Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Charlie O'Neal</b><p>What's yours??<br /><br />1. Ty Cobb<br />2. Babe Ruth<br />3. Hank Aaron<br />4. Ted Williams<br />5. Rogers Hornsby<br />6. Honus Wagner<br />7. Barry Bonds<br />8. Tris Speaker<br />9. Lou Gehrig<br />10. George Sisler

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Andrew Parks</b><p>1. Williams<br />2. Ruth<br />3. Cobb<br />4. Aaron<br />5. Musial<br />6. Mays<br />7. Wagner<br />8. Bonds<br />9. Speaker<br />10. Mantle

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Glenn</b><p>1. Ted Williams<br />2. Ty Cobb<br />3. Babe Ruth<br />4. Josh Gibson<br />5. Lou Gehrig<br />6. Barry Bonds<br />7. Stan Musial<br />8. Rogers Hornsby<br />9. Hank Aaron<br />10. Willie Mays<br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Ray</b><p>1. Babe Ruth<br />2. Ty Cobb<br />3. Ted Williams<br />4. Lou Gehrig<br />5. George Sisler<br />6. Rogers Hornsby<br />7. Mickey Mantle<br />8. Pete Rose<br />9. Joe DiMaggio<br />10. Willie Mays<br /><br />Honorable Mention: Ichiro Suzuki<br />Why is everyone omitting the All-Time Hit King???

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>1. Williams<br />2. Ruth<br />3. Hornsby<br />4. Gibson<br />5. Bonds<br />6. Foxx<br />7. Brouthers<br />8. Cobb<br />9. Mays<br />10. Gehrig<br /><br />Puljos will most likely bump someone from this list by the time he retires.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Jon Canfield</b><p>My top 10 "natural" hitters (ie: no suspicion of being jucied)<br /><br />1. Ty Cobb<br />2. Babe Ruth<br />3. Ted Williams<br />4. Hank Aaron<br />5. Rogers Hornsby<br />6. Honus Wagner<br />7. Mickey Mantle<br />8. Tris Speaker<br />9. Lou Gehrig<br />10. Joe DiMaggio<br /><br />Runner Up: Sisler, Gibson, Mays, Rose<br /><br />Edited to add comment:<br /><br />Jay, be offended if you must but my comment stays unless edited by Leon. Each of us is entilted to his own opinion and I can respect yours. However, if you read my comment above, I have simply chosen not to include players who have been under SUSPICION of being juiced as it would give a clear advantage in terms of power. This goes for any player; not just Bonds. Bottom line is, I do not feel my comment is out of line or unnecessary. Other's have chosen to qualify their comments by decades, power, OBP, etc. I have chosen to qualify my answers as well.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Jim</b><p>1) Williams<br />2) Ruth<br />3) Jackson<br />4) Hornsby<br />5) Cobb<br />6) Speaker<br />7) Gehrig<br />8) Musial<br />9) Gwynn<br />10)Lajoie

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Jon, did you really have to go down that road? I'll delete this post if you delete your unecessary comment. This doesn't need to degenerate into another thread about who is juiced or cheated. I guess "greenies" that players since the 50s doesn't count as cheating in your book.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>anonymousdave</b><p>Ruth<br />Bonds<br />Cobb<br />Mantle<br />Williams<br />Aaron<br />Gehrig<br />Gwynn<br />Foxx<br />DiMaggio

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Shannon</b><p>In no certain order<br />Cobb<br />Ruth<br />Lajoie<br />Williams<br />Sisler<br />Hornsby<br />Wagner<br />Speaker<br />Gehrig<br />Foxx

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>J Levine</b><p>This is my pure hitter that includes my opinion only...<br /><br />No real order...<br /><br />Williams<br />Ruth<br />Aaron<br />Bonds<br />Rose<br />Murray<br />Lajoie<br />Cobb<br />Hornsby<br />Gibson<br /><br />Joshua

