Now factor in hitting and its a different picture. Ozzie is on top without nobody close if we are only talking about the position defensively. Like I said if we factor in offensive numbers it may be a lot different. We did not watch but I would go out on a limb and say there is no way Wagner got to the balls he did. Yount was extremely talented but no where close on defensive range. Vizquel would be the only one closer. Jeter, Ripken, Vaughan, Yount no. If you go by offensive numbers then Ozzie would not be in top 5.

Not to take this thread in an entirely different direction, but when I grew up in the 1970s which is well before many statistical refinements were made, it was generally acknowledged that Joe Cronin was the second be shortstop to all time, certainly the best ever in the AL. Not even in the conversation anymore and has been supplanted by many of his contemporaries.

I agree that Larkin is often way undervalued. It may sound harsh, but if the cat in St. Louis isn't doing back flips doesn't have the legacy he has.

Larkin was a hell of a defensive SS that also hit. If Smith was in the AL, he'd likely have had close to 10 GG.

Underrated is Alan Trammell.

BB Ref lifetime WAR
Larkin 70.2
Trammell 70.4

Larkin 1st ballot HoFer, and Trammell nowhere close to induction.

Most people do not realize just how good Derek Jeter was. Derek Jeter ranks 20th in career offensive WAR. TWENTIETH! He's ahead of such greats as Jimmie Foxx, Ken Griffey Jr., Eddie Mathews and Joe DiMaggio.

Of the 19 players in baseball history to have a more productive offensive career, only THREE of them played in the last 30 years (Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez and Rickey Henderson) and of those three only Henderson hasn't been linked to steroids.

I think:
T1. Honus Wagner
T1. Derek Jeter
3. Cal Ripken Jr.
4. Barrry Larkin

Derek has been the best shortstop since integration and Wagner prior. It's a given that pre-integration baseball was a less competitive time in the sport, but I do not want to underscore Wagner's career because of it.

I discount Alex Rodriguez because of his inflated numbers and his time at 3B.

I think formulas cease to become useful when you can look at something an simply tell it is not true. I don't think any serious fan who prefer to have Jeter over DiMaggio or Foxx.

[QUOTE=bbcard1;1305787]I think formulas cease to become useful when you can look at something an simply tell it is not true. I don't think any serious fan who prefer to have Jeter over DiMaggio or Foxx.[/QUOTE
Offensive WAR, I believe, rates Jeter's production as compared to other shortstops only. Foxx ranks lower because he is rated against first basemen which in his time alone included Lou Gehrig, Hank Greenberg, Hal Trosky, etc.

I'm right there with you on Joe Cronin; can't believe he's not on more lists here in the thread. Wagner was the best at the position, but Cronin should be up there….

This Means WAR
 

As far as I can tell Joe and Jimmy never played shortstop. However, I decided to ask them:

Me, to Double X: Jimmy, tell me about your WAR years.

XX: I was lucky enough to have my career fall between both of them.


Me, to Joe: Tell me about your WAR years.

DiMag: I went from California to Hawaiii to Atlantic City.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjIZwv5aENQ

Using 250 steals as an arbitrary cutoff to boost the profile of Yount is kinda weak. Drop the number to 240 and Hank Aaron gets included, for example. Barring that, do we seriously believe that Yount belongs in any discussion that includes Mays, Musial, Aaron, Cobb, etc? C'mon.

And the reason Yount has only one Gold Glove? His name is Alan Trammell.

I know that I did briefly mention statistical plateaus that Yount reached, and how it was more impressive that Yount reached them as a shortstop. But the statistical comps I put up immediately afterword weren't meant to exclude Ripken, or anybody else. In fact, they weren't meant to be a comparison to other shortstops at all. They were really put up there to place the entirety of Yount's career numbers into context.

When looking at Yount's career numbers, people often tried to dismiss him by saying he only hit 250 home runs, or only hit .285. They don't take into consideration that Yount only played 64 games in the minor leagues, that he was picked out of high school, sent to the minors for a few months, then inserted into a Major League lineup at 18. He learned how to hit in the Majors. He was never afforded the time most baseball players get to perfect their craft. His career batting average suffers because while most Major League players don't come up to the big leagues now until they're 24 or 25, Yount was a teenager when he got the job. If you look at what Yount did from age 24 on, he was a career .293 hitter. So, as I so often try to do in these types of discussions, I am trying to place Yount's career as a whole into a proper context. What I was attempting to do, Raymond, was simply show that his career metrics, taken together, were more impressive than any of them were alone.

