How is giving Nolan Ryans' strikeout total proof that Rickey Henderson is the best leadoff hitter
of all time? I think you've wandered pretty far off script with that one. Rickey probably is the
best leadoff of all time, not sure where Cobb batted in the order but if it was leadoff he is at least
comparable to Henderson.
But Ryan isn't close to being the best power pitcher of all time. Yes, he has the most strikeouts.
Also I believe the most walks. But no Cy Young awards? Shouldn't the greatest of all time
have maybe 5 of those, like Randy Johnson. Or a couple MVP's like Walter Johnson?
Lefty Grove, Tom Seaver, Bob Gibson. All much better than Ryan.
If Ryan was such a great pitcher why was he never recognized with a Cy Young award.
@grote15 said:
Henderson is hands down the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history and a slam dunk HOFer. It's not even debatable. And Rickey agrees.
where does Wade Boggs rank ?
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
The Clockwork Angel Collection...brought to you by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Chase TheClockworkAngelCollection
@Darin said:
How is giving Nolan Ryans' strikeout total proof that Rickey Henderson is the best leadoff hitter
of all time? I think you've wandered pretty far off script with that one. Rickey probably is the
best leadoff of all time, not sure where Cobb batted in the order but if it was leadoff he is at least
comparable to Henderson.
But Ryan isn't close to being the best power pitcher of all time. Yes, he has the most strikeouts.
Also I believe the most walks. But no Cy Young awards? Shouldn't the greatest of all time
have maybe 5 of those, like Randy Johnson. Or a couple MVP's like Walter Johnson?
Lefty Grove, Tom Seaver, Bob Gibson. All much better than Ryan.
If Ryan was such a great pitcher why was he never recognized with a Cy Young award.
I agree. Nolan Ryan’s overall stats are good but I feel he’s overrated. Everyone really jumped on the Ryan bandwagon after he beat the crap out of Robin Ventura and threw those no hitters in his 40’s, but strikeouts and no hitters can’t compare to wins, ERA, and Cy Young awards
The Clockwork Angel Collection...brought to you by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Chase TheClockworkAngelCollection
there is ALWAYS room for debate
not sure why doors always have to be closed so soon on topics
knowing what we know now
if you were to pick a team, and needed a lead off hitter for 10 years
and you could pick either Boggs or Henderson
you can tell me its an open and shut case for Henderson ?
I'm not sure where Lou brock or Ty Cobb (mentioned before)
or many many others batted 1st
but there is plenty of room for debate
Tells you what a press machine Rickey was for himself
he was an over achiever, who was given Gods talent of speed
not a great hitter, and just hung around way too long
@grote15 said:
Henderson is hands down the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history and a slam dunk HOFer. It's not even debatable. And Rickey agrees.
where does Wade Boggs rank ?
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
Yes, I think Boston liked him for a few good reasons
because he was simply a monster hitter
who by the way struck out less than Henderson
Boggs found first base far more often
I never really cared for Boggs before
I was a Mattingly fan
but years pass, views change
I was a huge Gretzky fan
and I too thought it was an open and shut on who was the greatest
not so much anymore
today, I'd probably go with Lemieux or Bossy with my 1st pick
Boggs was very comparable to Rickey when he led off. The two most important offensive things a player can do are getting on base and scoring runs. Boggs did that just as well as Rickey during his peak. I don't know why people even bring up batting average any more. The more important measures are ob % and hitting the ball hard. Boggs got on base at a higher rate than Rickey during the 80's, and while his hr totals aren't as big, his doubles totals dwarf Rickey. In the 80's, I would take Boggs all day at leadoff. That doesn't even figure in the positional advantage boggs had playing third. As far as steals, the only stat I can think of that is more overrated would be saves. Stealing bases is super overrated. The out created by every caught stealing so far outweighs each stolen base that unless you are stealing at over an 80% clip, they add no value and actually hurt the team. There are plenty of articles about this so you don't have to take my word for it. Rickey created 335 unnecessary outs via caught stealing in his career. That is the all time lead and really hurt his teams. He ran his clubs out of many rallies by creating unnecessary outs.
Having Said all that, Henderson was a much better player than Whittaker.
@grote15 said:
Henderson is hands down the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history and a slam dunk HOFer. It's not even debatable. And Rickey agrees.
where does Wade Boggs rank ?