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>Pure hitters, power not included<br /><br /><br />Cobb<br />Ruth<br />Gwynn<br />Williams<br />Heilmann<br />Hornsby<br />Wagner<br />Speaker<br />Gehrig<br />Foxx <br /><br />R/O Lajoie, E Collins, Musial, Gehringer, Shoeless Joe<br /> <br /><br /> <br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p> Ave & Power & RBI<br /><br /> 1)Ruth<br /> 2)Bonds<br /> 3)Williams<br /> 4)Cobb<br /> 5)DiMaggio<br /> 6)JJackson<br /> 7)Gehrig<br /> 8)Mays<br /> 9)Wagner<br />10)Gwynn<br /><br />best of the rest........<br />Musial, Carew, Speaker,<br />Hornsby, Sisler, Aaron, Mantle,<br />Foxx, McGwire, MRamirez, ARod <br /> <br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Andrew Parks</b><p>For the sake of discussion ONLY and not to imply to anyone that they are wrong...<br /><br />Some observations:<br /><br />1) To me the best hitters are the ones who walk, hit and hit for power.<br /><br />2) Sisler was way overrated in my opinion. He hit for a high average but never walked and had limited power.<br /><br />3) Ruth, Gehrig, Foxx, and Hornsby all look like top ten hitters when you look at the stats, but how can four (five counting Sisler) from the same era make it on the list? It reeks of inflated stats and sure enough, when you dig deeper, you will find the time between 1920 - 1939 had some of history's greatest offensive seasons (Ruth, Hornsby, Greenberg, Gehrig, Wilson, Foxx, etc etc). Lots of runs scored in that era. So I am always suspicious of those stats. So I take the best of the era - Ruth.<br /><br />4)Cobb, Wagner and Speaker amassed some incredible numbers in an era when the ball was literally dead and fences were deep and the game was ruled by pitchers.<br /><br />5) Bonds may have had the most unnatural help, but the guy still has to hit the round ball squarely with a round bat. Few have done it better.<br /><br />6) I would love to add Gwynn, Carew, and Boggs to my list - those guys could get out of bed on Christmas morning and lace a two - strike double 9 times ouf 10...However, more power would make them more attractive to me. <br /><br />7) Aaron, Mays, Musial, and Mantle put up some eye-popping stats again in eras when the pitchers ruled. The 50's - 70's are eras where some of the least amount of runs scored. Longevity also plays in Aaron's, Musial's and May's favors. <br /><br />8) Pete Rose was an above average hitter for a LONG time. I never really considered him an outstanding hitter plus he had limited power.<br /><br />COOL TOPIC!

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>In no order<br /><br />Ruth<br />Cobb<br />Bonds<br />Gehrig<br />Speaker<br />Wagner<br />Rose<br />Gwynn<br />DiMag<br />Williams<br /><br />Ichiro is on there somewhere too, but I can't think of who to bump for him. Rose, probably.<br /><br />Bonds? There was tiny little talk out in the weeds of even looking at a rule change for Intentional Walks just because of him. When was the last time anyone even though abou the NL changing rules? 1890's? The number of IW's alone says he is way beyond the normal player. I'd even say top 3 or 4, IMHO.<br /><br />Joann

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>tim melton</b><p>aaron<br />gwynn<br />mattingly(pre injuries)<br />mantle<br />brett<br />mays<br />williams<br />pujols<br />a rodriguez<br />bonds<br /><br />these are in no particular order...also limited to players i have seen play...as any all time list would include ruth and cobb...as well as gehrig,sisler and wagner...