250 home runs alone isn't impressive.
250 home runs and 250 stolen bases is a little more impressive.
250 home runs, 250 stolen bases, and 2,500 hits is more impressive,
250 home runs, 250 stolen bases, 2,500 hits, and a 75.00 career WAR is even more impressive.
250 home runs, 250 stolen bases, 2,500 career hits, a 75.00 career WAR, and 500 doubles...is even more impressive.

See what I'm trying to get at? There were a lot of players that hit more home runs than Yount. There were also a lot of players that stole more bases than Yount. But how many did all the things that Yount did? He did a lot of things very well. And that, I think more than anything, is the greatest compliment that could be paid to Yount. He could do so many things well. He had really good power, had really good speed. He was a tremendous fielder, he was a great pure hitter. He was a clutch hitter. And he was a leader.

Robin Yount's greatness cannot simply be measured in a few stats. You really had to see him play to truly appreciate just how gifted he was. People often said that Joe DiMaggio made everything look so easy. Well, that's Yount. When you looked at him in the field, he was like Tulowitzki is now. So graceful. The way he broke to the ball. The way he stabbed the ball on a short bounce, the way he set himself while momentum was carrying his body towards third base, and let loose a perfect strike to first base. Everything the guy did was like watching poetry. He did the things that just don't show up in the box score. While baseball, more than any sport, lends itself to statistical analysis, numbers cannot capture the "wow" factor that some players had. One might look at Mickey Mantle's career stats, see his 536 home runs, and think "ok, he was 15th or 16th all-time in home runs." While that is an accurate statement, in a way, it does a disservice to Mantle. A home run that just squeaks over the wall in right field, where the fence is 318 feet, counts the same as a home run that hits the facade of the upper deck at Yankee Stadium. But are they the same hit? Absolutely not. Anybody that was at a Yankees game in the 50s and early 60s will tell you that Mantle could have hit a ball to heaven so God could see the stitches. And while Yankee fans might still worship Mantle in a way, and non Yankee fans, or baseball fans that didn't see him play might roll there eyes, there's a reason he's so revered today, and it's not because he looked like somebody out of central casting in Hollywood. When Mantle hit a home run, he put the fear of God in opposing pitchers.

Yet that doesn't show up in the box score.

Yount was like that in a different way. When he was on, the Brewers were going to win. He was going to do whatever it took to beat you. He might hit only one home run in a game. Then he'll make a diving catch for the third out, robbing two runs from the other team. Then he'll make a perfect relay throw on a ball hit deep to left center, and keep a guy at third from scoring. Yount was magical to watch. He really was. And because he played in Milwaukee, like Clemente before him in Pittsburgh, and even like Aaron when he was in Milwaukee, fewer people saw, or appreciated just how great he was.

IMO, Jeter is no where near the top 5...or 20.
He was just placed in the right situation/line-up...for,
well over 10 years.


- M.

That's all good Bill. I draw issue with any prestatement about Yount starting young and not spending much time in minors. So what! It's irrelevant to the player or his career. Cough cough Kaline Winfield.

Yount was a great SS and player, the fact he started young shouldn't be used to strengthen an argument for him. I actually think it can be used against him because without those early years he may not have reached 3000 hits. A number late starters like E. Martinez and Ichiro fall short of.

For the record, I think Yount belongs in the top 10.

Why discount just his batting average from his early years? Without his seasons prior to age 24 he wouldn't have reached any of the benchmarks you listed: 250 HRs, 250 SBs, 2,500 hits or 75 WAR. In either case I don't think anyone here is dismissing him as a great player. If anything, fair or not, he falls on some people's list of top shortstops because he played almost half his career in center field.

I think Kurkjian is the best SS!

No way is Jeter the second best shortstop. Not even close. He's played a lot of games at shortstop. That's why he appears so high on your list. While there is something to be said for playing the position for so long, he's never been the most dynamic player at his position.