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
Yes, I think Boston liked him for a few good reasons
because he was simply a monster hitter
who by the way struck out less than Henderson
Boggs found first base far more often
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Having Said all that, Henderson was a much better player than Whittaker.
That was thrown out half heartedly
Previously in the thread someone mentioned that Whittaker was better or on par w Henderson. I just quickly addressed that because it seems so obvious as to not need statistical analysis
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
are these numbers adjusted to show the 335 times he threw himself out ?
essentially negating 335 hits or walks ?
I realize he got those hits and walks
but the major aspect of this discussion
was on the basis of him stealing bases
MANY times he did NOT
Lou Brock was an overall player in MY opinion
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
are these numbers adjusted to show the 335 times he threw himself out ?
essentially negating 335 hits or walks ?
I realize he got those hits and walks
but the major aspect of this discussion
was on the basis of him stealing bases
MANY times he did NOT
Lou Brock was an overall player in MY opinion
Yes, the beauty of advanced statistics is that they take all game occurrences in calculation to provide a truly objective evaluation of a player's worth.
Brock was nowhere near as good as Henderson.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@grote15 said:
Henderson is hands down the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history and a slam dunk HOFer. It's not even debatable. And Rickey agrees.
where does Wade Boggs rank ?
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
Yes, I think Boston liked him for a few good reasons
because he was simply a monster hitter
who by the way struck out less than Henderson
Boggs found first base far more often
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
When analyzing peak performance for both players, which I think is more telling of ability than looking at lesser years when a player is in their late 30's/40's, I think boggs comes out ahead. Perhaps a fair amount ahead of Rickey. I took the decade of the 80's to compare the two as that was when they were both at their peak. I even added Rickeys mvp 1990 season. Boggs was on base at a significantly higher rate, slugged higher, had higher ops+, higher ops, and created more WAR per season than Rickey. Rickey also ran into 178 more outs through CS than Boggs which is huge. Boggs did this while playing a more demanding defensive position.
As far as career WAR, Henderson had almost 3000 more plate appearances to accumulate those extra 19 war.
For starters, Brock's career OBP% is 60 points lower than Henderson's.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@grote15 said:
Henderson is hands down the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history and a slam dunk HOFer. It's not even debatable. And Rickey agrees.
where does Wade Boggs rank ?
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
Yes, I think Boston liked him for a few good reasons
because he was simply a monster hitter
who by the way struck out less than Henderson
Boggs found first base far more often
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
When analyzing peak performance for both players, which I think is more telling of ability than looking at lesser years when a player is in their late 30's/40's, I think boggs comes out ahead. Perhaps a fair amount ahead of Rickey. I took the decade of the 80's to compare the two as that was when they were both at their peak. I even added Rickeys mvp 1990 season. Boggs was on base at a significantly higher rate, slugged higher, had higher ops+, higher ops, and created more WAR per season than Rickey. Rickey also ran into 178 more outs through CS than Boggs which is huge. Boggs did this while playing a more demanding defensive position.
As far as career WAR, Henderson had almost 3000 more plate appearances to accumulate those extra 19 war.
Henderson's career OPS+ is only 4 points lower than Boggs. And that's factoring in those years BGS stated he hung on too long.
I'm not necessarily saying Henderson was better than Boggs, but I don't consider Boggs a leadoff hitter when only about 1/3 of his games were played batting leadoff.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
As far as peaks go, both players' best season OPS+ totals exceeded 150 five times. Henderson's two best OPS+ totals were better than Boggs' best.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@grote15 said:
Henderson is hands down the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history and a slam dunk HOFer. It's not even debatable. And Rickey agrees.
where does Wade Boggs rank ?
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
Yes, I think Boston liked him for a few good reasons
because he was simply a monster hitter
who by the way struck out less than Henderson
Boggs found first base far more often
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
When analyzing peak performance for both players, which I think is more telling of ability than looking at lesser years when a player is in their late 30's/40's, I think boggs comes out ahead. Perhaps a fair amount ahead of Rickey. I took the decade of the 80's to compare the two as that was when they were both at their peak. I even added Rickeys mvp 1990 season. Boggs was on base at a significantly higher rate, slugged higher, had higher ops+, higher ops, and created more WAR per season than Rickey. Rickey also ran into 178 more outs through CS than Boggs which is huge. Boggs did this while playing a more demanding defensive position.
