Welcome to Hogville!      Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Historical perspective

Started by EastexHawg, August 12, 2014, 11:55:32 am

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

EastexHawg

I don't think I've ever dug up a thread this old before, but while searching for something else I uncovered this one about a potential "greatest ever".  It's interesting how the passage of time lends perspective...

http://www.hogville.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=57697.0

Baseball Hog

75% of those people propping him up would bash him now for no other reason than that he isn't a Cardinal now.

 

jrulz83

I'd say that if Mantle had not been a drunk and taken care of himself there would not be any debate about who the greatest player of all time was...

Just my opinion, and you know what opinions are like.....everybody has one.
Lenin is cautiously optimistic.

clutch

Best talent the games ever seen will always be Griffey Jr. in my mind.

Baseball Hog

If Mike Trout's Career follows the trajectory of many hall of famers, he will be the best ever.

McKdaddy

Quote from: jrulz83 on August 12, 2014, 05:39:48 pm
I'd say that if Mantle had not been a drunk and taken care of himself there would not be any debate about who the greatest player of all time was...


Don't buy upgrades, ride up grades.

"You are everything that is wrong with this place . . . Ban me"

"CPI, ex-food and energy, is only good for an anorexic pedestrian"--Art Cashin

EastexHawg

It's a perfect example of why we need to wait until a player's career is over or nearly over to discuss him in terms of "best ever".  At the time we were writing those posts Pujols was at the zenith of his career.  It's not fair or logical to project numbers based on the best he will ever be while the players to whom you are comparing him have experienced the inevitable erosion of skills and decline in productivity that getting "old" brings.

Pujols is only 34, but he is experiencing that dropoff now.

jrulz83

Quote from: EastexHawg on August 13, 2014, 09:38:02 am
It's a perfect example of why we need to wait until a player's career is over or nearly over to discuss him in terms of "best ever".  At the time we were writing those posts Pujols was at the zenith of his career.  It's not fair or logical to project numbers based on the best he will ever be while the players to whom you are comparing him have experienced the inevitable erosion of skills and decline in productivity that getting "old" brings.

Pujols is only 34, but he is experiencing that dropoff now.

It's not an equal comparison when you are comparing 1930 to 2009. The advent of video technology, modern scouting, and statistical analysis have all had a tremendous impact on the game.

I'm not saying those that played in the "old days" would be any different if they played today, or modern players would be any different if they played in the "old days", but I am saying that it is unfair and maybe even impossible to compare such vastly different eras of baseball.

The bottom line of the debate is there were and are great players in every era of baseball history and everybody has their favorite.
Lenin is cautiously optimistic.

EastexHawg

Quote from: jrulz83 on August 13, 2014, 09:56:46 am
It's not an equal comparison when you are comparing 1930 to 2009. The advent of video technology, modern scouting, and statistical analysis have all had a tremendous impact on the game.

I'm not saying those that played in the "old days" would be any different if they played today, or modern players would be any different if they played in the "old days", but I am saying that it is unfair and maybe even impossible to compare such vastly different eras of baseball.

The bottom line of the debate is there were and are great players in every era of baseball history and everybody has their favorite.

Even if all that is true, how many people right now are still saying Pujols could be the best ever?  You don't need to let a player's career play out just so you can compare him to players from the 1920s and 30s.  It needs to happen just to make a solid assessment of his place in the game over the course of his entire career and the careers of his relative contemporaries.

I know it's a different sport, but over his first three seasons Jamal Lewis was averaging close to 1,600 rushing yards per year and 4.73 per carry.  He was coming off a 2,066 yard year in his third season.  Over the next six seasons he averaged 975 yards and 3.8 per carry.

If someone has projected a ten year career after his first three he would have foreseen 16,000 yards...third all time, between Walter Payton and Barry Sanders on the career list...with the highest yards per carry average of anyone in the top eight other than Barry.

That's obviously not the way it turned out.  I don't think you could find more than a handful of people who would say Lewis is one of the top three backs of the last 20 years, much less all time.

Perspective...it's usually only attained through the passage of time.

Baseball Hog

You do realize that Pujols is still going to hit 600+ homers with a .300 career average.  Remove the roiders and the only people to have done that are Ruth and Mays.