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>whycough</b><p>1. Teddy Ballgame<br />2. The Sultan of Swat<br />3. Tyrus Raymond<br />4. The Rajah<br />5. Early Sisler<br />6. Shoeless Joe<br />7. Joltin' Joe<br />8. Josh<br />9. Stan The Man<br />10. (tie) Lou Gehrig & The Mick<br /><br />Anyone who likes how Bonds (the Sultan of Shots) did it must admire the way Ben Johnson and Rosie Ruiz ran.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>1. Cobb<br />2. Ted Williams<br />3. Barry Bonds<br />4. Joe Jackson<br />5. Rogers Hormsby<br />6. Babe Ruth<br />7. Josh Gibson<br />8. George Sisler<br />9. Stan Musial<br />10. Willie Mays<br />I have to disagree about Sisler being overrated. Why does he have to draw x number of walks to be a great hitter? The guy could flat out hit. Even when he had the vison problem he continued to hit. Had it not been for that vision problem people would put him in the same category as Williams and Cobb.Sisler batted over .400 twice! You can not do that and not be a great hitter.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Genaro</b><p>Just another Opinion<br /><br />1. Williams even in his late 30s and the same pitchers that<br />Mantle Aaron Mays faced in the 50'sIn 1957 3 years before he retired 388. BA 526 OBPs 737 SLGs. Give him close to those numbers in his prime over the 5 years he missed There’s the New RBI king Home Run King and allot of other records.<br /><br />2. Ruth. Played in the Modern and dead ball era. Proved dead ball era players could play with 4 and 5 man Rotations. Do I need to put his numbers up?<br /><br /><br />3. TY Cobb He hit for average got on base and was no punch and Judy hitter. Love him or hate him he also drove runs in from his spot and averaged 560 SLG in his prime years<br /><br />4. Bonds I don’t like the guy but if he played in the 50s or 60 his numbers would still stand he would have a slightly lower OBPs only because Gibson Koufax and Drysdale would have actually pitched to him but his BA may even be higher. <br /><br />5. Jimmy Foxx Take away the last 4 years when he was over the hill his BA OBPs and SLG would have been even higher. Did it all hit walk and drive em in. <br /><br />6. Gibson ok he pitched in the Negro leagues but many of those guys if they pitched in their prime as there were several who would have been in the HOF from the majors. The other compensation he gets is the cutters spitballs and junk balls they used in that era he still may have been the home run king. Exhibit Jackie Robinson he hit 349 in 1947 after adjusting to Major Leaguers.<br /><br />6. Lou Gehrig Hitting Some of the top numbers in history only 7 homers shy of 500. 340 BA 447 OBPs 632 SLGs Silent Perfection.<br />Never said a word just went out did his job let Ruth get all the glory, just collected rings. <br /><br />7. Rogers Hornsby Played in almost identical years as the Babe and even managed to hit 15 point higher in life time average. 358 AVG 434 OBPs 577 SLG and he managed to mentor Ted Williams. He combined the Power of Ripken and the hitting of Carew in his prime. Ill say he was top second baseman of all time on my list. <br /><br />8. Joe DiMaggio Simply one of the best ever he had style grace and was the backbone of all those championships. Clutch player<br />I would hate to have to pick between him and Willie as the greatest of all time I wouldn’t put my life on it. 3 time MVP several top fives in MVP ballot he was Joltin Joe the Yankee clipper and he was just shy of a 400 lifetime OBPs<br /><br />9. Hank Aaron Ted Williams loved the guy when he was inducted into the Hitters hall of fame Ted said that Hank Willie and Joe D were the greatest players of all time and there was not much separating them. Hank faced all the best pitchers from the 50s 60s and 70s. How many times would he have walked with today’s pitchers not willing to pitch to top hitters? <br /> <br /><br />10. The Mick had everything Joe D and Willie had power speed and ability to hit for average. If his knees didn’t blow out imagine how gowdy his numbers may have been how many more doubles and more drive to hit the ball. The Mantle was one of the best ever to play the game simple. He may have the lowest average on the list but he should have retired in 66 anyway still managed 477 OBPs and 577 SLG<br /><br />Honorable Mention Lajoie, Musial, Sisler, Heilmann, Brett, Rose, Carew, Jackson Speaker and Wagner. There are many just below this group let the debate continue.<br />I could not put speaker in the top 10 but just below it as I feel you had to at least dominate 2 of the top 3 categories. And his 466 SLG and 391 OBPs just didn’t put him in my group.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Genaro</b><p>opps ment Wagner not speaker in the last sentence.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>t206King</b><p>1- Cobb<br />2- Hornsby<br />3- Ruth<br />4- Speaker<br />5- Ed Delahanty<br />6- Cap Anson<br />7- Gehrig<br />8- Lajoie<br />9- Keeler<br />10- Collins

