Yes. This is becoming an increasingly difficult task.

Mantle, Ruth, Cobb.....Mix them up however you desire.....

Ruth
Cobb
Aaron
Gehrig
Mays

Bill- I believe you overrated Hornsby as a pitcher.
.
.

Oy, I have really sucked wind in this discussion. First, I omit the only 500 game winner in MLB history from my pitchers list, and now I make Rajah a hurler. http://williamgregory.net/images/doh.gif?lbisphpreq=1

Just a bad list-edit when previewing my post. It occurred to me that I'd forgotten Hornsby, and I stuck him in the wrong place.

Is there a limit to the number of Mulligans we get in one thread? :p

Mathewson an intentional omission?

Mathewson in my opinion was the greatest pitcher of all time. If you disagree with this, he certainly has to be in your top 5.....

Just an oversight, especially since I'm about 15 pages short of finishing Pitching in a Pinch. I've been re-reading it for a little over a week before trying to going to bed.

What can I say? Insomnia, and the five different medications I'm on are screwing with my head big time. When I was typing out the list, I thought to myself the first two pitchers on it would be Johnson and Mathewson. My best guess, when I split the list of best players into the two categories, I just deleted Matty from the list of hitters, and forgot to put him in the second one. I've had so many other names on the list (Ed Walsh, Warren Spahn, Steve Carlton, Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez), I probably forgot somebody else obvious, too. I'm trying.

Position Players
1.B.Ruth
2.T.Cobb
3.T.Williams
4.J.Beckley
5.C.Anson
6.R.Hornsby
7.F.Baker

Pitchers
1.W.Johnson
2.C.Mathewson
3.C.Young
4.S.Koufax
5.G.Alexander

Not for me.

1 WaJo
2 Cy
3 Rocket
4 Kid
5 Pete

Matty'd be in the top 10 though.

Due to military service, Spahn did not win a game until he was 25, and still won 363, pitching for the most part for an average team. Hard to leave him off.

I like wonder what all the greats named might have done in different
eras . Impossible to know for sure , but still fun to think about .

Just curious, how well do you think Babe Ruth would fare against our current aces (Grienke, Kershaw, Max, Felix)?

How would Mike Trout, or Bonds and Pujols in their prime, do against Walter Johnson, Matty, Cy Young, Pete Alexander or Grove?

Let's consider all players while in their prime and using today's equipment.

Top hitters
Ruth
Cobb
Mays
Williams

Top Pitchers
Mathewson
Wajo
Pedro (Dominated during the most hitter friendly era / no PED's like Clemens)

Yeah , I was wondering how the 62 Mets might have
finished if they had a rookie name Babe Ruth on their roster.
Doubt they'd have lost 120 , but who knows.
A lot of good players around today , but what would the quality of play be
if the best were re-teamed to only 16 rosters?

mine
 

1. Wagner
2. Wagner
3. Wagner
4. Ruth
5. Cobb

PITCHERS
1. Grove
2. Johnson
3. Maddux
4. Spahn
5. Young

1. Ruth
2. LaJoie
3. Cobb
4. Wagner
5. Gehrig

Pedro just never got caught. His career screams PED user and was on a team full of them. How this guy and Rickey Henderson get a free pass on PED use just amazes me beyond belief.

Agree on Rickey, but I've never particularly suspected Pedro.

Babe Ruth pitched 62% as many innings in his career as Dizzy Dean did, and Ruth had a better WHIP.

On an unrelated note, Home Run Baker hit more triples than home runs.

On an even less related note, Freud is more popular with English professors than with psychology professors.

Mantle is a top 5 all-time guy. Without the injuries, he would be #1 on my list. As it is, Babe was and is the best.

without taking into account that some of these choices that some members are making, are across different eras... I like my 5

1. Cobb
2. Williams
3. Ruth
4. Rose
5. Aaron

Pedro was skinny and stayed skinny, so he never looked like a PED user (e.g., Sosa, Bonds). He was great from early on, so was not a case where a suddenly average player became great (e.g., Ortiz). His career also petered out in his early 30s, so he didn't have a natural decline and then suddenly became great again (e.g., Clemens, Bonds). If you continue to be great in your late 30s, that raises flags, but Pedro had retired by then. Obviously, you never know, but I think that's why most people don't suspect him.

I think the 2015 Toledo Mud Hens would easily beat the 27 Yankees in a 7 game series. Athletes today are superior than the athletes of yesteryear. The number of 100mph pitchers is evidence to this.

Which is why I rely on stats like WAR, OPS+, and ERA+ because they take into account era and competition level.

That is just one of the big misconceptions with PEDs. Being skinny and staying skinny just means he did not use a steroid used to build mass. His career petered out early because of the PED abuse.

Bonds only used at the end of his career and look how after a couple years the injuries built up quick. With Clemens I am really on the fence. He had a very long career so he had to be very smart with his PED use. Look at all the strange injuries the other PED uses had that he somehow never got. I am sure he did use something but did crazily overuse like McGwire, Sosa, Giambi and Bonds who juiced to the gills. Would go into more detail but got to get back to work.