As far as career WAR, Henderson had almost 3000 more plate appearances to accumulate those extra 19 war.
Henderson's career OPS+ is only 4 points lower than Boggs. And that's factoring in those years BGS stated he hung on too long.
I'm not necessarily saying Henderson was better than Boggs, but I don't consider Boggs a leadoff hitter when only about 1/3 of his games were played batting leadoff.
That is why I used only the years when boggs was primarily a leadoff hitter in my analysis. It just happens that rickeys prime coincided with boggs. When those years are analyzed, boggs is a clear winner. And he played a more valuable defensive position. I am not super concerned with how they played at age 40 when they were shells of themselves.
Also, Rickey's CS are dwarfed by his successful stolen bases. I'd rather have a player who can steal a base successfully 80% of the time while amassing over 1400 career stolen bases vs a player like Boggs who stole 24 bases in his career and was thrown out on 60% of his tries. No question about it.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@grote15 said:
Henderson is hands down the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history and a slam dunk HOFer. It's not even debatable. And Rickey agrees.
where does Wade Boggs rank ?
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
Yes, I think Boston liked him for a few good reasons
because he was simply a monster hitter
who by the way struck out less than Henderson
Boggs found first base far more often
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
When analyzing peak performance for both players, which I think is more telling of ability than looking at lesser years when a player is in their late 30's/40's, I think boggs comes out ahead. Perhaps a fair amount ahead of Rickey. I took the decade of the 80's to compare the two as that was when they were both at their peak. I even added Rickeys mvp 1990 season. Boggs was on base at a significantly higher rate, slugged higher, had higher ops+, higher ops, and created more WAR per season than Rickey. Rickey also ran into 178 more outs through CS than Boggs which is huge. Boggs did this while playing a more demanding defensive position.
As far as career WAR, Henderson had almost 3000 more plate appearances to accumulate those extra 19 war.
Henderson's career OPS+ is only 4 points lower than Boggs. And that's factoring in those years BGS stated he hung on too long.
I'm not necessarily saying Henderson was better than Boggs, but I don't consider Boggs a leadoff hitter when only about 1/3 of his games were played batting leadoff.
That is why I used only the years when boggs was primarily a leadoff hitter in my analysis. It just happens that rickeys prime coincided with boggs. When those years are analyzed, boggs is a clear winner. And he played a more valuable defensive position. I am not super concerned with how they played at age 40 when they were shells of themselves.
He batted leadoff only about 1/3 of the time. Involving him in any comparison in which he is categorized as a leadoff hitter is a foolish exercise vs a player who primarily batted leadoff his entire career.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Boggs didn't lead off enough to be considered in the discussion... similar to why Raines was a better leadoff man than Ichiro (despite Ichiro being a much better hitter). Brock had more than a 2:1 K/BB ratio... that's horrible for a leadoff hitter and is why his OBP suffered. Still haven't seen a compelling argument to dethrone Rickey.
@ClockworkAngel said:
I agree. Nolan Ryan’s overall stats are good but I feel he’s overrated. Everyone really jumped on the Ryan bandwagon after he beat the crap out of Robin Ventura and threw those no hitters in his 40’s, but strikeouts and no hitters can’t compare to wins, ERA, and Cy Young awards
86 the k's and the no hitters.
a pitchers job is to stop the batter.
so lets look at his opponents lifetime batting avg...its a mere .204 and will hold the #1 spot there forever as well.
another fun fact:
chapman is the new record holder for velocity and clocked at 105mph (but from the hand). ryan clocked in at 100.9mph (but over the plate). this would roughly equal 107mph if gunned outta the hand the way they do today.
but everyone's biased. some of the pre-war pitching stats out there are equally insane and will also never be duplicated.
craig- I agree with much of what you wrote, except for "I don't know why people
even bring up batting average anymore".
I could never figure out why modern stat analysts don't think batting avg. is important.
But you do say OBP is important. So if a player hits .340 for the year compared to one
who hits .240, isn't there a pretty strong possibility the .340 hitter has a better OBP because
we know at minimum its going to be .340 if he managed 0 walks for the year. If he walks
even 50 times per year it brings up his OBP a lot. More than 50 times and the .240 hittter
has no chance to beat him in OBP no matter how many times he walked.
