pujols played for the Cardinals. Once he got to first base his defense was stellar. He was very good defensively. Those two gold gloves were no joke.
And his decline with the angels you have to keep in mind that he had bad knees in a lot of those years.
Well someone has to win. I’m referring to his career. Statistically he’s below average so maybe I was being generous. He more than made up for hit offensively.
Greg Maddux, Steve Carlton, and Randy Johnson are definitely worthy of mention. Bench is considered the greatest catcher of all time. Schmidt is regarded as the greatest 3rd baseman ever so he too gets a mention. Rickey Henderson is the all-time steals leader and considered the greatest leadoff man ever. Miggy was the first to win the Triple Crown and the only one since Yaz. His 500 home runs, 1800+ RBIs, and a .306 lifetime average are not too shabby. Griffey Jr can also be mention here as his lifetime stats and achievements are on par with the others mentioned.
I think it boils down to how much more value you put on a Centerfielder over a Firstbaseman.
Pujols really has a big hitting advantage with 12 years having more than 300 Total Bases to Griffeys 6.
Pujols has 16 years above 125 in OPS+ to Griffeys 11.
Pujols had 17 seasons where he played 140 or more games to Griffeys 11.
Pujols top 6 OPS+ years were all better Han Griffeys best year.
Pujols gave you an average 20 more games per year played.
Pujols had 6 lousy years to Griffeys 3.
I think Griffey being the better/more valuable all around player gives him an edge, but Pujols was much better offensively at his peak, it makes it close for me.
He hasn't been mentioned much on this thread, but ARod might have been the best of all time had he played clean.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
It’s too bad he couldn’t stay on the field. He might have actually had a shot at opening the “800 club”.
Unfortunately for him he was pretty unlikeable. All that nonsense with the mad scientist Bosch probably hurt his career. But he admitted using banned substances (not banned when he started using them but illegal without a prescription) for 10 years before the whole biogenesis thing.
He’s done well after baseball rehabilitate his image. But perhaps not among many baseball fans.
Some of the names being thrown out make no sense to me. Koufax? League average outside of Dodger Stadium and just 2300 innings. Pete Rose? No power AND just a .303 average. Gimme Wade Boggs if we're taking somebody with no power. Nolan Ryan? What were his GREAT seasons? 1972 and the shortened 1981? He had an ERA of 2.75 or lower TWICE.
@Tabe said:
Some of the names being thrown out make no sense to me. Koufax? League average outside of Dodger Stadium and just 2300 innings. Pete Rose? No power AND just a .303 average. Gimme Wade Boggs if we're taking somebody with no power. Nolan Ryan? What were his GREAT seasons? 1972 and the shortened 1981? He had an ERA of 2.75 or lower TWICE.
C'mon.
It's great that people have favorite players, but if he was still alive I would NOT be nominating Harmon Killebrew, even though he was better than some mentioned here.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Comments
Trouty over here like, "Why am I catching strays in this conversation?" Lol
.
People forget what a cultural phenomenon he was. They would break into programming when he was at bat. You would stop eating dinner and go watch him at the plate. There was just nothing else like it.
I'm pretty sure the cream and the clear is actually milk and water.
Bobby Orr
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Koufax
chaz
Like I said Koufax wouldn't be my choice, but you cannot argue that Koufax and Mattingly had the same career impact. There is no comparison, just on season awards alone 3 CY and 1 MVP over 4 years.
>
>
>
You don't have to agree with any facts you don't like.
Koufax had 3 great years (although he was just average away from Dodger Stadium during those seasons) and 1 fantastic year. He also had 6 years where he was either not used or ineffective. He had one other year where he was pretty good.
These are facts. You can choose to ignore them because he had a great year in 1966 and he struck out a lot of guys.
Your other guy, Nolan Ryan was very good from time to time, but if you look at ERA+, he had about 4 superb years. He struck out a lot of guys, but he walked a lot of guys too. At least Ryan had a long career.
Marichal was far superior as was Gibson and Seaver who all had at least 9 great seasons. Some of the newer group of pitchers were far superior to Koufax as well. Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and Kershaw were all better.
