Is 3000 hits a big deal or overrated?

[packs]

How does a guy who gets 3,000 hits in 16 seasons qualify as a participation award player? Before you said anyone could play 23 seasons and get 3,000 hits. Ichiro did it in 16.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

How does a guy who gets 3,000 hits in 16 seasons qualify as a participation award player? Before you said anyone could play 23 seasons and get 3,000 hits. Ichiro did it in 16.

I already addressed that Ichiro got his 3000 in many less years than the others (only 1 of 2 with 16 years)...... I actually addressed that many many times.

they celebrate 3000 hits, not the amount of years it took him to get it. We arent just talking about ichiro we are talking about 3000 hit club in general.

So coming up with 1 out of 2 of the lone examples of guys that did it in 16 years or less that are in the 3000 club proves my point, you are citing an exception not the rule. You already appear to agree that 23 seasons amounts to a participation award as you were quick to talk about Ichiro. 25 guys took 20 years or more on the top 30. Most of the remainder are 19 years of service. Cap Anson 27 years which is 111 hits a year. (yes many many less games a season) Still if you play 23 seasons you need 130 hits a year. Replacement guys can do that, but they arent going to have the power needed to get in the top 30 of total bases.

[packs]

How come Julio Franco doesn't have 3,000 hits?

[1952boyntoncollector]

How come Ichiro doesnt have 4000 total bases or even 3900 total bases even with 3000 hits? Walks are also added to the total bases which makes the feat amazing.

I would assume Julio Franco doesnt have 3000 hits because he only played in 120 games in a year 13 times. Plus one year he played ONE game, in another year 15 games and there are 9 years in which he played under 100 games many for far less. Give him 20 years of steady games and he gets it easy

Its too bad Franco didnt get to participate more to win the participation award

[Eric72]

3,000 hits. 500 home runs. 300 wins. 3,000 strikeouts.

Rightly or wrongly, these milestone career totals have been celebrated for decades. I personally consider achieving any one of them to be a, "big deal," as the OP framed it.

I understand that advanced statistics are available and perhaps more useful when comparing one particular player to another. However, I also try to keep things in context. In and of itself, racking up 3,000 hits in Major League Baseball is quite an accomplishment.

In short, yes, it IS a big deal. Kudos to all who have done it.

If 4,500 total bases somehow becomes a milestone, which I doubt, then let us applaud those players, too.

Best regards,

Eric

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Eric72

3,000 hits. 500 home runs. 300 wins. 3,000 strikeouts.

Rightly or wrongly, these milestone career totals have been celebrated for decades. I personally consider achieving any one of them to be a, "big deal," as the OP framed it.

I understand that advanced statistics are available and perhaps more useful when comparing one particular player to another. However, I also try to keep things in context. In and of itself, racking up 3,000 hits in Major League Baseball is quite an accomplishment.

In short, yes, it IS a big deal. Kudos to all who have done it.

If 4,500 total bases somehow becomes a milestone, which I doubt, then let us applaud those players, too.

Best regards,

Eric

sure they are MILESTONES for the player, and celebration points for an individual's lengthy career. My entire argument has been that hitting a milestone doth not necessarily carry with it some level of prowess. There is no such a thing as a "3000 hit player" as not all hits are created equal. There are plenty of hitters better than many on the 3000 hit club who had long careers that were far more productive.

In a nutshell, I'm just saying that getting to a milestone doesn't make you a better player than some other who failed to reach it. We have to look deeper below the surface.


ETA: the OP asked if 3000 hits was overrated, and yes I tend to think that ,as an indicator of player performance, it IS!

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

sure they are MILESTONES for the player, and celebration points for an individual's lengthy career. My entire argument has been that hitting a milestone doth not necessarily carry with it some level of prowess. There is no such a thing as a "3000 hit player" as not all hits are created equal. There are plenty of hitters better than many on the 3000 hit club who had long careers that were far more productive.

In a nutshell, I'm just saying that getting to a milestone doesn't make you a better player than some other who failed to reach it. We have to look deeper below the surface.


ETA: the OP asked if 3000 hits was overrated, and yes I tend to think that ,as an indicator of player performance, it IS!

I was never arguing with you. And I agree with what I consider to be the salient point of your post. For example, Lou Gehrig did not amass 3,000 hits or 500 home runs. Does this make him any less of a player? Of course not. Was he better than Ichiro? I certainly think so.

All I was trying to say is that achieving 3,000 hits is pretty special. Perhaps we should all just enjoy the accomplishment instead of trying to "win" a discussion that somehow devolved into the polarized argument this thread has become.

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

How come Ichiro doesnt have 4000 total bases or even 3900 total bases even with 3000 hits? Walks are also added to the total bases which makes the feat amazing.

Walks aren't added to total bases........

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Walks aren't added to total bases........

Ah now you see what that would of been an amazing feat... there are other metrics that factor it in..

To sum up, there are different ways to look at total bases versus hits...each side has its argument..neither side is 'wrong' No more from me on this thread....

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

No more from me on this thread

Much appreciated, Jake. Thank you.