How much did Boggs' high batting average help his OBP? Tremendously!
A high batting average is the basis, or the foundation of a good OBP, OPS, SLG % WAR, etc, etc.
@grote15 said:
Also, Rickey's CS are dwarfed by his successful stolen bases. I'd rather have a player who can steal a base successfully 80% of the time while amassing over 1400 career stolen bases vs a player like Boggs who stole 24 bases in his career and was thrown out on 60% of his tries. No question about it.
Despite Henderson's huge SB totals, he was right at the 80% tipping point where in totality, there was little net value because of his huge CS numbers. When considering the value of SB, some research is revealing that perhaps as few as 20% of stolen bases actually directly lead to a run scored. For the potential rally killing CS, it just isn't worth the attempt unless the success rate is 85-90%
Statistically, with a runner on first and no outs, the team will score .953 runs in that situation. If the runner gets caught stealing, that number plummets to .297. Too risky for the steal to be a net gain at the end of a season.
Sorry, Craig, but I disagree wholeheartedly with that assertion. Maybe dallasactuary can opine further on this but in my view stealing 1400 bases, even with 375 CS, is a huge asset, not a liability.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I am scratching my head that there is even a Whitaker vs. Rickey debate going on, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I agree with Craig to an extent regarding OPS vs. Batting Avg, but there are so many other factors involved. Based on your argument, would you say Boggs was a better overall player than Tony Gwynn because Gwynn didn’t walk much? Gwynn was mainly a singles hitter but was ridiculous with RISP and had a knack for coming through in those situations. Boggs would work the walk a lot in those situations and I think that was a source of frustration at times because Boston wanted their best hitter to try to get the runs in instead of walking and leaving it to the next guy.
The Clockwork Angel Collection...brought to you by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Chase TheClockworkAngelCollection
As far as boggs not hitting leadoff enough to be considered in this discussion, Henderson led off any inning during his career 5356 PA out of 13346 career PA for 40% of his career. Boggs led off any inning in his career 2876 PA out of 10740 career PA or 27% of his career. In totality, Henderson only has 13% more leadoff at bats for his career than Boggs. It is a bit surprising. It really makes no difference if those leadoff at bats come in the first inning or the 7th. They are still table setting leadoff at bats.
It really seems that the whole leadoff hitter position is being re thought of late. Why not have the teams best hitters hit first and second in the lineup to accrue the extra at bats? And have the lesser hitters hit late and get fewer at bats. Same thought process as having your ace pitcher start first so they get the extra 3 or 4 starts throughout the season.
@grote15 said:
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Yes, Rickey scored a lot of runs, because somebody batted him home
No, Rickey not so much in bringing people home
unless he just stole home plate all the time
@ClockworkAngel said:
I am scratching my head that there is even a Whitaker vs. Rickey debate going on, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.
You're going to have to get over that one
I already stated it was half heartedly
I was only comparing Whitaker to a part of Rickey's
But since even Wage Boggs cant hold a candle to Rickey around here
what can I say about Whitaker ... the man just sucked!
@grote15 said:
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Yes, Rickey scored a lot of runs, because somebody batted him home
No, Rickey not so much in bringing people home
unless he just stole home plate all the time
Rickey can't score or offer the RBI opportunity unless he gets on base and gets into scoring position.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@grote15 said:
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Yes, Rickey scored a lot of runs, because somebody batted him home
No, Rickey not so much in bringing people home
unless he just stole home plate all the time
Rickey didn't just score a lot of runs, he scored more than anyone in baseball history! You can't score runs if you don't get on base... and the chances of scoring dramatically increase when you'r in scoring position. Baseball in the 80s and 90s wasn't what it is today, there was a lot more emphasis on manufacturing runs... how many times did Rickey get on first, steal second, steal third and score on a sac fly or groundout... very often. And Rickey brought himself home more than any other leadoff batter in history, that accounts for something. And consider he was a 10-time All-Star, won and MVP (and received MVP votes 7 other times, and three-time Silver Slugger winner... that's phenomenal for a leadoff hitter. And while he only won one Gold Glove, who didn't love his swim catch!
