ESPN Top 100

[RCMcKenzie]

Chris, I agree, I have Martinez ahead of Ryan, but neither is in my top 50. To me, I saw Ryan many times and he was like Dave Kingman, he could have the best game you ever saw, or a really bad game.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Greg, to me as a baseball card collector, I never saw Clemente or Kaline, but I consider them both all-time greats. I don't consider Bryce Harper an all-time great.

I couldn't agree more. Harper may end up there, but he's been far too inconsistent to appear on this list right now.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Tabe

I'm curious about these two opinions. Based on what are you saying these guys should be moved?

For all his strikeouts and no-hitters, Ryan still finished his career with a 112 ERA+. He had an ERA+ under 100 nine different times in his career. Pedro, on the other hand, had an ERA+ of 154 and had an ERA+ under 100 just two times in his career. Besides those two, his next lowest for a season was 117. That's right - his third-worst ERA+ season was 5 points higher than Ryan's career total. Pedro won 3 Cy Youngs and was runner-up twice - Ryan was a runner-up once with no wins. Pedro once had an ERA - in a hitters' park in a steroid era - that was 3.17 runs below the league average.

So, again, what's the case for Ryan needing to be higher up to the top and, thus, many, many spots ahead of Pedro who should be "towards the bottom"?

My favorite Pedro stat is that in 2000, he led the AL with an ERA of 1.74. The second lowest ERA in the entire American League was posted by Roger Clemens at.... 3.70. 1.96 full runs below Pedro. Pedro was twice as effective at not giving up runs as the second best pitcher.

Personally I don't Martinez hurled enough innings to rank #11 among players at all positions, but he was one dominating pitcher

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Ricky

No George Sisler.

Thank you, Rich. The fact that he and Crawford aren't even on the list is shocking to me and, at the very least, shows a lack of appreciation or research on the greats of the first quarter of the 20th century by ESPN.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Peter I said I could make a case, not that I would win. What do y'all think about Robin Roberts as the 50th "most valuable" of all-time by WAR? I did not see him play, but heard he had a good fastball early in his career. I picked up a nice 1956 Topps that I should be getting soon.

Greg, to me as a baseball card collector, I never saw Clemente or Kaline, but I consider them both all-time greats. I don't consider Bryce Harper an all-time great.

Roberts pitched on mostly lousy teams but still seemed to have very impressive stats. That said, 50 feels a little high to me, just subjectively.

[Robextend]

Bryce Harper over Eddie Murray, Lou Brock & Jeff Bagwell?? Eh

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Robextend

Bryce Harper over Eddie Murray, Lou Brock & Jeff Bagwell?? Eh

I won't argue Murray or Bagwell but Bryce is a LOT better player than Brock. Brock was a guy with a little power whose job was to get on base. Except he wasn't all that good at that (.343 OBP). Harper, meanwhile, gets on base a LOT more (.392 OBP) while slugging much higher (.524 vs .410). Defensively, they're probably a wash with neither being great (though Harper's dWAR is better). Harper also has 2 MVPs.

There's literally no argument for Brock over Harper unless you think stealing a ton of bases at the not-great rate of 75% success is more valuable than it is.

[shagrotn77]

Foxx and Trout should switch places.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Trout and Harper are undoubtedly getting some credit for the projected rest of their careers. But they are the two most talented hitters of this generation and I think this forum for the most part has a huge nostalgia bias in favor of vintage players.

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Trout and Harper are undoubtedly getting some credit for the projected rest of their careers. But they are the two most talented hitters of this generation and I think this forum for the most part has a huge nostalgia bias in favor of vintage players.

Pete, can you please post Trout's Playoffs & World Series numbers during his 11 year career?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

Pete, can you please post Trout's Playoffs & World Series numbers during his 11 year career?

Sure, when you post Ted Williams' and Ernie Banks'. Oh and Ty Cobb's too please -- .262 was it?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

There is no way on earth Pujols on the Angels was remotely close to Trout. No one seriously disputes Trout has been the best player in baseball since he came up in 2011.