Regarding the steals comment, yes, Aaron makes that list if the benchmark is set to 250. If you lower the standards on any list, more players will always be included. That's what happens. I could have raised the list to 300 HR and SB, and Yount wouldn't have been included. But 250 is not some arbitrary number.

And as far as the other comment is concerned, you are entitled to your opinion. I say when his numbers put him in the discussion, yes, he belongs. He wasn't on the level of Mays or Aaron when it comes to power, or Musial or Cobb when it comes to pure hitting. But he's in the discussion because he did so many things well while playing two premium positions.

That's fair, too. I realize that his career numbers aren't as good if he doesn't play those earlier years. I'm just merely pointing out that he was a much better hitter once he reached the age that most baseball players hit the Majors. He learned on the fly. So did Kaline

Bill- you are a true fan, no doubt about it.

I just took a look at Yount's BBR player page with the goal of reminding all of the split in games played at each position (1479 @ short & 1218 @ OF), but I came away having been reminded that he won MVPs at both positions, and, while he only won gold gloves at SS, I remember him as a very, very good centerfielder, another premium defensive position. His stat lines remained solid throughout his career. All that does add up to him being a Great player.

When I attended the 1999 HOF Induction Ceremonies, he appeared to be a footnote - everyone else seem to have bigger fan support, even Cepeda.

Thanks, Raymond. I think Yount's hallmark was probably his consistency. He had the one transcendent season in 1982, and a bunch of great years: 1980, 1983, 1984, 1987, 1988 and 1989. The thing that hurt him was that shoulder injury in 1985. It completely changed Robin Yount as a hitter. He wasn't able to turn on inside pitches with power the way he used to. He was able to adjust his approach at the plate, and started hitting with power to the opposite field.

It's odd that you didn't feel more of a Brewer fan presence when Yount was inducted. I know a few Brewer fans that went to the ceremony, and they felt the Cheesehead turnout was quite good. That was a great class, though, wasn't it? Ryan, Brett, Yount and Cepeda. One of my favorites, in fact.

Yount was a really good defensive center fielder, underrated, even. I think that when it came to people appreciating Yount nationally, he didn't get the credit he deserved. I think that's part of the reason why I'm such huge fans of Yount and Clemente both. They both played in smaller markets, and their talents were underappreciated when they played. Remember, Yount was only an All Star 3 times, and never as an outfielder. He wasn't even an All Star the year he won his second MVP, which is really odd.

Yount made a lot of great plays with his glove in center. Here's one of my favorites. This is Robin Yount laying out to make the final out of Juan Nieves' no hitter.

Yount goes horizontal to preserve Nieves no no.

The comment has been made that Yount wasn't on the level of a Cobb, or a Musial. That's fine by me. There have been very few players that have ever played the game at that level. I think Yount would have come a lot closer if he hadn't messed up his shoulder in his prime. He was 29 when that injury happened, and it basically closed off a good third of the field to him. He could hit the occasional single, but he couldn't pull the ball to left field with power anymore, and that sapped some of his extra base hit ability. That he was able to adjust his game, become a really good player again, and win an MVP in the process says a lot about how great he was.

Considering it the crux of the debate I thought it would be appropriate to mention Jeter passed Wagner in hits last night.

Nate-

Just to be clear, Kurkjian is a Hobbitt, not a shortstop. :D

Just being put in the position does not mean the production magically happens.
Jeter is an all time great and would be whether or not he played in NY or in Florida. Obviously the fact he plays in New York makes his profile larger with more people are aware of his exploits.

Yes SS is a premium defensive position. But would you rather have a player who is decent with the glove and great with the bat or great with the glove and below average with the stick? I'm taking the stick. That's why Schmidt is hands down better than Robinson
Ozzie was amazing defensively. Terrible with the bat. If pick Jeter 6 days a week and twice on Sunday.
My list for what it's worth:
1-Wagner
2-Jeter
3-Banks
4-Ripken
5-Vaughn

Ozzie had almost 2500 hits and 600 steals. A better hitter than he sometimes gets credit for, although obviously not in Jeter's class.

And I don't buy the argument that Jeter just happened to be in the right place at the right time. That could be said of almost anyone.

Always found Ripkens streak overated. No big deal to take a day off and have another pro cover for you.