@grote15 said:
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Yes, Rickey scored a lot of runs, because somebody batted him home
No, Rickey not so much in bringing people home
unless he just stole home plate all the time
Rickey can't score or offer the RBI opportunity unless he gets on base and gets into scoring position.
Can I ask a question?
Do you have a large Henderson collection?
@grote15 said:
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Yes, Rickey scored a lot of runs, because somebody batted him home
No, Rickey not so much in bringing people home
unless he just stole home plate all the time
Rickey can't score or offer the RBI opportunity unless he gets on base and gets into scoring position.
Can I ask a question?
Do you have a large Henderson collection?
LOL, I do have a PSA 9 Henderson RC I pulled from a super cello pack years ago.
Nice BGS 9.5!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@grote15 said:
Sorry, Craig, but I disagree wholeheartedly with that assertion. Maybe dallasactuary can opine further on this but in my view stealing 1400 bases, even with 375 CS, is a huge asset, not a liability.
It is because most steals don't directly lead to a run. I will concerned that No one will score from first on a single. However,a runner on first, especially one as fast as Henderson, most likely will score on a double and will definitely score on a triple or home run. That is where the only 20% of steals directly lead to a run number comes from. The only time a steal is truly valuable is when a runner takes second and scores on a single or takes third and scores on a sac fly or more rarely a wild pitch. This only happens about 20% of the time. The rest of the stolen bases would have scored anyways on an extra base hit or were stranded. Because so few a percentage of stolen bases actually lead directly to a run, it makes their real world value very very low. And consequently the CS are so costly because it so greatly lessens the opportunity for that baserunner who probably could have scored anyway to score.
Another negative to stolen bases are the effect to the batter. I am unaware of any statistical analysis, but it seems to be common for hitters to hate hitting behind a base runner. It seems they feel it is very distracting and I know that frank thomas hated hitting when Tim Raines was on base because of the distraction. Also hitters are often given the take sign to allow a runner to steal, often putting themselves in a hole so the runner may advance a base.
It is because most steals don't directly lead to a run
Yes, it must be just a coincidence then that the player with the most stolen bases in baseball history also has the most runs scored in baseball history, lol.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
@grote15 said:
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Yes, Rickey scored a TON of runs. But when you look at rate stats, that number comes back to earth a bit. For every plate appearance, Ricky scored .17 runs. For boggs, every plate appearance turned into a run .14 of the time. Very very close. To look even deeper, one can look at each lineup and who hit behind each. Rickey had two outlier seasons for runs scored in 1985 and 1986. Both of those years coincide with Mattinglys greatest power seasons.
During those two seasons, Henderson's obp was .387. Boggs was .452. If those two players switched teams, who do you think would have scored more runs? I am betting on the guy who was on base the additional 65% of the time.
You can cherry pick all you want, but Henderson's career OBP% of .401 was not much lower than Boggs's .415. Add all the extra bases via stolen bases on top of that and it's no wonder Henderson scored more runs than anyone in baseball history.
Boggs was a terrific player, too. His top 5 OPS+ career totals measure up with Henderson's though Henderson's two best seasons were also better than any season in Boggs's career.
We can go back and forth with this as both players were slam dunk HOFers and you can make a valid case for either one being the better player. My choice is still Henderson.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Comments
How is giving Nolan Ryans' strikeout total proof that Rickey Henderson is the best leadoff hitter
of all time? I think you've wandered pretty far off script with that one. Rickey probably is the
best leadoff of all time, not sure where Cobb batted in the order but if it was leadoff he is at least
comparable to Henderson.
But Ryan isn't close to being the best power pitcher of all time. Yes, he has the most strikeouts.
Also I believe the most walks. But no Cy Young awards? Shouldn't the greatest of all time
have maybe 5 of those, like Randy Johnson. Or a couple MVP's like Walter Johnson?
Lefty Grove, Tom Seaver, Bob Gibson. All much better than Ryan.
If Ryan was such a great pitcher why was he never recognized with a Cy Young award.