I agree Trout was better on the Angels. Life time it will be Pujols and the numbers really won't be that close. In my opinion anyway.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I agree Trout was better on the Angels. Life time it will be Pujols and the numbers really won't be that close. In my opinion anyway.

Pujols on St. Louis was MASSIVE. A phenomenon. The second half of his career he was average to mediocre and hitting behind Trout pumped up his counting numbers.

[53toppscollector]

Not sure I understand the people saying Pedro Martinez is way too high.

He was the most dominant pitcher of his era. From '97-03, the peak of the steroid era, he went 118-36, with a 2.20 ERA, 0.94 WHIP, 213 ERA+, and 5.59 K/BB ratio. I mean, those numbers are outrageous.

He ended up with 3,000+ strikeouts despite throwing only 2800 career innings. Injuries limited him after age 32, and he retired younger than some guys will now. But his numbers are absurd, in maybe the most offensively dominated era of baseball history.

I place more value on peak/performance than I do on counting stats, though some can argue that longevity is a skill. 10th best winning percentage ever, 8th best WHIP ever, 13th in H/9, 11th in K/9, 12th in K/BB, and 6th in ERA+

The game has changed recently and tilted back toward pitchers to some degree, which might make his accomplishments seem not as great, but I think when you adjust for era/context, hes arguably the most dominant pitcher ever, maybe behind only WaJo. But then you get into trying to compare their eras, which is really a fool's errand.

[Peter_Spaeth]

No doubt he had that amazing dominant period, although interestingly, in WAR7, he ranks … wait for it.... 21st. 5th though in adjusted WAR7 which I think doesn't require consecutive seasons. To me, you have to take the whole career into consideration too, and I just can't see putting him above Young, Alexander, Mathewson, Grove, Seaver, etc.

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Sure, when you post Ted Williams' and Ernie Banks'. Oh and Ty Cobb's too please -- .262 was it?

1st, Trout won't even sniff many of Williams and Cobbs accomplishments.

Hits - Cobb - 4189 - Trout - 1419

Steals - Cobb - 897 - Trout - 203

Home Runs:
Williams - 521 (and missed 3 prime years at a real WAR) - Trout - 310

Batting Average - Williams .344 - Cobb .366 - Trout .305

2nd, these 2 played in an era where there were no playoffs so asking to show their playoff numbers, really? c'mon you have at least average intelligence I'm gonna to assume. Nowadays what 5 teams from each league make the playoffs every year and there are 3 rounds before you even get to the World Series. And that wuss can't even get his team into the playoffs. Kinda like when Harper left the Nats, then the Nats won the Series. Trout is a cancer, like Harper, pretty boys who will never play in a WS, and never come close to the careers of Williams and Cobb.

3rd, you're just wrong, and I just proved it.

Don't ever mention Mike Trout with Williams and Cobb again. Mention him with Koufax if you like, or other players who had a nice shorter peak.

Now get the f--k off my lawn!

[felada]

They have Pedro as the highest rated pitcher. Does by one really believe he was the best pitcher ever?

[icollectDCsports]

Sometimes I think they plant a few head scratchers on lists like this in order to get people talking about it.

[Belfast1933]

Am I the only one who counted how many of this top 100 I have in my own card collection?

Probably unimpressive compared to most of you… but I am 93 yup, 7 not yet.

[molenick]

In response to some earlier posts:

Martinez is ranked as the second best pitcher behind Walter Johnson. Which is still high for me, but he wasn't ranked first.

Below are the explanations for WAR7 and WAR7Adj.

[luciobar1980]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

Am I the only one who counted how many of this top 100 I have in my own card collection?

Probably unimpressive compared to most of you… but I am 93 yup, 7 not yet.

Do I detect false modesty? Haha. How can 93 out of 100 NOT be good? I probably own 50 if I'm lucky.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

Do I detect false modesty? Haha. How can 93 out of 100 NOT be good? I probably own 50 if I'm lucky.