Since you are in NY, do you feel the same about Ruth and Gehrig? Mantle, Berra? Dimaggio? Whitey Ford never would have won the games he did on a different team. Bench and the Big Red Machine? Reggie Jackson, Clemente, Schmidt? I could go on. Your lineup is what it is. Just like the ballpark the player plays in. They play where they play. I would like to know your top 20 shortstops that are better that Jeter. Start naming Marckus......

Yes, Jeter was in the right place at the right time. There was no Ozzie Smith, Robin Yount, or Cal Ripken in front of him. In '95, the year before Jeter became a full-time player, the Yankees marched a 33 year old Tony Fernandez out to shortstop. Fernandez, who was an outstanding shortstop in his prime, was no longer that player. In the only season he spent with the Yankees, he hit .245 with a .688 OPS in 108 games.

But, once Jeter got the starting nod, he was good enough to hang on to the position for two decades. And this is on a team where the owner will drop $100 million on a player the way I drop my socks in the laundry. Jeter had to be doing something right to continue getting the starting nod every spring.

I'm not a huge Jeter fan. I respect how he's played the game, though, and when a player has earned the praise they are being given, I will stand up and point that out. And there's no doubt in my mind that Jeter deserves the praise he;s been given.

A solid team might help some of the counting stats a bit (RBI, runs scored, etc.) but Jeter managed a .311 career batting average over 20 years! I'm sorry, but having Jason Giambi on your team doesn't make that happen.

Jeter is a top 5 modern player and top 2 shortstop IMO.

Silence Marckus? That's what we all thought.....troll.

A .311 career average is quite good, nobody will deny that. But a top 5 player of the modern era? No way. He's not even close. And the second best shortstop of all-time? No.

The modern era includes Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Stan Musial, Ken Griffey Jr, Barry Bonds. That's 5 players off the top of my head that blow Jeter out of the water.

Since 1950, there have been 716 players to rack up 4,000 or more at bats. Jeter is 159th in OPS on that list, and Jeter's offense is far better than his defense.

What makes Derek Jeter one of the 5 best players of the modern era in your mind? How could you possibly arrive at that statement? He's never won an MVP, and he's only placed in the top 5 of the MVP 3 times in 20 seasons. He's never won a batting title. Never led the league in doubles, home runs, triples, stolen bases, OBP, SLG, or OPS. Not even once. He's led his league in hits twice, and runs once. In twenty seasons. And those two seasons he led the league in hits? One season he really did so legitimately, as he hit .349. But in 2012 he had 216 hits...in 683 at bats! He hit .316. Very good, but not great.

Derek Jeter played the majority of his career in an era of offense, and there was nothing truly special about his offensive game. That Jeter was able to hold on to the job in New York for twenty seasons says something. But Jeter has never been the best hitter in baseball. He's never been the best hitter in his league. He's never been the best fielder.

What elevates Derek Jeter to be one of the top 5 players in the modern era when players like Miguel Cabrera, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle and Carl Yastrzemski have all won the Triple Crown in the American League, and Jeter couldn't lead his league in even a single major offensive category in twenty seasons.

I'm sorry. I know you are entitled to your opinion. I just don't know how even the biggest Derek Jeter fan could say "Derek Jeter is one of the five greatest baseball players of the modern baseball era" with a straight face.

I would say in his prime that he was one of the ten best pure hitters in baseball. Hitting .324, .339, .349..no matter what era you are in, those averages are excellent. Not Tony Gwynn excellent, but very, very good. Jeter did what New York needed him to do. He got on base. He stole bases. He scored runs. He played solid defense. He helped a team that was laden with talent win multiple World Series.

I just can't get past the comment about Jeter being one of the five greatest players of the modern era. I don't know if I'd even put him in the Yankee top 5 from the modern era.

These players, in their prime, I would take over Derek Jeter in his prime, or would likely take over Derek Jeter in his prime:

Don Mattingly
Mickey Mantle
Joe DiMaggio
Rickey Henderson
Yogi Berra
Reggie Jackson
Dave Winfield

You might be defining the modern era differently.

Sorry, I should have specified. I do not include Aaron or Mays to be "modern" players (but that's a completely different argument). I'll rephrase it to say, he has been a top 5 player to play in the past 30 years.