Stupid list…. Mistlin
He’s in the discussion but he can’t touch Rickey. He batted lead off during the peak of his dominance in the 80’s, but ultimately batted 3rd or other spots the last half of his career so it’s not a fair comparison. He was always on base via walk or hit but never stole bases so I always thought he was an unorthodox lead off guy. But Boston liked him in that spot
TheClockworkAngelCollection
I agree. Nolan Ryan’s overall stats are good but I feel he’s overrated. Everyone really jumped on the Ryan bandwagon after he beat the crap out of Robin Ventura and threw those no hitters in his 40’s, but strikeouts and no hitters can’t compare to wins, ERA, and Cy Young awards
TheClockworkAngelCollection
there is ALWAYS room for debate
not sure why doors always have to be closed so soon on topics
knowing what we know now
if you were to pick a team, and needed a lead off hitter for 10 years
and you could pick either Boggs or Henderson
you can tell me its an open and shut case for Henderson ?
I'm not sure where Lou brock or Ty Cobb (mentioned before)
or many many others batted 1st
but there is plenty of room for debate
Tells you what a press machine Rickey was for himself
he was an over achiever, who was given Gods talent of speed
not a great hitter, and just hung around way too long
strikeouts and no hitters can’t compare to wins, ERA, and Cy Young awards
I like that
Yes, I think Boston liked him for a few good reasons
because he was simply a monster hitter
who by the way struck out less than Henderson
Boggs found first base far more often
I never really cared for Boggs before
I was a Mattingly fan
but years pass, views change
I was a huge Gretzky fan
and I too thought it was an open and shut on who was the greatest
not so much anymore
today, I'd probably go with Lemieux or Bossy with my 1st pick
Boggs was very comparable to Rickey when he led off. The two most important offensive things a player can do are getting on base and scoring runs. Boggs did that just as well as Rickey during his peak. I don't know why people even bring up batting average any more. The more important measures are ob % and hitting the ball hard. Boggs got on base at a higher rate than Rickey during the 80's, and while his hr totals aren't as big, his doubles totals dwarf Rickey. In the 80's, I would take Boggs all day at leadoff. That doesn't even figure in the positional advantage boggs had playing third. As far as steals, the only stat I can think of that is more overrated would be saves. Stealing bases is super overrated. The out created by every caught stealing so far outweighs each stolen base that unless you are stealing at over an 80% clip, they add no value and actually hurt the team. There are plenty of articles about this so you don't have to take my word for it. Rickey created 335 unnecessary outs via caught stealing in his career. That is the all time lead and really hurt his teams. He ran his clubs out of many rallies by creating unnecessary outs.
Having Said all that, Henderson was a much better player than Whittaker.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
That was thrown out half heartedly
I certainly wouldn't say far more often. Boggs' career OBP% is .415 while Henderson's is .401. And many of those walks turned into doubles via the stolen base. And that's even factoring in all those years you say he hung around for too long.
Also, career WAR:
Henderson 110
Boggs 91
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Previously in the thread someone mentioned that Whittaker was better or on par w Henderson. I just quickly addressed that because it seems so obvious as to not need statistical analysis
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
are these numbers adjusted to show the 335 times he threw himself out ?
essentially negating 335 hits or walks ?
I realize he got those hits and walks
but the major aspect of this discussion
was on the basis of him stealing bases
MANY times he did NOT
Lou Brock was an overall player in MY opinion
Yes, the beauty of advanced statistics is that they take all game occurrences in calculation to provide a truly objective evaluation of a player's worth.
Brock was nowhere near as good as Henderson.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
When analyzing peak performance for both players, which I think is more telling of ability than looking at lesser years when a player is in their late 30's/40's, I think boggs comes out ahead. Perhaps a fair amount ahead of Rickey. I took the decade of the 80's to compare the two as that was when they were both at their peak. I even added Rickeys mvp 1990 season. Boggs was on base at a significantly higher rate, slugged higher, had higher ops+, higher ops, and created more WAR per season than Rickey. Rickey also ran into 178 more outs through CS than Boggs which is huge. Boggs did this while playing a more demanding defensive position.
As far as career WAR, Henderson had almost 3000 more plate appearances to accumulate those extra 19 war.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
nowhere?
For starters, Brock's career OBP% is 60 points lower than Henderson's.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Henderson's career OPS+ is only 4 points lower than Boggs. And that's factoring in those years BGS stated he hung on too long.