That did sound tool-ish, didn’t it? 😂.

I’ll bet there are plenty here that run the table with all 100!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

1st, Trout won't even sniff many of Williams and Cobbs accomplishments.

Hits - Cobb - 4189 - Trout - 1419

Steals - Cobb - 897 - Trout - 203

Home Runs:
Williams - 521 (and missed 3 prime years at a real WAR) - Trout - 310

Batting Average - Williams .344 - Cobb .366 - Trout .305

2nd, these 2 played in an era where there were no playoffs so asking to show their playoff numbers, really? c'mon you have at least average intelligence I'm gonna to assume. Nowadays what 5 teams from each league make the playoffs every year and there are 3 rounds before you even get to the World Series. And that wuss can't even get his team into the playoffs. Kinda like when Harper left the Nats, then the Nats won the Series. Trout is a cancer, like Harper, pretty boys who will never play in a WS, and never come close to the careers of Williams and Cobb.

3rd, you're just wrong, and I just proved it.

Don't ever mention Mike Trout with Williams and Cobb again. Mention him with Koufax if you like, or other players who had a nice shorter peak.

Now get the f--k off my lawn!

Did Trout retire? I missed the memo. He's 30. And missed most of two years. Your comparisons are meaningless. Here's something meaningful.
Offensive WAR
2012 AL 8.7 (1st)
2013 AL 10.1 (1st)
2014 AL 8.8 (1st)
2015 AL 8.8 (1st)
2016 AL 9.9 (1st)
2018 AL 9.2 (1st)
2019 AL 8.1 (1st)

Adjusted OPS+
2012 AL 168 (1st)
2015 AL 176 (1st)
2016 AL 173 (1st)
2017 AL 186 (1st)
2018 AL 198 (1st)
2019 AL 182 (1st)
Active 176 (1st)

Oh, and 3 MVPs and 4 2nds.

But hey, live in the past, it's cool. I probably have some of that nostalgia bias myself.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

Am I the only one who counted how many of this top 100 I have in my own card collection?

Probably unimpressive compared to most of you… but I am 93 yup, 7 not yet.

99, if you count a Laughlin's Josh Gibson. No Oscar Charleston unfortunately.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by G1911

My favorite Pedro stat is that in 2000, he led the AL with an ERA of 1.74. The second lowest ERA in the entire American League was posted by Roger Clemens at.... 3.70. 1.96 full runs below Pedro. Pedro was twice as effective at not giving up runs as the second best pitcher.

Personally I don't Martinez hurled enough innings to rank #11 among players at all positions, but he was one dominating pitcher

That is an AMAZING stat.

Pedro was damn good. Definitely a top 100 in my book, #11? Maybe not in my book, but he was definitely a dominant pitcher during the PEDs era.

The one stat I liked about Pedro up until 2009 was that he was only the second pitcher to have over 200W's and less than 100L's. His 5-1 record in his last season pushed him to 100L (exactly). Ok, whose the only pitcher with over 200W's and less than 100L's (without Googling)?

Top 100 thoughts -

The one thing most people ignore in baseball stats is defense. Defense is a tough sell in a game where offensive stats are what people want to hear about. Looking at the list, you can tell where some players had their defense considered to be included in the top 100. Ozzie Smith at 69 tells you how good people considered his defense.

[Carter08]

Spahn is the big omission for me of course. Not many baseball players with a career war over 100 and he’s on that list while giving up some prime years to WWII. Feels like he gets knocked for longevity sometimes. Easy to forget he led the league in WHIP a lot and threw two no-nos. Dominant.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Spahn is the big omission for me of course. Not many baseball players with a career war over 100 and he’s on that list while giving up some prime years to WWII. Feels like he gets knocked for longevity sometimes. Easy to forget he led the league in WHIP a lot and threw two no-nos. Dominant.

Isn't Spahn #47 on the ESPN top 100?

[John1941]

I think what it comes down to is that it's a bad list, and we could point out absurdities for months.