4-5 years, no matter good are not enough to be considered an all time great.
^^^^ this
What’s odd is that we’re not saying anything all that different.
I said I was taking the word of Aaron and Morgan on Koufax. Why? Because I didn’t watch Koufax pitch but in videos.
And I said that I didn’t have Nolan Ryan in my top 10. I can think of a lot of better overall pitchers.
Pretty benign opinion if I do say so.
Marichal is underrated...and possibly Gibson who had an unbelievable year in 1968 (ERA = 1.12) and broke Koufax's record of 15 KKs in a WS game w/18 KKs against the Tigers in Game #1.
It's still Bonds. He was better than Mays.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
I think people reason that Koufax would have had more elite years if not for injury. He was great the last four years of his career, ending in his age 30 season. That disqualifies him from being the greatest, but he likely would have had a few more great years.
They did the same thing with McGwire and Sosa about six seasons prior as they did with Bonds. With the amount of testosterone flowing through their veins, it was sort of like:
“…we’re cutting away from the game you’re watching to bring you this live coverage of a horse swinging a baseball bat. McGwire’s batting .268 with 46 HR, and this coming off a third place finish at the Belmont Stakes…”
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
My main point was that Koufax is being hugely over-rated here as an all time great. That's not really debatable.
Aaron and Morgan were commenting on how good Koufax was, not from 1955-1961 when he sucked, but 1963-1966 when he was dominant.
Sandy had a great 4 year run, no argument there, although he was injured for one of those years and not that great on the road.
What Koufax fans are ignoring are the 7 years of mediocrity.
It's interesting that you used Marichal when Jim "Cakes" Palmer has nearly identical stats plus 3 Cy Young awards and 3 World Series rings. Marichal has 0.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
this. I think people get all wound up about the lore and majesty of Koufax. like the Beatles, he retired at his peak powers. there is always very strong nostalgia when that happens.
Koufax was GREAT for 3-4 seasons. thats it.
I will take Bob Gibson every single time. He had a higher peak and better career value.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
like joe said, people also forget how much dodger stadium helped Koufax. the splits are pretty telling
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I would also take Gibson over Koufax and I would also take Marichal over Koufax. Marichal's career was sneaky-impressive. He had 191 Wins in the 1960s alone. I thought that statistic was so impressive when I cracked a PSA 8 '61 Marichal to get signed a couple years ago that was the inscription I had added.
But, I also think Koufax was a great pitcher. Sure, it took him some time to figure it out, but from 1961 until he retired he was arguably the most dominant pitcher in MLB. What if his career wasn't cut short because of arthritis? Whether he's an all-time great because of a short career, or because of those many seasons of early struggles with command is debatable, but he did give us a string of 5 seasons of pitching mastery - which hasn't been matched. The closest I can think of would be Randy Johnson's 4 straight Cy Young seasons, and Pedro's string from the late 90s to the early 00s.
Greg Maddux's also 4 straight cy's
fair point. I neglected the professor. thanks!
Palmer was also better than Koufax, just didn't think of him.
Cy Young awards are nice, but I don't depend much on them. The voters get it wrong as often as they get it right.
Marichal was better than Koufax in 1965.
World Series wins are TOTALLY MEANINGLES when comparing players.
I was more than a bit excited to see Reggie on TV last night, chatting with Joe Davis and Smoltzie in the booth at Rickwood Field. He mentioned during the discussion of "greatest player" how nice it is to even be included in the same way as Willie Mays. He seemed much more humble and eager to recall past experiences.
Gobble.
Shohei Ohtani
The full time DH
Folks its called a joke, then again for at least 2024 it is 100% true
Not only did it take "some time" for him to figure it out, it took 7 years! After the 1961 season, his record was 54-53, ERA was 3.94 and WHIP was 1.368, NOT very good numbers.
1962 was not much better, even though he started to figure it out he made only 26 starts.
He was dominant from 1963-1966 (not 1961-66) and he was also hurt in 1964, missing about 25% of the season.