I'm not necessarily saying Henderson was better than Boggs, but I don't consider Boggs a leadoff hitter when only about 1/3 of his games were played batting leadoff.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
ok, Rickey is the best
and Rickey says so
:-)
time for the fork in this one
the discussion was fun
thanks to all
As far as peaks go, both players' best season OPS+ totals exceeded 150 five times. Henderson's two best OPS+ totals were better than Boggs' best.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
That is why I used only the years when boggs was primarily a leadoff hitter in my analysis. It just happens that rickeys prime coincided with boggs. When those years are analyzed, boggs is a clear winner. And he played a more valuable defensive position. I am not super concerned with how they played at age 40 when they were shells of themselves.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Also, Rickey's CS are dwarfed by his successful stolen bases. I'd rather have a player who can steal a base successfully 80% of the time while amassing over 1400 career stolen bases vs a player like Boggs who stole 24 bases in his career and was thrown out on 60% of his tries. No question about it.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
He batted leadoff only about 1/3 of the time. Involving him in any comparison in which he is categorized as a leadoff hitter is a foolish exercise vs a player who primarily batted leadoff his entire career.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Boggs didn't lead off enough to be considered in the discussion... similar to why Raines was a better leadoff man than Ichiro (despite Ichiro being a much better hitter). Brock had more than a 2:1 K/BB ratio... that's horrible for a leadoff hitter and is why his OBP suffered. Still haven't seen a compelling argument to dethrone Rickey.
86 the k's and the no hitters.
a pitchers job is to stop the batter.
so lets look at his opponents lifetime batting avg...its a mere .204 and will hold the #1 spot there forever as well.
another fun fact:
chapman is the new record holder for velocity and clocked at 105mph (but from the hand). ryan clocked in at 100.9mph (but over the plate). this would roughly equal 107mph if gunned outta the hand the way they do today.
but everyone's biased. some of the pre-war pitching stats out there are equally insane and will also never be duplicated.
craig- I agree with much of what you wrote, except for "I don't know why people
even bring up batting average anymore".
I could never figure out why modern stat analysts don't think batting avg. is important.
But you do say OBP is important. So if a player hits .340 for the year compared to one
who hits .240, isn't there a pretty strong possibility the .340 hitter has a better OBP because
we know at minimum its going to be .340 if he managed 0 walks for the year. If he walks
even 50 times per year it brings up his OBP a lot. More than 50 times and the .240 hittter
has no chance to beat him in OBP no matter how many times he walked.
How much did Boggs' high batting average help his OBP? Tremendously!
A high batting average is the basis, or the foundation of a good OBP, OPS, SLG % WAR, etc, etc.
Stupid list…. Mistlin
Despite Henderson's huge SB totals, he was right at the 80% tipping point where in totality, there was little net value because of his huge CS numbers. When considering the value of SB, some research is revealing that perhaps as few as 20% of stolen bases actually directly lead to a run scored. For the potential rally killing CS, it just isn't worth the attempt unless the success rate is 85-90%
Statistically, with a runner on first and no outs, the team will score .953 runs in that situation. If the runner gets caught stealing, that number plummets to .297. Too risky for the steal to be a net gain at the end of a season.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Sorry, Craig, but I disagree wholeheartedly with that assertion. Maybe dallasactuary can opine further on this but in my view stealing 1400 bases, even with 375 CS, is a huge asset, not a liability.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Also, if it's run creation or runs scored we're talking about, Henderson is the career leader in that category, after all, and that's all time as in the history of baseball.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I am scratching my head that there is even a Whitaker vs. Rickey debate going on, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I agree with Craig to an extent regarding OPS vs. Batting Avg, but there are so many other factors involved. Based on your argument, would you say Boggs was a better overall player than Tony Gwynn because Gwynn didn’t walk much? Gwynn was mainly a singles hitter but was ridiculous with RISP and had a knack for coming through in those situations. Boggs would work the walk a lot in those situations and I think that was a source of frustration at times because Boston wanted their best hitter to try to get the runs in instead of walking and leaving it to the next guy.
TheClockworkAngelCollection
As far as boggs not hitting leadoff enough to be considered in this discussion, Henderson led off any inning during his career 5356 PA out of 13346 career PA for 40% of his career. Boggs led off any inning in his career 2876 PA out of 10740 career PA or 27% of his career. In totality, Henderson only has 13% more leadoff at bats for his career than Boggs. It is a bit surprising. It really makes no difference if those leadoff at bats come in the first inning or the 7th. They are still table setting leadoff at bats.