David Ortiz is #63, Carl Yastrzemski is #61. I love Big Papi, but he's nowhere close to Carl.

Satchel Paige, who has a case for greatest pitcher of all-time, is just one spot ahead of Nolan Ryan, who had a .526 winning percentage and 112 ERA+.

Lefty Grove, who also has a case for greatest pitcher of all-time, is #54.

How did Ryne Sandberg get in the top 100? Same with Jim Palmer.

As a Yankees fan, I love Whitey Ford, but there's no way he's #60.

And am I the only one who thinks their rating of Negro League players is ridiculously low? Take Oscar Charleston, for instance. They have him rated #53. He had a career OPS+ of 184. Even if you multiply that by .9, that's still 166. In his prime years, 1920-27, he had an OPS+ of 206. Even if you account for the Negro Leagues probably not being as good as the major leagues, that's amazing.

Same with Josh Gibson.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by John1941

I think what it comes down to is that it's a bad list, and we could point out absurdities for months.

David Ortiz is #63, Carl Yastrzemski is #61. I love Big Papi, but he's nowhere close to Carl.

Satchel Paige, who has a case for greatest pitcher of all-time, is just one spot ahead of Nolan Ryan, who had a .526 winning percentage and 112 ERA+.

Lefty Grove, who also has a case for greatest pitcher of all-time, is #54.

How did Ryne Sandberg get in the top 100? Same with Jim Palmer.

As a Yankees fan, I love Whitey Ford, but there's no way he's #60.

And am I the only one who thinks their rating of Negro League players is ridiculously low? Take Oscar Charleston, for instance. They have him rated #53. He had a career OPS+ of 184. Even if you multiply that by .9, that's still 166. In his prime years, 1920-27, he had an OPS+ of 206. Even if you account for the Negro Leagues probably not being as good as the major leagues, that's amazing.

Same with Josh Gibson.

The other aspect of that is that only three predominantly or exclusively Negro League players are even on the list. Maybe ESPN had an explanation but in this day and age especially, the list is surprising in this respect. Bill James btw had Charleson 4 Gibson 9 and Paige 17. Stearnes at 25. Lloyd at 27. Suttles at 43. And several others in the back 50.

[Kidnapped18]

Originally Posted by Tabe

I'm curious about these two opinions. Based on what are you saying these guys should be moved?

For all his strikeouts and no-hitters, Ryan still finished his career with a 112 ERA+. He had an ERA+ under 100 nine different times in his career. Pedro, on the other hand, had an ERA+ of 154 and had an ERA+ under 100 just two times in his career. Besides those two, his next lowest for a season was 117. That's right - his third-worst ERA+ season was 5 points higher than Ryan's career total. Pedro won 3 Cy Youngs and was runner-up twice - Ryan was a runner-up once with no wins. Pedro once had an ERA - in a hitters' park in a steroid era - that was 3.17 runs below the league average.

So, again, what's the case for Ryan needing to be higher up to the top and, thus, many, many spots ahead of Pedro who should be "towards the bottom"?

I think you misread me...when I said towards the bottom that was a direction not saying he should be at the bottom.
To me both pitchers are top 30 MLB all time for sure and I have cards of both

Pedro is not top 20 for me at all...I would move Rickey Henderson (my favorite ballplayer) into top 20 before Pedro

Ryan I believe still holds over 50 MLB records that is a big reason why I move him up...in addition he has over 100 wins and over 2500 strikeouts more than Pedro

[icollectDCsports]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The other aspect of that is that only three predominantly or exclusively Negro League players are even on the list. Maybe ESPN had an explanation but in this day and age especially, the list is surprising in this respect. Bill James btw had Charleson 4 Gibson 9 and Paige 17. Stearnes at 25. Lloyd at 27. Suttles at 43. And several others in the back 50.

How about Buck Leonard?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by icollectDCsports

How about Buck Leonard?

65 on James' list.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Isn't Spahn #47 on the ESPN top 100?