I didn't think we compared apples to rotten oranges--don't eat the peel, Barry!
Although I must admit McGwire was a favorite of mine in naive days gone by, and I really don't know exactly how to deal with him mentally.

Great lists,

Larry

I couldn't keep it to top 5.

Position players:

1) Ruth
2) Cobb
3) Mays
4) Bonds
5) Wagner
6) Williams
7) Gehrig
8) Mantle
9) Oscar Charleston
10) Musial
11) RHenderson


Pitchers:

1) WJohnson
2) Clemens
3) RJohnson
4) Grove
5) Mathewson
6) Seaver
7) Maddux
8) PMartinez
9) CYoung
10) MRivera
11) SPaige
12) Koufax

I would be very interested in why you think Pedro used. I have never heard that, and his career track can easily be explained by how hard he threw despite a skinny body. He eventually just threw himself out.

I don't know if it's a steroid thing, BTW, but Clemens had groin problems (and no I don't mean chasing after whoever he chased after) for much of his career. He was just a tough bastard and pitched through them. He was written off for dead twice by Boston fans, in 1996 (oops, two consecutive Cy Youngs the next two years) and then again when he got shelled early in the 1999 playoffs and it was the triumph of Pedro blah blah. Two more Cy Young awards later, Roger was still going.

Your entire post pretty much outlines why in my opinion Pedro was a PED abuser while I believe Clemens only used in small quantities to stay healthy.

As a Sox fan I watched Pedro pitch a lot of games. All the announcers talked about was how amazing it was that such a skinny guy could throw so hard and pitch so many innings and how nobody else with that body type had ever been able to do that. I don't think he was ever a major user but used way more than to just stay healthy.

Clemens on the other hand had way to long and consistent career to have used them in excess.

I base this opinion on the above and the fact I used them myself on and of for close to 15 years so I know first hand how they affect ones body and performance. By the age of 35 my body was shot. I can also assure you the worst side affect of steroids is the depression that comes when you are done with a cycle. The last time I done them I had severe depression for close to two years.

Ron Guidry was a pretty lean guy as I recall and threw very very hard.

I bid on it but I didn't win it. Wish I did. I was a couple bucks off.

Son of a ....

Completely forgot about Napolean Lajoie. I would also like to add Tris Speaker to my ever expanding list. Speaker had a .345 career average, and (if the numbers are accurate) struck out only 394 times in 11,992 plate appearances. That's pretty exceptional, even for the pre-Ruth era.

I'm curious to know where the participants in this discussion would place Tony Gwynn. Outstanding defender and base stealer before his knees began to give out. Never a real power hitter, or big RBI guy. But you can't argue with his eight batting titles. Since 1965, Gwynn's .338 average is 10 points higher than the next best hitter (minimum 5,000 at bats), Wade Boggs. And after meeting with Ted Williams for the first time (1992 All Star Game), Gwynn was an incredible .356 hitter for the last nine seasons of his career.

i'm partial to lefties like myself: ruth, bonds, teddy ballgame, cobb, mays.

as for clemens using only sparingly to stay healthy, c'mon power pitchers today like verlander is flaming out in their early 30s...even great control guys like halladay were done by their mid 30s. you don't go 220 era+ in your early 40s like clemens without the aid of something. his career should've been done after boston w/o the help of chemistry.

Babe Ruth
Ty Cobb
Ted Williams
Hank Aaron
Ken Griffey Jr. (:D hopeless Seattle fan)

So to have a long career as a power pitcher means you took PED's. Ok sounds good. Then Nolan Ryan must have done more PED's than Lance Armstrong. He led the league on strikeouts at the ages of 40, 41, 42, and 43.

Yes, doesn't Mays have the record of least strikeouts batting left handed of all the 500+ home run hitters?

I'd really have to take a closer look but for me, he'd be pretty far down the list (in comparison here ... I'm saying he wouldn't be in my top 20 or so if we're including pitchers). As you mention, he was a stolen base threat and a very good defender, but only for a relatively small part of his career. Easily the best hitter since Ted Williams, but he'd rank behind a lot of guys that simply did more for longer stretches of time. So many great players that didn't make my top five (i.e. Stan Musial) fit that category.

The things that amaze me are that he was so much better than everyone else in his generation and that he was hitting over .320 still at the age of 41. He was still an above average hitter that late into his career. Nothing but respect for that.

Interesting point come to think of it, although probably not where you were intending to point. That represents an improvement of 62 strikeouts per year over his age 36, 37, 38, and 39 seasons, starting in 1987. Otherwise he hadn't led the league in strikeouts since he was 32 and facing DHs instead of pitchers. Then at the age of 42 he threw over 300 strikeouts for the first time since age 30. Specifically, his strikeout total was 2.35 standard deviations better than his numbers in the intervening years. That's just ludicrous.