Derek Jeter has amassed the 7th most hits in major league baseball history playing in the most competitive era in baseball. His career offensive WAR ranks him 20th in history and 3rd among players over the last 30 years and 2nd if you exclude A-Rod and his juice.

Leading the league in home runs or winning an MVP award is meaningless. Look at his career stats and you will be very hard pressed to find 5 players who had a more productive career than Jeter over the past 30 years.

As for the original topic, I'll stick to my original list:
T1. Honus Wagner
T1. Derek Jeter
3. Cal Ripken Jr.
4. Barrry Larkin

I would argue that Jeter was better than Wagner purely because of the time period they played in, but without opening that can of worms I'll just concede they're tied.

If you're evaluating players solely on a few years in their prime then there are a bunch of players better than Jeter. Roger Maris is better than all those players in that case, he had a three year span where he hit 133 home runs and had 353 RBI with two MVPs and a gold glove award.

This makes it sound as if Tony Fernandez was the Yankees' only option at short. Tony Fernandez was a place-filler, as it made no sense for the Yankees to go out and get a better shortstop because they had Derek Jeter a year away from the majors.

To disregard Jeter because he had a long career, or because he played on the Yankees, to me, is ludicrous. He had 200 hits 8 times in his career, and 190+ hits three more. That's quite a feat regardless of how many at bats he had. His lifetime OBP was .379 - an impressive number that puts him ahead of Pete Rose, despite Rose having 800 more hits. While he never won an MVP, that's an arbitrary award that, to me, means nothing - he should have won it in 2006 and could have won it in 1998 and 2009. It's like saying Ted Williams wasn't any good because he never won a World Series.

There's no question that Jeter belongs in the list of all-time greats, and all-time great shortstops as well.

And there's also no question that, steroids or not, obnoxious personality or not, and choking in the postseason or not, Alex Rodriguez had better numbers than all of them but one. As such, if I were to put together such a list, it would probably look like this:

1. Honus Wagner
2. Alex Rodriguez
3. Pop Lloyd
4. Jeter/Yount (virtually interchangeable in my mind)
6. Ernie Banks
7. Arky Vaughn
8. Joe Cronin
9. Cal Ripken
10. 10 is tough, but I probably put George Davis there.

Just underneath I would have Bill Dahlen, Luke Appling, Barry Larkin and Alan Trammell.

Fun discussion, made me look up a whole bunch of shortstops while I should be working. :)

-Al

So being recognized by the sports writers who cover the game as the best player in the game is meaningless? /head scratch

Well, of course you'll have a hard time finding anybody who had better numbers over the last 30 years. That's because you're providing such a narrow time frame, a time frame that perfectly fits Jeter's career. Most players, if they even played that long, started playing before your 30 year parameter, meaning the earliest part of their career is being excluded, or they started playing some time after Jeter did, meaning their later years are being excluded.

Let me get this straight. You're basically saying that Derek Jeter is the greatest shortstop to ever play the game?

http://www.williamgregory.net/images/laughing.gif

Ok, last 30 years only. From 1984 on. Players I would put ahead of Jeter.

Ken Griffey Jr
Barry Bonds
Frank Thomas
Jeff Bagwell
Craig Biggio
Tony Gwynn
Miguel Cabrera
Joe Mauer
Ryne Sandberg
Don Mattingly
Rickey Henderson

I could probably find a few more names, but my mind is too busy trying to wrap itself around how MVP awards, and leading the Majors in major statistical categories doesn't matter.

Yes, it's meaningless. By your logic of more MVP's=better players - so Al Rosen was a better player than Ozzie Smith, Al Kaline, Bill Dickey, Duke Snider, Mel Ott and Tony Gwynn.

Major head scratch is right...


Why doesn't that work? Were there not great players? There have been more professional baseball players playing over the past 30 year than any other 30 year period in the history of the sport. So why can't I use this sample size? That's when he played. That's when tens of thousands of players played and Jeter had a better career than all of them less maybe 4 or 5. That's pretty damn impressive. Even expand it to include every player who has played in the past 30 years and you'll still be hard pressed to find players with a better career.