Is it really so insane to say he is one of the best ever?

jrulz83

Quote from: EastexHawg on August 13, 2014, 10:33:53 am
Even if all that is true, how many people right now are still saying Pujols could be the best ever?  You don't need to let a player's career play out just so you can compare him to players from the 1920s and 30s.  It needs to happen just to make a solid assessment of his place in the game over the course of his entire career and the careers of his relative contemporaries.

I know it's a different sport, but over his first three seasons Jamal Lewis was averaging close to 1,600 rushing yards per year and 4.73 per carry.  He was coming off a 2,066 yard year in his third season.  Over the next six seasons he averaged 975 yards and 3.8 per carry.

If someone has projected a ten year career after his first three he would have foreseen 16,000 yards...third all time, between Walter Payton and Barry Sanders on the career list...with the highest yards per carry average of anyone in the top eight other than Barry.

That's obviously not the way it turned out.  I don't think you could find more than a handful of people who would say Lewis is one of the top three backs of the last 20 years, much less all time.

Perspective...it's usually only attained through the passage of time.

I think Pujols is one of the "best ever(s)", anybody who claims to have an indisputable "best ever" in just about any sport is lying to themselves.

You probably don't care because it doesn't fit your narrative but here is an article discussing his standing in comparison to other Hall of Famers:

http://lasportshub.com/2014/04/25/hall-of-fame-status-albert-pujols/

So perhaps your "perspective" needs a little adjustment.

Lenin is cautiously optimistic.

EastexHawg

Quote from: Baseball Hog on August 13, 2014, 11:25:29 am
You do realize that Pujols is still going to hit 600+ homers with a .300 career average.  Remove the roiders and the only people to have done that are Ruth and Mays.

Is it really so insane to say he is one of the best ever?

His career OPS is virtually identical to Manny Ramirez.  Manny has 40 more home runs and 300 more RBI in 450 fewer at-bats.  Pujols' career batting average is .318, Manny's .312.

Is Manny in the discussion for the greatest ever? 

Remember, that was the conversation.  It wasn't "is Pujols a Hall of Famer", or "is Pujols one of the best hitters of the last 50 years"...it was "is Pujols the greatest player of all time?"

Baseball Hog

Quote from: EastexHawg on August 13, 2014, 11:59:25 am
His career OPS is virtually identical to Manny Ramirez.  Manny has 40 more home runs and 300 more RBI in 450 fewer at-bats.  Pujols' career batting average is .318, Manny's .312.

Is Manny in the discussion for the greatest ever? 

Remember, that was the conversation.  It wasn't "is Pujols a Hall of Famer", or "is Pujols one of the best hitters of the last 50 years"...it was "is Pujols the greatest player of all time?"

Manny is 42 and will likely never see another AB.  Pujols is 34 and will likely have 4-5 more productive years.  What a silly comparison.

I stand by the facts.  Pujols will finish his career somewhere around these numbers:

.310 AVG
.400 OBP
.990 OPS
600+ HR
2000 RBI
2 Gold Gloves

That's good enough for top 5 all time to me.

 

gutshot

The part in that thread about Andruw Jones vs. Jim Edmonds is what amuses me. Take a look and dang near any defensive metric you can find.  Now, I'm not one who relies solely on defensive metrics to judge players, but when they are that lop-sided across the board, it is quite evident that there is something to it.  Andruw Jones in a landslide over Edmonds. 

EastexHawg

Quote from: Baseball Hog on August 13, 2014, 01:54:07 pm
Manny is 42 and will likely never see another AB.  Pujols is 34 and will likely have 4-5 more productive years.  What a silly comparison.

The comparison isn't silly because of the number of at-bats.  Albert would have to drive in 300 runs in 450 at-bats...less than one full season...to reach Manny's total.

I don't doubt that Pujols will reach 600 home runs, but I'm not so sure about maintaining a career .310 average and the .990 OPS.  In the last three years his batting averages have been .285, .258, and .273.  His OPS numbers have been .859, .767, and .803.  While he's only 34, it is obvious his skills are declining.