But of course, you'd expect violent outbursts in someone who was using steroids to the extent required to achieve such an improvement in middle-age.


http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/sl...322&h=215&q=75

And anyway, these fine gentlemen can testify that the clubhouse in Arlington was clean as a whistle.


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...ea168cab4f.jpg

I'm not saying he was on the juice, but with the standard of evidence we're applying to all the other guys who have been condemned in this thread, the case against Nolan Ryan is vastly greater than it is against Pedro.

LOL, fine gentlemen indeed.

Top 10:

(1) Ruth
(2) Cobb
(3) Gehrig
(4) Williams
(5) Shoeless Joe
(6) Mantle
(7) Walter Johnson
(8) Christy Mathewson
(9) Cy Young
(10) Honus Wagner

That's because of the rampant English professorial cocaine usage:cool:

I agree. I think it's an attempt to discount Martinez to justify the reputed greatness of Koufax.

Just read a great article comparing Gywnn, Boggs, and Cal Ripken. It took into account offence and defense with a bunch of stats I know nothing about. For their careers it had Boggs as #1, Ripken as #2 and Gwynn ranked 3rd. I would personally rank them the same.

There was nothing "reputed" about the greatness of Koufax--I saw it as it occurred--other than the length of time it took him to get to that point, and its premature end. He routinely threw an upper '90's fastball that would hop at the end (due to backspin exerting its full effect when the ball's forward impetus began to decline sufficiently, much like the drives some golfers hit), like the one DeGrom of the Mets threw to Vogt in the All-Star Game, starting at the waist and ending up at shoulder level, and a 12 to 6 curve that he always telegraphed, but few could still hit at all. Agree wholeheartedly that Pedro was fantastic!

Great thread,

Larry

What pitcher has won 3 unanimous Cy Youngs in 4 years?
What pitcher won a MVP and was runner up twice in a 4 year period?
What pitcher won 3 pitching triple crowns in 4 years?
What pitcher won 2 World Series MVPs in that same 4 year period?
What pitcher threw 2 shutouts in 3 days to clich a world championship?
What pitcher threw a perfect game and 3 no hitters in 4 years?
Reputed is the wrong word, unparalleled is the word you were looking for.

Easily the best hitter since Ted Williams? Easily a better hitter than Bonds, Pujols, A-Rod, Schmidt, and Boggs? Only if singles count for more than home runs.

My take
 

It's funny to me how many of you guys think that the top 5 players of all time retired 40+ years ago.

No it's the word I meant. Don't get me wrong, I think Koufax was great. I don't dispute he was the best pitcher on earth for 4 years either.

I don't believe he belongs in the discussion for greatest ever (living or dead) though. Not when considering the ballpark he pitched half his games in and the era he pitched.

Koufax pitched against
Roberto Clemente
Willie Mays
Hank Aaron
Stan Musisl
Eddie Mathews
Willie Stargell
Willie McCovey
Orlando Cepeda
Frank Robinson
Pete Rose
Lou Brock
Ernie Banks
Ron Santo
Billy Williams
Richie Allen
Richie Ashburn
Nellie Fox
Yogi Berra
Duke Snider
Mickey Mantle
Roger Maris
Harmon Killebrew

I guess the NL really sucked, no talent. There's no excuse for not pitching multiple no hitters every season, an ERA under 1 (He did it in the WS, why not the regular season)., 400 Ks, 30 wins. I guess the Dodgers should have stayed in the Colasium with a 250 ft left field fence. After all, you think that had no impact on his era or other stats. Moving into a real major league park was an unfair advantage for Koufax, as was pitching against no talent in the NL or WS. Striking out 15 Yankees was meaningless, cause that team sucked too. Go on and continue hating the best left handed pitcher of all time.

Judging a pitcher's historical greatness based on his best four-year run was never a thing before Koufax. It's just something that was created to retrofit the data to make a case for putting him at or near the top of the best pitchers list. Ex post facto analyses like that don't stand up to peer review in fields whose experts have studied statistics. Maybe that's condescending, but it's also true.

The best career is Walter Johnson, Cy Young, or Roger Clemens.

The best season is Tim Keefe, Pud Galvin, Hoss Radbourn, Walter Johnson (1913), Bob Gibson, Dwight Gooden, or Pedro Martinez (2000).

The best game is Kerry Wood, but that could be surpassed today if, for example, someone pitches a perfect game without a ball put in play and strikes out 21 batters.

The best 4 (or 7 or 16.3 or π or .123) year run can be calculated, but I don't really see the point. Even if you choose 4 years (completely by accident of course), it's still not at all clear that Koufax should be #1.

I'm not expecting to change anyone's mind, because the people who think Koufax was the greatest pitcher ever (or even in the top 5) didn't get there by caring about the statistics that empirically do a better job of quantifying a player's contributions to his team's chances of winning games, but hopefully they can at least understand the perspective of those they are arguing against.