Is that a stretch? Most members here have him on their top 5 list all time (and several have him at 1 and 2). Of the list, he's the only player to have played through the steroid era. He's the only player to face known steroid users. Wagner played before the league was integrated, today 38% of the league are minorities. Imagine what Jeter's stats would have been if 38% of the league was replaced by white minor league pitchers. We'll never know, so I'll just leave it at they were both the best of their time.

Joe Mauer better than Jeter? :confused:
Biggio?

Mauer? Biggio? Bagwell? Even Sandberg and Mattingly? I take Jeter over all those guys which probably puts him in the tp 5 of the last 30 years. Just my opinion, but his consistent longevity makes it hard to argue against him.

Whoa, wait a minute. Nobody here is disregarding Jeter because he had a long career. You're reading into something, and putting words in my mouth that simply aren't there. :p

The year before Jeter was a full time player, it is a fact that Fernandez was the starting shortstop for the New York Yankees. They may have had other options, but Tony got the majority of playing time, and by a wife margin. The aim of my statement was that there was no incumbent superstar that was keeping Jeter from finding playing time. When he came up, he was able to win the starting job, and keep it for two decades. If anything, I think I mentioned that Jeter deserved credit for holding on to the position for two decades. Staying in the game for even ten years is an accomplishment, as younger and stronger guys are always coming along to try and take your job. But to last for twenty years, and to do it playing for the greatest baseball franchise in history...that's really a phenomenal accomplishment. I recognize Jeter's greatness. He's the kind of guy that you could put on any team, and he'd make any team a contender. I mean that. He isn't showy on the field. But he is a leader. His confidence instills confidence in his teammates. His work ethic is unrivaled. So when it seems I am being critical of Derek, I am because he is being compared to the immortals of the game, and when that happens, he should have to prove himself. There is a difference between being a great player, and one of the best to ever play the game.

Back to the longevity topic. Any great player that ends up in the top 10 of hits, or home runs, or RBIs all time had to have had a long career. That kinda goes without saying. But the second time he led the league in hits was more a product of the sheer number of at bats he had than it was his "great year". He wasn't hitting .350 or .360 to get those hits. He hit .316. Certainly a very good year, but nobody ever won an MVP Award on the strength of hitting .316 alone. And truth be told, .316 is a little bit of a let down for Jeter. I'm betting he would be the first to admit it.

And not winning an MVP Award is nothing like not winning a World Series. Winning a World Series is always a team accomplishment. While one player can play out of their mind, and seemingly carry their team on their back, it is still a team effort. An MVP Award is an individual recognition. It is awarded to the best player in the league. While there will often be some disagreements, a great player will typically win at least one MVP in their career. I don't think Jeter should have won the MVP in 2006. Since WAR has been brought up in this discussion (not by you), I should point out that Jeter's WAR in 2006 was only a 5.5. His WAR was only ninth best in the American League. While it's hardly an exact science, a 5 + WAR is considered All Star level, with an 8 + WAR being MVP level.

But it must be said that while I use it in discussions because it gets to the point a little more quickly, I am not the biggest fan of WAR. And while Jeter didn't have the highest WAR in the AL in 2006, or the second highest, or the third...or the eighth, I don't think anybody could say those other guys ahead of him were more impactful than Jeter. Justin Morneau had a sensational season, and he was a tough opponent to go up against for the award. But WAR would have me believe that he was a bigger part of Minnesota's success than Jeter was a part of New York's success.

I don't know if I buy that. While I don't think Jeter was the AL MVP that year, at least I don't at this moment without further reviewing the season, the standings, and how the nominees, so to speak, compared. But I sure as hell don't think he was the 8th or 9th most important player in the AL in 2006. So, is WAR wrong here? It seems so, doesn't it?

I tell you what, Al. Let me look more in-depth tonight at the 2006 season, and I will give you an honest, educated, well thought out response. It may very well be that I agree with you, and Jeter may have deserved the MVP that season. We shall see.

I absolutely agree.

I like your shortstop list. I would move Ripken up a little, move Jeter down. I think in his prime Yount was a better player than Jeter, but that, of course, is my opinion, though the numbers bear that out. But Jeter also played the position at a high level for a really long time. When you consider that as recently as two years ago he was having an MVP caliber season at age 38, that says a lot about him.