I'm not trying to say Pujols isn't a great hitter because obviously he is.  He's a no doubt first ballot Hall of Famer.  He had a stretch in the early to middle part of his career that was tremendous...but not unprecedented.  Time plays no favorites and he's now in the inevitable decline stage that all the other greats have experienced.

ucahogfan

Quote from: clutch on August 12, 2014, 07:12:10 pm
Best talent the games ever seen will always be Griffey Jr. in my mind.
Fully agree.  I think he would be the HR King had he not spent a lot of his 30s injured.  He had the best looking swing I have ever seen as well.

dhornjr1

Quote from: Baseball Hog on August 13, 2014, 11:25:29 am
You do realize that Pujols is still going to hit 600+ homers with a .300 career average.  Remove the roiders and the only people to have done that are Ruth and Mays.

Hammerin' Hank says hello.

ucahogfan

Quote from: gutshot on August 13, 2014, 02:45:57 pm
The part in that thread about Andruw Jones vs. Jim Edmonds is what amuses me. Take a look and dang near any defensive metric you can find.  Now, I'm not one who relies solely on defensive metrics to judge players, but when they are that lop-sided across the board, it is quite evident that there is something to it.  Andruw Jones in a landslide over Edmonds. 
Another thing that amused me in that thread was a poster wanting J-Roll over Miggy.  Now I know it was back in 2006 when J-Roll was in the prime of his career while Miggy was only 23 and J-Roll went on to win NL MVP in 2007, but Miggy has posted at least 30 HRs, 100 RBI, and a .290 BA (.320 BA every season but one) every season since then.  While he might not reach the 30 HR mark this season, he will still hit over .300 and drive in 115 runs or so.

dhornjr1

Quote from: EastexHawg on August 14, 2014, 08:54:31 am
He had a stretch in the early to middle part of his career that was tremendous...but not unprecedented. 

Pujols was the first person in Major League history to begin his career with six consecutive seasons of a .300 average, 30 home runs, 100 RBI, and 100 runs scored.

He was one run scored in 2007 and one RBI and one percentage point in batting average in 2011 away from doing it his first ELEVEN consecutive seasons.

That's unprecedented.

EastexHawg

Quote from: Imminent Rueage on August 14, 2014, 09:51:03 am
Pujols was the first person in Major League history to begin his career with six consecutive seasons of a .300 average, 30 home runs, 100 RBI, and 100 runs scored.

He was one run scored in 2007 and one RBI and one percentage point in batting average in 2011 away from doing it his first ELEVEN consecutive seasons.

That's unprecedented.

That's impressive.

In those first six seasons, Pujols had 3,489 at-bats.  Over those 3,489 at-bats his stats were:

Runs scored  748
Hits  1,159
Home Runs  250
RBI  758
Batting Average  .332
On-Base Percentage  .415
Slugging Percentage  .628

Those are Hall of Fame numbers for sure.

On the other hand, Babe Ruth was a pitcher with the Red Sox from 1914 through 1919, winning 89 games during that time with an ERA of around 2.25.  He didn't become a full-time position player until he was sold to the Yankees in 1920.

In Ruth's first 3,309 at bats (remember, Pujols' numbers were over 3,489) after joining the Yankees, Babe's stats in the same categories were:

Runs scored  923
Hits  1,197
Home Runs  307
RBI  873
Batting Average  .362
On-Base Percentage  .498
Slugging Percentage  .746

That's more impressive.

I don't think we want to continue the comparison into subsequent seasons, because in the five years after the period I used for Ruth he went:

.356, 60 HR, 165 RBI
.323, 54 HR, 146 RBI
.345, 46 HR, 154 RBI
.359, 49 HR, 153 RBI
.373, 46 HR, 162 RBI


The "in his first six seasons he hit .300 and hit 30 HR" thing is cool, but it's sort of a made-up stat.  It's a little like "with two outs and the bases loaded on the road during night games"...it is a little situational. 

During Ruth's first ten FULL seasons as an outfielder with the Yankees (he was injured much of 1922 and 1925), these are his average per-season numbers:

Batting Average  .365
Home Runs  50
RBI  149
Runs Scored  151

Pujols has never achieved any of those numbers in a single season, much less averaged them over ten years.  He is a great hitter and a great player, but he's not even close to the greatest of all time.  That's not a knock against Pujols, it's just the truth. 



lefty08

Unfortunate timing on his decline id say, surprised he isnt mentioned more as a potential roider. Maybe he is and we just dont hear it, we are smack dab in cardinal country
Re: So far the UC press conference is hilarious   Reply
Losing gracefully isn't taught in second-tier programs. See Arkansas, Cincinnati, et al.
3/21 8:11 PM | IP: Logged