My faith in humanity is restored and my reading comprehension is in question. I’m a Spahn defender but not sure I’d have him quite that high - I’ll take it!

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Kidnapped18

I think you misread me...when I said towards the bottom that was a direction not saying he should be at the bottom.
To me both pitchers are top 30 MLB all time for sure and I have cards of both

Pedro is not top 20 for me at all...I would move Rickey Henderson (my favorite ballplayer) into top 20 before Pedro

Ryan I believe still holds over 50 MLB records that is a big reason why I move him up...in addition he has over 100 wins and over 2500 strikeouts more than Pedro

But, at the end of the day, do strikeouts matter all that much? Isn't the goal to not give up runs? Pedro was A LOT better than Ryan at that.

How can you ignore Pedro actually winning Cy Young Awards and Ryan not?

As for wins, I'll play along and ignore that they're an awful way to judge pitchers (as Ryan's 1987 season shows): Yes, Ryan has 105 more wins. He's also 87 fewer games over .500, with 173 more losses than Pedro. Martinez would have to go 105-173 - 68 games under .500, a winning percentage of .378 - to tie Ryan. So, if you take Pedro's career and add 12 years of 9-15 onto it, you get Nolan Ryan.

[Misunderestimated]

Even when you have "experts" the players that People like and have the compelling narratives still over-perform.
Too high:
Pedro Martinez
Derek jeter
Mickey Mantle
Mariano Rivera
Pete Rose
Ernie Banks
David Ortiz
Joe Jackson (unless you credit him with years he didn't play after 1920)
Bryce Harper (not yet -- and Mookie Betts is better anyway)

Too Low:
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Cy Young
Oscar Charleston
Ivan Rodriguez
Tris Speaker
Eddie Collins

Omissions:
Bullet Rogan
Ed Delahanty
Mickey Cochrane
Smokey Joe Williams

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tabe

But, at the end of the day, do strikeouts matter all that much? Isn't the goal to not give up runs? Pedro was A LOT better than Ryan at that.

How can you ignore Pedro actually winning Cy Young Awards and Ryan not?

As for wins, I'll play along and ignore that they're an awful way to judge pitchers (as Ryan's 1987 season shows): Yes, Ryan has 105 more wins. He's also 87 fewer games over .500, with 173 more losses than Pedro. Martinez would have to go 105-173 - 68 games under .500, a winning percentage of .378 - to tie Ryan. So, if you take Pedro's career and add 12 years of 9-15 onto it, you get Nolan Ryan.

For all his records, Ryan ranks only 29th by JAWS. Petey is 12th. For all his longevity, Ryan is only 24th in WAR.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by shoeless moe

1st, trout won't even sniff many of williams and cobbs accomplishments.

Hits - cobb - 4189 - trout - 1419

steals - cobb - 897 - trout - 203

home runs:
Williams - 521 (and missed 3 prime years at a real war) - trout - 310

batting average - williams .344 - cobb .366 - trout .305

2nd, these 2 played in an era where there were no playoffs so asking to show their playoff numbers, really? C'mon you have at least average intelligence i'm gonna to assume. Nowadays what 5 teams from each league make the playoffs every year and there are 3 rounds before you even get to the world series. And that wuss can't even get his team into the playoffs. Kinda like when harper left the nats, then the nats won the series. Trout is a cancer, like harper, pretty boys who will never play in a ws, and never come close to the careers of williams and cobb.

3rd, you're just wrong, and i just proved it.

Don't ever mention mike trout with williams and cobb again. Mention him with koufax if you like, or other players who had a nice shorter peak.

Now get the f--k off my lawn!

Best post in this thread by far....

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by Tabe

I won't argue Murray or Bagwell but Bryce is a LOT better player than Brock. Brock was a guy with a little power whose job was to get on base. Except he wasn't all that good at that (.343 OBP). Harper, meanwhile, gets on base a LOT more (.392 OBP) while slugging much higher (.524 vs .410). Defensively, they're probably a wash with neither being great (though Harper's dWAR is better). Harper also has 2 MVPs.