Looking at it realistically, he had only 3 dominant full years, was good in 2 others where he missed significant games and he pretty much sucked for the other 7 seasons.
This does NOT make a guy an all time great.
As much as I dislike the Braves and Cubs, Greg Maddox was pretty awesome AND won a ton of Gold Gloves.
Groo, I would say you are the all-time greatest swordsman. Any fool can plainly see that. 😄
A No-Hitter is called a No-No, but a complete game shutout with less than 100 pitches is a Maddux. When baseball coins a term for you, that's next level.
Gobble.
I've been called a medicant many times
You never including the hardware is meaningless, you clearly didn't play much and didn't care about winning. Guys like Palmer, Rose, etc. they win no matter what, and it matters, and no guy sitting at home with a pencil can take that away, no matter how hard they try to ignore it.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
That's idiotic. Championships is the WORST way to compare players ability.
I guess Ted Williams just didn't want to win championships, along with Banks, Killebrew, Mattingly and a bunch of other guys.
Awards are subjective. It's obvious some guys get them that don't deserve them. I'll bet that Marichal didn't have a chance in 1965 after hitting Roseboro with his bat.
Marichal should have won in BOTH 1965 and 1969, but didn't.
In 1969, Marichal had a lower ERA and WHIP, more complete games and shutout and a better ERA+ and WAR than Seaver, yet Seaver not only won the "award", Marichal didn't even get a vote. Don't tell me awards mean anything. They are more of a popularity contest than a true measure of greatness.
On a side note, Koufax was the opposing pitcher in that 1965 game and refused to throw at Giants batters. Roseboro then took matters in his own hands and allegedly hit Marichal in the ear with the ball when throwing it back to Sandy. Then Juan clobbered Roseboro.
Ty Cobb's legacy ... which is alive and well.
Never won a championship and only 1 MVP, I guess he wasnt that good and didn't put out much of an effort.
Trouty dominates the disabled list like nobody in history.
Before his reign is over he will set records for most time spent not earning his salary that will never be broken.
I believe postseason stats are meaningless to Twins fans because they don’t have any postseasons.
😀
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Koufax Context
Koufax was signed out of high school.
He was a “bonus baby”; that means the Dodgers signed him at 19 and had to keep him on the MLB roster or lose him. There was no minor league assignment available: due to the nature of rookie “bonus baby” contracts at the time, sending him to the minors would mean any team could simply take him.
The Dodgers had just lost Roberto Clemente to the Pirates in this fashion and did not want it to happen yet again.
His rookie year he was trying to crack a rotation that would go on to win a World Series, basically earning every starter an additional season.
From 1955-1960 he pitched a total of 691 innings bouncing between bullpen and rotation. That about 115 innings of usage a year.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Back to Pujols.... I know the playoff format is different, but Pujols played in 88 post season games.
Someone was saying that championships don't matter..... I agree that there are benchwarmers that get championship rings that didn't contribute much. And there are starters that did not help much. But when you are the driving force that gets your team a championship ring, that matters dramatically.
Albert Pujols owns 2, got to another World Series, and almost got to a couple of more. He had THE single greatest offensive World Series Game in history. In game 3 of the 2011 World Series, he was 5 for 6 with 3 HR, 2 singles, 6 RBIs, and 14 total bases.
In the playoffs for his career, he played in 88 games, which is a tiny bit more than a half of a season. He had 19 HR, 38 extra base hits, batted .319, 54 RBIs, on base percentage was .422, slugged .572, with an OPS of .995. Those are MVP numbers for a regular season IN JUST THE PLAYOFFS when it is crunch time.
Back to regular season stats.... if he had a full covid year he passes Babe Ruth home runs for third all time. His time with the Angels was marred with bad knees that never gets talked about. His first 10 years with the Cardinals are literally unmatched offensively in the history of baseball. His second half of 2022, he was the MVP of the National League (don't believe me, look at the numbers) at the age of 42. He just got off to a terrible start. He tweaked one thing with his swing at the All Star break, and BAM!