I want to make it clear that I have nothing but the utmost respect for Derek Jeter. He's a true professional, and worthy of the Hallowed New York Yankees Captain designation.

When I enter into one of these discussions, I try to stick to facts as the basis of my debate as much as possible. Of course, all we're left with are a bunch of numbers, and the opinions of other baseball fans, with their own agendas, and favorite players, to fill in the holes for players that we never saw.

I've watched more baseball in my life than I should have. I've seen all the great players in the last 30 years. While an MVP isn't the only way of recognizing greatness, and keeping in mind that mistakes have been made with the award, I have over the years been able to look at a player, and gauge which ones of them have been what I would consider MVP worthy. And there have been some great players that were elected to the Hall of Fame that never won an MVP, and I don't know if I ever looked at them as being the best player in baseball, or at least their league. Paul Molitor is one player that I compare a lot to Jeter. The same kind of game. Molitor was a good shortstop and second baseman who could also play third, and even the outfield if need be. But he was not an exceptional glove man. His main path to greatness was his bat. Like Jeter, he had some power, but that manifested itself more in the form of extra base hits. Like Molitor, Jeter has been the spark plug that got his team going. A guy that could lead off, or bat second, and get on base with a really high batting average. A guy that could steal, and score on a single. A guy that had an incredible eye at the plate. Yet Molitor never won an MVP. Like Jeter, some of Molly's best years were later in his career. Molitor hit .341 with 225 hits and 113 RBI at age 39. Molitor had 2,000 hits after age 30 because he suffered so many injuries early in his career. Three of his four 200 hit seasons came after age 33. Like Jeter, Molitor had great speed. Jeter had 356 swipes, Molitor had 504.

One negative about Jeter has stuck out for me a little. And that's been his number of strikeouts. While he certainly wasn't striking out 200 times like Mark Reynolds, he did strike out over 100 times in a season 9 times. But when you consider Jeter only has 259 home runs, he shouldn't be 14th on the all-time strikeout list. Only two other guys on the all-time strikeout list ahead of Jeter have under 300 home runs: Bobby Abreu, who is right in front of Jeter, but has 29 more home runs in 2,500 fewer at bats, and Mike Cameron has 278 home runs but some 4,200 fewer at bats. All the other guys on this list have at least 400 home runs. That's a minor gripe, a nitpick, really, because again, Jeter is a career .311 hitter, and when you maintain that kind of average for two decades, into your forties, you're a special player.

Jeter will be a first ballot inductee, and I will cheer for him when he gets in.

Isn't Jeter's foreskin used as the tarp of the new Yankee stadium? That has to make him the greatest. Plus Tim McCarver thinks he's the greatest.

1. Ken Griffey Jr was clearly better than Jeter.
2. Barry Bonds, even before he bulked up, was clearly better than Jeter.
3. Rickey Henderson, greatest leadoff hitter in baseball history, I think he was clearly better than Jeter, also.
4. Tony Gwynn, highest career batting average since Ted Williams at .338. 8 batting titles, led the National League in hits seven times, five of which were over 200. And where Jeter's Gold Glove Awards were questionable, nobody questioned Tony Gwynn's defense. He won 5 Gold Gloves. In the first half of his career, before he added weight, he was a fantastic athlete.
5. Albert Pujols. .318 lifetime batting average, 514 home runs, 1,571 RBI in 14 seasons. His average season is .318, 40 HR, 123 RBI. He has 554 doubles, a total of 1,083 extra base hits in 14 seasons. He's also won multiple Gold Glove Awards. I'd take him over Jeter in a heartbeat.
6. Miguel Cabrera. Triple Crown winner. Has won the last three American League batting titles, and the last two MVP Awards. 12 seasons, lifetime .320 AVG, 382 home runs and 1,344 RBI. I would take him over Jeter, too.

Griffey Jr.
Bonds
Henderson
Gwynn
Pujols
Cabrera

There's no way that Jeter cracks the top 5 players in the last thirty years.


I'm going to leave Frank Thomas out, even though I think he's one of the greatest right handed power hitters the game has ever seen.

Never mind I see what you are doing with Bonds.

Vlad Guerrero deserves some consideration for that list too. .318 average with great power numbers.

For the sake of the arguments I will concede top 7. Close enough.