There's literally no argument for Brock over Harper unless you think stealing a ton of bases at the not-great rate of 75% success is more valuable than it is.

Good point on Brock, and I know if we are picking a team - we all want Bryce over Brock, but the career numbers do matter a bit. Those were three players that came to mind right away, probably could think of more I would want over Bryce.

[darwinbulldog]

Personally I'd put Eddie Collins a little ahead of Mickey Mantle, but I can understand having Mantle a bit ahead of Collins. 7th vs. 82nd though just bespeaks a shameful ignorance, as does Griffey ahead of Hornsby, Jeter ahead of Speaker, Cy Young at #21...

83% of the list is reasonable, but these 17 rankings are not.

82. Eddie Collins
57. Pete Alexander
54. Lefty Grove
46. Ichiro Suzuki
39. Yogi Berra
36. Tris Speaker
34. Pete Rose
28. Derek Jeter
21. Cy Young
20. Rogers Hornsby
17. Roger Clemens
16. Joe DiMaggio
13. Ken Griffey Jr.
12. Honus Wagner
9. Walter Johnson
7. Mickey Mantle
6. Lou Gehrig

You can't put Koufax in your top 50 and leave WaJo out of your top 3.

[darwinbulldog]

I agree that Trout is too high for what he's done. However, he's too low for a reasonable projection of where he'll end up, so I think they're just splitting the difference. If he retires today I have him at #27. If he plays until he's 40 with a typical dropoff and number of games missed, I expect he'll rank in the 8-12 range at that point.

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Did Trout retire? I missed the memo. He's 30. And missed most of two years. Your comparisons are meaningless. Here's something meaningful.
Offensive WAR
2012 AL 8.7 (1st)
2013 AL 10.1 (1st)
2014 AL 8.8 (1st)
2015 AL 8.8 (1st)
2016 AL 9.9 (1st)
2018 AL 9.2 (1st)
2019 AL 8.1 (1st)

Adjusted OPS+
2012 AL 168 (1st)
2015 AL 176 (1st)
2016 AL 173 (1st)
2017 AL 186 (1st)
2018 AL 198 (1st)
2019 AL 182 (1st)
Active 176 (1st)

Oh, and 3 MVPs and 4 2nds.

But hey, live in the past, it's cool. I probably have some of that nostalgia bias myself.

Who's living in the past, I believe that would be you. You seemed to forget 2020 & 2021. Can you post those?

Like I said he had a very nice run, like Koufax did.

I personally would put him in the 40's, but if you want to put him in the 30's I'd reluctantly be ok with that. But Top 20 at this point is a complete joke.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

Who's living in the past, I believe that would be you. You seemed to forget 2020 & 2021. Can you post those?

Like I said he had a very nice run, like Koufax did.

I personally would put him in the 40's, but if you want to put him in the 30's I'd reluctantly be ok with that. But Top 20 at this point is a complete joke.

2020 was a 60 game season and he missed most of last year with an injury, but you knew that. At 30 I would doubt his run is "over." His injury is nothing like Sandy's. Stay tuned!!

[drcy]

My vote is the top 100 is a decent enough list.

[insidethewrapper]

What are Mike Trout's best stats ? I see he has never lead the league in hits, home runs or batting ave. Once in SB and once in RBI's. Good On Base Pct ( so he must be good at walking ). Watching Centerfielders his defense seems to be about the same ( they are all good ).

[John1941]

Originally Posted by insidethewrapper

What are Mike Trout's best stats ? I see he has never lead the league in hits, home runs or batting ave. Once in SB and once in RBI's. Good On Base Pct ( so he must be good at walking ). Watching Centerfielders his defense seems to be about the same ( they are all good ).

Mike Trout's value is best shown by OPS+. OPS+ is on base percentage and slugging percentage together, and adjusted for era and park effects. For example, 100 is average and 150 is 50% better than average.

