Pie Traynor cards and memorabilia are awesome

[bbcard1]

A beneficiary of the inflated offensive numbers of his time, I alway thought it curious that he was chose for the Sporting News all time team in the 1976 Topps set. One of these things is not like the others...

[Exhibitman]

Radio station premium:

[rats60]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

A beneficiary of the inflated offensive numbers of his time, I alway thought it curious that he was chose for the Sporting News all time team in the 1976 Topps set. One of these things is not like the others...

He was a gold glove 3rd baseman who hit .320 over his career. At the time he was the only 3rd baseman elected to the HOF by the BBWAA. He was also elected as the 3rd baseman Baseball's All Time Team in 1969. His numbers today suffer because he played in a pitcher's park and didn't hit many home runs. Eddie Mathews would have been a better choice, but it was probably too close to the end of his career and he wasn't even in the HOF yet.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by rats60

He was a gold glove 3rd baseman who hit .320 over his career. At the time he was the only 3rd baseman elected to the HOF by the BBWAA. He was also elected as the 3rd baseman Baseball's All Time Team in 1969. His numbers today suffer because he played in a pitcher's park and didn't hit many home runs. Eddie Mathews would have been a better choice, but it was probably too close to the end of his career and he wasn't even in the HOF yet.

He was a .320 career hitter. The NL overall batting average over his career was .283. That includes pitchers hitting. His career slugging percentage was .435. The NL overall slugging percentage over his career was .396.

He was a slightly above average hitter (as is shown by his career OPS+ of 107...7% above average) and seems to have been overrated as a defender.

Tom C

[rats60]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

He was a .320 career hitter. The NL overall batting average over his career was .283. That includes pitchers hitting. His career slugging percentage was .435. The NL overall slugging percentage over his career was .396.

He was a slightly above average hitter (as is shown by his career OPS+ of 107...7% above average) and seems to have been overrated as a defender.

Tom C

The people that saw him play voted him into the Hall of Fame. They elected no other 3rd baseman until 30 years later. Those who saw him play said he was an elite defensive player. I would say you are under rating his defensive ability since you didn't see him play and you don't know. His slugging percentage suffered from playing in a big park and not benefiting from cheap home runs that other NLers did. He was top 10 in hitting 6 times, hits 7 times, total bases 5 times and RBIs 9 times. He was much better than an average hitter, he was exceptional for his position in his era. That is why he was elected to the Hall of Fame and none of his contemporaries at the position were. Brooks Robinson had an OPS+ 104, I guess he stinks and should be kicked out of the HoF.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by rats60

The people that saw him play voted him into the Hall of Fame. They elected no other 3rd baseman until 30 years later. Those who saw him play said he was an elite defensive player. I would say you are under rating his defensive ability since you didn't see him play and you don't know. His slugging percentage suffered from playing in a big park and not benefiting from cheap home runs that other NLers did. He was top 10 in hitting 6 times, hits 7 times, total bases 5 times and RBIs 9 times. He was much better than an average hitter, he was exceptional for his position in his era. That is why he was elected to the Hall of Fame and none of his contemporaries at the position were. Brooks Robinson had an OPS+ 104, I guess he stinks and should be kicked out of the HoF.

Brooks Robinson was pretty much as good a hitter as Traynor (as you said...104 OPS+ for Robby versus 107 for Traynor) and he sustained that level for over 3,500 more plate appearances than did Traynor. Thus being that kind of hitter for six more full seasons than did Traynor. And if you want to discuss defense and try to compare the two as being in the same stratosphere it would be a losing argument on your part. Robinson was a slightly above average hitter for almost 12,000 plate appearances and the best defense player ever at his position. So yes. He belongs in the Hall, although in the lower tier.

Players who had a higher slugging percentage as a Pirate during Pie Traynors years there who were apparently not as adversely affected by the huge park as poor ol' Pie was:

Kiki Cuyler
Paul Waner
George Grantham
Max Carey (6 year period)
Glenn Wright (5 year period)
Gus Suhr

All of their career slugging numbers as a member of a Pirates team alongside Pie Traynor are higher than Traynor.