As great as Albert Pujols is I truly feel like he is underrated as a living legend.
Shane
>
>
For comparing or evaluating players, team sport championships are simply a very poor way to determine greatness. My main objection is guys who were some of the all time greats (Williams, Cobb, Griffey, Gwynn, Bonds, Frank Thomas etc.) never won a championship because their teammates weren't good enough. Even Mickey Mantle in his book "All my Octobers" says he feels he never dominated in a WS to lead his team to victory, and he has a good point, he played his best mostly in series' the Yankees lost.
>
>
>
>
>
>
Totally agree on Pujols. For some reason, people have forgotten about him. Maybe it's because he had seven years with an OPS+ below 100?
I think his contract made his performance look worse than it was. But it was really two different careers. If he wouldn’t have had such a decline with the Halos he would have more all time records than just GIDP. Like RBIs.
I’m curious where everyone ranks his career. I’m not sure he would crack my top 25 but he’s top 50. That he won 2 GGs is a mystery to me because his defense was barely average.
I respectfully disagree. I watched 99% of every game Albert Pujols played for the Cardinals. Once he got to first base his defense was stellar. He was very good defensively. Those two gold gloves were no joke.
And his decline with the angels you have to keep in mind that he had bad knees in a lot of those years.
Shane
Well someone has to win. I’m referring to his career. Statistically he’s below average so maybe I was being generous. He more than made up for hit offensively.
I'll exclude the PED players as we'll never really know just how great they would be without "help".
Pujols has to be the one. 3400 hits 700 home runs and a lifetime .296 hitter puts him on the level of any other previous great.
Ichiro is a sleeper here as the all-time baseball hits leader.
.322 BA
4369 Hits
573 2B
119 3B
235 HR
1309 RBI
708 SB
Greg Maddux, Steve Carlton, and Randy Johnson are definitely worthy of mention. Bench is considered the greatest catcher of all time. Schmidt is regarded as the greatest 3rd baseman ever so he too gets a mention. Rickey Henderson is the all-time steals leader and considered the greatest leadoff man ever. Miggy was the first to win the Triple Crown and the only one since Yaz. His 500 home runs, 1800+ RBIs, and a .306 lifetime average are not too shabby. Griffey Jr can also be mention here as his lifetime stats and achievements are on par with the others mentioned.
I think it boils down to how much more value you put on a Centerfielder over a Firstbaseman.
Pujols really has a big hitting advantage with 12 years having more than 300 Total Bases to Griffeys 6.
Pujols has 16 years above 125 in OPS+ to Griffeys 11.
Pujols had 17 seasons where he played 140 or more games to Griffeys 11.
Pujols top 6 OPS+ years were all better Han Griffeys best year.
Pujols gave you an average 20 more games per year played.
Pujols had 6 lousy years to Griffeys 3.
I think Griffey being the better/more valuable all around player gives him an edge, but Pujols was much better offensively at his peak, it makes it close for me.
He hasn't been mentioned much on this thread, but ARod might have been the best of all time had he played clean.
It’s too bad he couldn’t stay on the field. He might have actually had a shot at opening the “800 club”.
Unfortunately for him he was pretty unlikeable. All that nonsense with the mad scientist Bosch probably hurt his career. But he admitted using banned substances (not banned when he started using them but illegal without a prescription) for 10 years before the whole biogenesis thing.
He’s done well after baseball rehabilitate his image. But perhaps not among many baseball fans.
Barry Bonds
Pete Rose
Some of the names being thrown out make no sense to me. Koufax? League average outside of Dodger Stadium and just 2300 innings. Pete Rose? No power AND just a .303 average. Gimme Wade Boggs if we're taking somebody with no power. Nolan Ryan? What were his GREAT seasons? 1972 and the shortened 1981? He had an ERA of 2.75 or lower TWICE.
C'mon.
It's great that people have favorite players, but if he was still alive I would NOT be nominating Harmon Killebrew, even though he was better than some mentioned here.
So Pujols and Henderson never used steroids?
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21