Baseball's Top 125

[Kraven]

But lets determine when more or less Bonds started taking....BEFORE 1993, whenever he played at least 140-150 games, he avergaed 27 HRs and 35+ doubles...about .280 BA... and about 35 SB. With SLG averaging around .535.

All as a lead off hitter.

Let that marinate for a couple of minutes.

Now if you take away the steroid filled season, and even REMOVE the last 6 seasons.. and he plays until he is 36, averaging THOSE numbers, you honestly don't think he is a HOFer...?!

Easy Tiger ..... I never said he doesnt belong in the HoF. I dont believe he's in the top 10 of all time.
Obviously being roid'ed up helped his stats down the road...I dont believe PED or whatever improved his slugging.. but definetely helped in the HR/power department.

Cheers, K

 

[raoul5788]

Yes, but he pitched in the steroids era and still put up the numbers he did.

You can't hit a ball that's six inches or more outside and called a strike no matter how many PEDs you take.

 

[Ramy]

You can't hit a ball that's six inches or more outside and called a strike no matter how many PEDs you take.

You are not seeing what I said. I think he is even better because he still got his numbers facing guys who were on steroids. He was a great pitcher.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[raoul5788]

I am curious. What 15 or 20 pitchers do you put ahead of Greg Maddux?

Cy Young
Walter Johnson
Sandy Koufax
Bob Gibson
Bob Feller
Warren Spahn
Christie Matthews
Tom Seaver
Randy Johnson

And these are the ones I know off the top of my head. I maybe missing one or two.

OK.... I would put him DEFINITELY in the top 10...but no way, in the top 5.

Good start. I'd add these:
Roger Clemens (despite the PEDs)
Pedro Martinez
Andy Pettitte (maybe)
Whitey Ford
Christie Mathewson
Grover Cleveland Alexander
Lefty Grove
Steve Carlton
Nolan Ryan

 

[salsadancer7]

You are not seeing what I said. I think he is even better because he still got his numbers facing guys who were on steroids. He was a great pitcher.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

He was ALSO on some great team. He does NOT get those numbers if he is pitching on those crappy Cubs teams he was on.

 

[salsadancer7]

Easy Tiger ..... I never said he doesnt belong in the HoF. I dont believe he's in the top 10 of all time.
Obviously being roid'ed up helped his stats down the road...I dont believe PED or whatever improved his slugging.. but definetely helped in the HR/power department.

Cheers, K

My apologizes. I agree, he is NOT top ten.... I would venture to say top 100 easily.

 

[salsadancer7]

Good start. I'd add these:
Roger Clemens (despite the PEDs)
Pedro Martinez
Andy Pettitte (maybe)
Whitey Ford
Christie Mathewson
Grover Cleveland Alexander
Lefty Grove
Steve Carlton
Nolan Ryan

Good... I would leave out Andy Pettite. I think Maddux is way better than Pettite.

 

[raoul5788]

Let's say you are the manager in game seven, and you have those two to choose from. Who gets the ball? Besides, I did say maybe!

 

[BillD1984]

IMO, nobody can touch the three year body of work ('99-'01) of Pedro Martinez. He was virtually unhittable pitching in the steroid era, in the American League, and pitching half his games in a bandbox.

That being said, Babe Ruth has to be the greatest player of all time. Who else could pitch AND hit at such a high level?

 

[raoul5788]

Even though I am a Yankee fan, you are absolutely right BillD1984, he was the best of his era.

 

[cjwct]

I like these discussions/arguments, but with the difference in the game throughout the years I rather see not the best of all time but the best of the years 1900-1930 for example. Also, lets not forget the Negro leagues greatness . . . . Josh Gibson, Buck O'Neil, Smokey Joe Williams, et al.


Posted Using The New SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[raoul5788]

There were many great players in the Negro leagues. The problem is that they had so little press that it's hard to judge just how good they really were.

 

[cjwct]

There were many great players in the Negro leagues. The problem is that they had so little press that it's hard to judge just how good they really were.

We judge like we judge all others . . . stats . . . for example, Smokey Joe:

His signature season was 1914, when he rung up 41 victories against a mere three defeats, a record compiled while pitching against all levels of competition (in league play he was 12-2 with 100 Ks in 17 games).

Three years later, Williams struck out 20 and pitched a no-hitter against the National League Champion New York Giants, but lost the game, 1-0, on an error.


Posted Using The New SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[Paul Wozniak]

IMO, nobody can touch the three year body of work ('99-'01) of Pedro Martinez. He was virtually unhittable pitching in the steroid era, in the American League, and pitching half his games in a bandbox.

That being said, Babe Ruth has to be the greatest player of all time. Who else could pitch AND hit at such a high level?

A lot of people forget that he was one of the best pitchers in baseball before he went to playing everyday. Prorate his batting numbers for the years he spent pitching, and his numbers would have been unattainable to those who followed him.

 

[raoul5788]

We judge like we judge all others . . . stats . . . for example, Smokey Joe:

His signature season was 1914, when he rung up 41 victories against a mere three defeats, a record compiled while pitching against all levels of competition (in league play he was 12-2 with 100 Ks in 17 games).

Three years later, Williams struck out 20 and pitched a no-hitter against the National League Champion New York Giants, but lost the game, 1-0, on an error.


Posted Using The New SatelliteGuys Reader App!

True, I'm just not so sure how accurate their numbers are. I can't say I've looked specifically at the Negro league stats and how they were compiled to see if they are honest enough to take at face value. For instance, how good were the lower quality teams/players the good teams/players were playing against?

 

[salsadancer7]

IMO, nobody can touch the three year body of work ('99-'01) of Pedro Martinez. He was virtually unhittable pitching in the steroid era, in the American League, and pitching half his games in a bandbox.

That being said, Babe Ruth has to be the greatest player of all time. Who else could pitch AND hit at such a high level?

Koufax, from 1963-1966, he was 97-27, 1.85 ERA, 89 CG, 31 SHOs, averaged 325 innings per, 320 SOs per, 6 hits per 9 innings, 3 no-hitters including a perfect game.

Well.... I would say Koufax's 4 year run, personally, tops Pedro Martinez... but I do agree...he was absolutely unhittable and incredibly fun to watch!

 

[raoul5788]

Very true about Koufax. The biggest difference I see between him and Pedro is the complete games/shutouts. They were different eras in that respect. If Pedro pitched in the early 60s, I'm sure he would have similar numbers in those catagories. Here is an interesting article comparing the two:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...y-koufax-who-was-the-greater-starting-pitcher

 

[salsadancer7]

Very true about Koufax. The biggest difference I see between him and Pedro is the complete games/shutouts. They were different eras in that respect. If Pedro pitched in the early 60s, I'm sure he would have similar numbers in those catagories. Here is an interesting article comparing the two:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...y-koufax-who-was-the-greater-starting-pitcher

I would also add averaged innings pitched as well... Koufax averaged about 70+ innings more per season.

But the 89 complete games is a stunning stat.

 

[raoul5788]

I would also add averaged innings pitched as well... Koufax averaged about 70+ innings more per season.

But the 89 complete games is a stunning stat.

I think that's more a function of how games are managed now. Like I said, Pedro would have many more complete games and ip if he played when Koufax did.