My list of better third basemen than Pie Traynor before he played:

Home Run Baker
Jimmy Collins
Heinie Groh
Larry Gardner (maybe a tie)

And players who came more towards the end of Traynor's career who were better:

Pinky Higgins
Stan Hack
Harlond Clift (not sure...Clift much better over much shorter time)

Pie Traynor was basically George Kell during a more offensive era and with better teammates.

I don't dislike Traynor. I agree that during the period 1922-1935 he was the best third baseman in the game overall. But only in maybe four of five of those individual years was he the best, and on his own team he may have had one year where he was the best. Very good player. Just not a HOFer. And I put little stock in any body that votes for Joe Tinker for the HOF.

Tom C

[rats60]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Brooks Robinson was pretty much as good a hitter as Traynor (as you said...104 OPS+ for Robby versus 107 for Traynor) and he sustained that level for over 3,500 more plate appearances than did Traynor. Thus being that kind of hitter for six more full seasons than did Traynor. And if you want to discuss defense and try to compare the two as being in the same stratosphere it would be a losing argument on your part. Robinson was a slightly above average hitter for almost 12,000 plate appearances and the best defense player ever at his position. So yes. He belongs in the Hall, although in the lower tier.

Players who had a higher slugging percentage as a Pirate during Pie Traynors years there who were apparently not as adversely affected by the huge park as poor ol' Pie was:

Kiki Cuyler
Paul Waner
George Grantham
Max Carey (6 year period)
Glenn Wright (5 year period)
Gus Suhr

All of their career slugging numbers as a member of a Pirates team alongside Pie Traynor are higher than Traynor.

My list of better third basemen than Pie Traynor before he played:

Home Run Baker
Jimmy Collins
Heinie Groh
Larry Gardner (maybe a tie)

And players who came more towards the end of Traynor's career who were better:

Pinky Higgins
Stan Hack
Harlond Clift (not sure...Clift much better over much shorter time)

Pie Traynor was basically George Kell during a more offensive era and with better teammates.

I don't dislike Traynor. I agree that during the period 1922-1935 he was the best third baseman in the game overall. But only in maybe four of five of those individual years was he the best, and on his own team he may have had one year where he was the best. Very good player. Just not a HOFer. And I put little stock in any body that votes for Joe Tinker for the HOF.

Tom C

"He was a mechanically perfect third baseman." Branch Rickey

"The greatest team player I ever saw." John McGraw

"Watching Traynor play was like looking over daVinci's shoulder." Red Smith

"Most marvelous pair hands you'd ever want to see." Billy Herman

"Pie had the quickest hands, the quickest arm of any third baseman." Charlie Grimm

He wasn't better than Brooks, but he was the best of the prewar era. His peers considered him the best, better than any of the players on "your list." I value their opinions over those of people who never saw him play and just want to hate on him. In 1947 Baker received 49 votes for the HOF, Traynor 119. Baker better than Pie? Lol.

[btcarfagno]

Are you using HOF votes as your argument that Traynor was the best pre war third baseman? That's not just lol worthy. I'll give you a lulz.

Frank Baker was far superior to Pie Traynor. It's not close. And Jimmy Collins was slightly better.

Pie Traynor was statistically the best third baseman in the sport for just three years. 1923, 1927 and 1929. That's it. Any idea how many times he was one the the two best hitters on his own team? Twice.

He played at a time when there was a severe lack of quality third basemen in baseball. Being the best of a bad lot should not make one HOF worthy. Statistically there were several players before him that were better. One career contemporary that was almost as good (Travis Jackson...who also shouldn't be in the HOF). Several statistically better 3B came just after him, and then the floodgates opened in the 50's and 60's.

Recent career contemporaries would swear that Derek Jeter was a gold glove caliber defender for the better part of 20 years.

Lol.

Tom C

[bbcard1]

I am not implying Traynor is an egregious selection for the hall...he's not at all. Best of all time, even in 1976? That's probably a stretch. He may not make the top ten now, certainly not the top 5 which is something no other player on that 1976 Topps All Time team would say (you can argue Cochrane, but he is one of a cluster of catchers, though Bench or Campy would be my pick). We have had a good run of quality third basemen in the last 40 or so years and are in the midst of quite probably the best crop of third sackers ever top to bottom (Bryant, Arenado, Donaldson, Machado, Beltre, Seager, Turner, Ramirez, Rendon, plus others like Longoria, Lamb, Bregman, Castellanos, Frazier etc.). Interesting times.