Mike Trout has led the AL in OPS+ six times, and for his career is 76% better than the average hitter. That's historic. As with all rate stats, he won't be able to keep it up, but it's still amazing.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by John1941

Mike Trout's value is best shown by OPS+. OPS+ is on base percentage and slugging percentage together, and adjusted for era and park effects. For example, 100 is average and 150 is 50% better than average.

Mike Trout has led the AL in OPS+ six times, and for his career is 76% better than the average hitter. That's historic. As with all rate stats, he won't be able to keep it up, but it's still amazing.

I also like his MVP stats -- 3 awards and 4 second place finishes and IMO he easily could have won two or three of those.

[Tao_Moko]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

Personally I'd put Eddie Collins a little ahead of Mickey Mantle, but I can understand having Mantle a bit ahead of Collins. 7th vs. 82nd though just bespeaks a shameful ignorance, as does Griffey ahead of Hornsby, Jeter ahead of Speaker, Cy Young at #21...

83% of the list is reasonable, but these 17 rankings are not.

82. Eddie Collins
57. Pete Alexander
54. Lefty Grove
46. Ichiro Suzuki
39. Yogi Berra
36. Tris Speaker
34. Pete Rose
28. Derek Jeter
21. Cy Young
20. Rogers Hornsby
17. Roger Clemens
16. Joe DiMaggio
13. Ken Griffey Jr.
12. Honus Wagner
9. Walter Johnson
7. Mickey Mantle
6. Lou Gehrig

You can't put Koufax in your top 50 and leave WaJo out of your top 3.

+1 No list can make everyone happy but there are some real head scratchers here. Your points were well made.

[Peter_Spaeth]

My more in depth disagreement list in addition to omission of Negro League players. Only noted serious disagreements.

89. Shoeless Joe Jackson TOO LOW
82. Eddie Collins TOO LOW
63. David Ortiz TOO HIGH
57. Pete Alexander TOO LOW
54. Lefty Grove TOO LOW
53. Oscar Charleston TOO LOW
46. Ichiro Suzuki TOO HIGH
41. Satchel Paige TOO LOW
36. Tris Speaker TOO LOW
35. Josh Gibson TOO LOW
32. Sandy Koufax TOO HIGH
31. Mariano Rivera TOO HIGH
28. Derek Jeter TOO HIGH
27. Roberto Clemente TOO HIGH
26. Alex Rodriguez TOO LOW
17. Roger Clemens TOO LOW
12. Honus Wagner TOO LOW
11. Pedro Martinez TOO HIGH

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I also like his MVP stats -- 3 awards and 4 second place finishes and IMO he easily could have won two or three of those.

Put another way:

Mike Trout has played in 120+ games in a season 7 times. He finished 1st or 2nd in the MVP voting in all 7 of them. If he didn't get hurt in 2017, he absolutely would have won the MVP that year as well.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

My more in depth disagreement list in addition to omission of Negro League players. Only noted serious disagreements.

89. Shoeless Joe Jackson TOO LOW
82. Eddie Collins TOO LOW
63. David Ortiz TOO HIGH
57. Pete Alexander TOO LOW
54. Lefty Grove TOO LOW
53. Oscar Charleston TOO LOW
46. Ichiro Suzuki TOO HIGH
41. Satchel Paige TOO LOW
36. Tris Speaker TOO LOW
35. Josh Gibson TOO LOW
32. Sandy Koufax TOO HIGH
31. Mariano Rivera TOO HIGH
28. Derek Jeter TOO HIGH
27. Roberto Clemente TOO HIGH
26. Alex Rodriguez TOO LOW
17. Roger Clemens TOO LOW
12. Honus Wagner TOO LOW
11. Pedro Martinez TOO HIGH

With that caveat that I'm unsure how to judge the Negro League guys, you and I are on the same page on all of the other guys you listed.

As mentioned above, ARod being just 2 spots higher than Derek Jeter is laughable. You could split ARod's career into two pieces by position and both careers would be top 30 - and still higher than Jeter.