Funny how much Yankee bias (for and against) crops up in these discussions.

Greatest hitters or players past 30 years? Randy Johnson, Martinez, Maddux, Rivera........

I believe it is not. It is awarded to the player that the sportswriters in the BWAA think had the best season.

In 1991, those writers thought that Terry Pendleton's season was better than Barry Bonds', despite the fact that Bonds outperformed Pendleton in virtually every meaningful statistical category.

In 2006, the writers thought that Justin Morneau had a better season than Derek Jeter, despite the fact that he played a much easier position, had a lower WAR, fewer runs, fewer hits, a batting average .20 points lower, and on base percentage .42 points lower, and scored 21 fewer runs. But, you know, Morneau had more RBIs.

History is littered with examples where the rightful winner of the MVP was overlooked by writers who simply don't get it. They value RBI too highly, they value home runs too much, they usually discount defense and modern analytics, they place inordinate emphasis on whether the team was a winner, and they take character into consideration (which is why Albert Belle never won an MVP despite being one of the greatest players in the game in the 90s).

-Al

That's a great list, but I disagree with some of the above.

Barry Bonds: Normally I exclude him entirely because of the steroids, but if you exclude his steroid years (most people start it around 1998, but some people think it even started when he was on the Pirates), his career numbers are impressive, but not even close to Jeter's. His season stats are out of this world though. You can pretty much take any one of Bond's season and extrapolate it across his entire career and he will be better than Jeter, but I always exclude him, because you honestly will never know what his career would have been. Honestly, if you don't care about steroids or whatever, Bonds was the best player in the history of baseball and it's not even close.

Henderson: I won't argue Henderson. I said before in this thread I thought he was better.

Gwynn: I won't argue Gwynn.

Pujols: I think it's too early in his career. Right now, he's a first ballot Hall of Fame baseball player. He had the best 10 year run out of any hitter ever IMO. But over the past couple years he seems more like a career .260, 20 home run guy. If Pujols keeps going with this downward trend, I would take Jeter's career over Pujols, but if Pujols turns things around, it'll clearly be Pujols 10 times out of 10. So it's too early. Also, hopefully he was clean throughout his career!

Cabrera: Same with Pujols, it's too early. I think Pujols and Cabrera deserve a spot on the top 20 all time list (assuming they can have above average finishes to their careers), but both players are years from retiring. Anything can happen.


Ken Griffey Jr: This is a lot closer than most people realize. Here are there 162 game average numbers:

G R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+
162 101 169 32 2 38 111 11 80 108 0.284 0.370 0.538 0.907 136
162 115 205 32 4 16 77 21 64 109 0.311 0.379 0.442 0.821 116

Griffey hit more home runs granted, but he had almost 30 points less in his career batting average and half as many stolen bases as Jeter did. Everything else; doubles, triples, walks, strike outs are about the same. The only thing Griffey did that Jeter didn't was hit home runs, but Griffey never had a 200 hit season, he only hit above .310 once in his career while Jeter averaged above .310 throughout the entirety of his career. Really, it would just be a preference argument at this point. Offensive WAR gives the edge to Jeter, OPS+ gives it to Griffey. Do you like home runs or hits? Otherwise they were very similar.

My list for the past 30 years would be:

1. Rickey Henderson
2. Tony Gwynn
3. Ken Griffey Jr.
4. Derek Jeter (very close)
5. Albert Pujols

I think when Miguel Cabrera retires he will knock Jeter off the list and Pujols will (hopefully) move up to third.

My list for the past 30 years including Steroid Users:
1. Barry Bonds
2. Alex Rodriguez
3. Rickey Henderson
4. Tony Gwynn
5. Ken Griffey Jr.

Don't forget that somehow Andre Dawson won on the worst team in baseball despite Ozzie outplaying him in every statistical category except HR and RBI and having a worse War by almost 3 points.

Not sure why it's crazy to take Mauer over Jeter. Mauer is a significantly better offensive player (3 batting titles, a slugging title, and an OPS+ title) while playing legitimate (not the Derek Jeter version) Gold Glove defensive at a super premium position. In all honesty, the only thing Jeter has over Mauer is longevity - a not-insubstantial point in his favor. Point being, however, that it's not crazy to put Mauer up there vs Jeter.