It really seems that the whole leadoff hitter position is being re thought of late. Why not have the teams best hitters hit first and second in the lineup to accrue the extra at bats? And have the lesser hitters hit late and get fewer at bats. Same thought process as having your ace pitcher start first so they get the extra 3 or 4 starts throughout the season.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Yes, Rickey scored a lot of runs, because somebody batted him home
No, Rickey not so much in bringing people home
unless he just stole home plate all the time
You're going to have to get over that one
I already stated it was half heartedly
I was only comparing Whitaker to a part of Rickey's
But since even Wage Boggs cant hold a candle to Rickey around here
what can I say about Whitaker ... the man just sucked!
Rickey can't score or offer the RBI opportunity unless he gets on base and gets into scoring position.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Rickey didn't just score a lot of runs, he scored more than anyone in baseball history! You can't score runs if you don't get on base... and the chances of scoring dramatically increase when you'r in scoring position. Baseball in the 80s and 90s wasn't what it is today, there was a lot more emphasis on manufacturing runs... how many times did Rickey get on first, steal second, steal third and score on a sac fly or groundout... very often. And Rickey brought himself home more than any other leadoff batter in history, that accounts for something. And consider he was a 10-time All-Star, won and MVP (and received MVP votes 7 other times, and three-time Silver Slugger winner... that's phenomenal for a leadoff hitter. And while he only won one Gold Glove, who didn't love his swim catch!
Can I ask a question?
Do you have a large Henderson collection?
Would you rather have one psa 10 Henderson rookie? Or 45 boggs psa 10 Topps rookies?
Both come to about $20k
I'd take this one that sold for $3,800.00
I prefer Beckett cards simply because I like sheet cut cards & I can make my money go farther vs. PSA cards
How much to get the rest of the card?
LOL, I do have a PSA 9 Henderson RC I pulled from a super cello pack years ago.
Nice BGS 9.5!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Not sure what you mean
Sheet cut question ?
It's noticeably thin L/R, possibly a touch short T/B too.
looks good to me
It is because most steals don't directly lead to a run. I will concerned that No one will score from first on a single. However,a runner on first, especially one as fast as Henderson, most likely will score on a double and will definitely score on a triple or home run. That is where the only 20% of steals directly lead to a run number comes from. The only time a steal is truly valuable is when a runner takes second and scores on a single or takes third and scores on a sac fly or more rarely a wild pitch. This only happens about 20% of the time. The rest of the stolen bases would have scored anyways on an extra base hit or were stranded. Because so few a percentage of stolen bases actually lead directly to a run, it makes their real world value very very low. And consequently the CS are so costly because it so greatly lessens the opportunity for that baserunner who probably could have scored anyway to score.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Another negative to stolen bases are the effect to the batter. I am unaware of any statistical analysis, but it seems to be common for hitters to hate hitting behind a base runner. It seems they feel it is very distracting and I know that frank thomas hated hitting when Tim Raines was on base because of the distraction. Also hitters are often given the take sign to allow a runner to steal, often putting themselves in a hole so the runner may advance a base.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It is because most steals don't directly lead to a run
Yes, it must be just a coincidence then that the player with the most stolen bases in baseball history also has the most runs scored in baseball history, lol.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Yes, Rickey scored a TON of runs. But when you look at rate stats, that number comes back to earth a bit. For every plate appearance, Ricky scored .17 runs. For boggs, every plate appearance turned into a run .14 of the time. Very very close. To look even deeper, one can look at each lineup and who hit behind each. Rickey had two outlier seasons for runs scored in 1985 and 1986. Both of those years coincide with Mattinglys greatest power seasons.
During those two seasons, Henderson's obp was .387. Boggs was .452. If those two players switched teams, who do you think would have scored more runs? I am betting on the guy who was on base the additional 65% of the time.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
You can cherry pick all you want, but Henderson's career OBP% of .401 was not much lower than Boggs's .415. Add all the extra bases via stolen bases on top of that and it's no wonder Henderson scored more runs than anyone in baseball history.
Boggs was a terrific player, too. His top 5 OPS+ career totals measure up with Henderson's though Henderson's two best seasons were also better than any season in Boggs's career.
We can go back and forth with this as both players were slam dunk HOFers and you can make a valid case for either one being the better player. My choice is still Henderson.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.