Brooks Robinson or Mike Lowell

edmundfitzgerald

Mike Lowell has played over 1000 games. Brooks Robinson played over 2000 games.
Mike Lowell has a .975 lifetime fielding percentage. Brooks Robinson had a .971 lifetime fielding percentage.

I know it's sacreligious to say that anybody was ever a better defensive 3rd baseman then Brooks, but
Mike certainly deserves to get some honorable mention.

RipublicaninMass

I have a man crush on Mike Lowell, I think he is great in the club house as a "veteran" as well as on the field

yankeeno7

Lowell has always been an exceptional fielder. He has certainly fit in well in Boston. Im sure he pays lots of homage to the green monster too.

WinPitcher

You are kidding us right?





Steve

calaban7

<< <i>Mike Lowell has played over 1000 games. Brooks Robinson played over 2000 games.
Mike Lowell has a .975 lifetime fielding percentage. Brooks Robinson had a .971 lifetime fielding percentage.

Mike Lowell as of 2007 had 976 putouts and 2290 assists in 10,780 innings of 3rd base play. Brooks had 2,697 putouts and 6205 in 24,993-2/3 innings at 3rd.

If Brooks had played in the same amount of innings that Mike had played , he would have made 187 more putouts and would have made 386 more assists in the same amount of time. That equates to 573 more baserunners put on base, not helping the picture.

I always here this crap about how great Steve Garvey was as a 1st baseman.He was at or near the bottom of assists for almost every season he ever played at 1st, unlike Bill Buckner , who was one of the greatest fielding in major league history, except for that "1" play. Garvey would hold onto the ball, and let the runner reach first, instead of makeing his normal bad throws.

Mike Lowell has a nice fielding percentage, but his lifetime numbers at least in the assist area , are slightly below average, when compared to the average 3rdbaseman. I would be willing to guess , he like Garvey held onto the ball and let the runner on base, instead of making a bad throw.

I know it's sacreligious to say that anybody was ever a better defensive 3rd baseman then Brooks, but
Mike certainly deserves to get some honorable mention. >>



I'm from Baltimore , and have always felt that Brooks and Cal were terrible overrated as position players. Brroks made some incredible plays , that helped formed his well deserved legend. But when you compare Ossie's numbers to Cal's numbers , Cal the great , simply wasn't.

If you compare Mike Schmidt's numbers to anyother 3rdbaseman, as a fielder or as a batter, NO ONE COMPARES or even comes close, not even the great Brooks.

At times we may have great passion for the players we admire, but the numbers tell a better story. We can ignore reality , but reality will never ognore us.

dallasactuary

<< <i>I always here this crap about how great Steve Garvey was as a 1st baseman.He was at or near the bottom of assists for almost every season he ever played at 1st, unlike Bill Buckner , who was one of the greatest fielding in major league history, except for that "1" play. Garvey would hold onto the ball, and let the runner reach first, instead of makeing his normal bad throws. >>




I know you were just kidding, but have a little mercy; reading those words caused me actual physical pain.

otwcards

Great gloves at 3B in order of ear played:

Clete Boyer (made EVERY play and may have been the best defensive 3B ever!)
Brooks Robinson (great fielder, but his best work was on the big stage -- overrated, but still one of the best)
Aurilio Rodriguez (played in the shadow of the Brooks era, but in my eye, was a better defensive 3B)
Graig Nettles (reliable and there wasn't a play he couldn't make)
Mike Schmidt (his homeruns overshadowed his great fielding)
Scott Rolen (great range and never gets the props he deserves -- may be better than Lowell)

dallasactuary

Robinson is a perfect example of what's wrong with the Gold Glove awards. Once a player wins two, and the first two are usually deserved, then unless he gets hurt, retires or completely falls apart he will usually just keep winning them. Robinson won a gazillion Gold Gloves in a row and he probably deserved half of them - which means he was great. But Clete Boyer was every bit as good, and maybe even better, and he had to get traded to the NL late in his career to finally win one for himself. Rodriguez probably deserved several of Robinson's Gold Gloves, but he had to wait until Robinson stopped playing regularly before he finally got one. Where MVP voters show their laziness by voting for the RBI champ, Gold Glove voters show theirs by voting for last year's winner.

Players with multiple Gold Gloves are almost certainly better than players with none, but one should be careful drawing any conclusions beyond that, especially when the Gold Glove winner is also a good hitter.


And an interesting thought about calaban7's joke about Buckner occurred to me. In general, an assist is a good thing and in general a player with more of a good thing is better than a player with less of a good thing. But when we're talking specifically about assists by first basemen, it is generally the case that the better the first baseman the fewer assists he will have (if you think about it, the reasons are fairly obvious). I can't think of any other stat like that.

1420sports

I had dinner with Brooks Robinson a few years back. He said that Clete Boyer was the best fielder he has ever seen.

markj111

I always here this crap about how great Steve Garvey was as a 1st baseman.He was at or near the bottom of assists for almost every season he ever played at 1st, unlike Bill Buckner , who was one of the greatest fielding in major league history, except for that "1" play. Garvey would hold onto the ball, and let the runner reach first, instead of makeing his normal bad throws.


In his younger days perhaps. Later in his career he was routinely removed for a defensive replacement in later innings. McNamara received much criticism for not doing it in game 6. Buckner had impressive looking assist totals because his knees were so bad he would throw to the pitcher rather than making the play him self.

ziggy29

<< <i>I always here this crap about how great Steve Garvey was as a 1st baseman.He was at or near the bottom of assists for almost every season he ever played at 1st, unlike Bill Buckner , who was one of the greatest fielding in major league history, except for that "1" play. Garvey would hold onto the ball, and let the runner reach first, instead of makeing his normal bad throws. >>

Too many people use fielding percentage (and lack of error-making) as a defensive holy grail, when there's so much more to defense than merely not making errors.

You could put a statue out there with no range, a guy who can't field anything unless it's hit directly at him. I don't care if this statue *never* made an error; he's still a bad defensive player. Sure handed as all get-out, but a bad defensive player overall.

The true measure of a defensive player is the number of batted balls he turns into outs, not just the rate at which he makes errors.

WinPitcher

Oh I dunno I wouldn't say he is over rated. I also wouldn't say he was the best hitting 3rd basemen either.

I would put him in the top 5 of fielding 3rd basemen though.


Guy never played an inning in the minor leagues, and came right out of high school.


A very deserving Hall of Famer...........IMO


Steve