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Chris,<br /><br />A guy who hits .400+ and walks 30 times will make MORE outs than a guy who hits .400+ and walks 120 times. Making outs is not a good idea. Sisler was a free-swinger with no power.<br /><br />Here are the players that baseballreference.com compare his career to:<br /><br />Heinie Manush (884) * <br />Zack Wheat (845) * <br />Kiki Cuyler (837) * <br />Dan Brouthers (821) * <br />Joe Judge (820) <br />Jesse Burkett (818) * <br />Jimmy Ryan (816) <br />Tony Gwynn (813) <br />Roger Connor (811) * <br />Edd Roush (808) * <br /><br />In 1920 when Sisler hit .407, he made 384 outs. In 1922, he made 340 outs.<br />In 1923 Ruth hit .393 and made 317 outs.<br />In 1941, Williams hit .406 and made 271 outs.<br /><br />Over the course of his career, Sisler made a massive amount of outs for a .340 hitter. Furthermore, he played in an era of inflated stats. We should not judge hitters on batting average alone. It says 1B = 2B = 3B = HR and BB = 0. A George Sisler .407 is not in the same league as a Ted Williams .406 or even a Williams, Ruth, Wagner, Cobb, Mays, .370. Sisler was a free-swinging singles hitter.<br /><br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>t206King</b><p>yeah but it doesnt really matter if stats were inflatted or if he was a signles hitter, he got on base and got hits at crunch times. power isnt eveything!!! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>I agree, power is even more overrated now than it's ever been. The fact that McGwire was even mentioned in this thread made me choke on my coffee. Forget whether he was juiced or not, the guy was a one-trick pony. <br /><br />Many of the players from the tail end of the deadball era didn't have the opportunity to hit gobs of home runs. It's hard to compare eras but you have to take the rule changes and development of the game into the equation. I have a hard time NOT putting any post WWII guys on the list, as it just plain doesn't make sense. I'm sure ARod, Vladi Guerrero, or Manny Ramirez would have been quite successful in the Prewar era. The dynamics of the game have changed and most of which favor the pitchers.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>It does matter if stats were inflated because we are comparing players across eras. If we were only comparing Ruth, Gehrig, Foxx, Hornsby, and Sisler. Then it won't matter if stats were inflated.<br /><br />The truth of the matter is that stats were inflated and Sisler isn't even in the top five hitters from his era.<br /><br />I guess to make a top ten list we would have to make the standards before we made the list. To me a total hitter hits for average, knows the strike zone, and hits for power. That gives your team the optimum chance of winning. <br /><br />A HR produces a run, while it takes three singles to produce a run. See the difference? <br /><br />If inflated stats, walks, and power didn't count, then just make a list of the top ten career batting averages and be done with it. And Sisler STILL doesn't make it:<br /><br />1. Ty Cobb+* .3664 L <br />2. Rogers Hornsby+ .3585 R <br />3. Joe Jackson* .3558 L <br />4. Lefty O'Doul* .3493 L <br />5. Ed Delahanty+ .3459 R <br />6. Tris Speaker+* .3447 L <br />7. Ted Williams+* .3444 L <br />8. Billy Hamilton+* .3443 L <br />9. Dan Brouthers+* .3421 L <br /> Babe Ruth+* .3421 L <br /><br /><br />But as you can see, this is faulty because it contains 3 from the 19th C, 3 from the deadball era, 3 from the 1920's - 1938, and one from 1940-1960.<br /><br />It's skewed.<br /><br />For more information check out Bill James's research on inflated stats, park adjustments, and win shares.<br /><br />It would be fun to make a best of list:<br /><br />Best total hitter:<br />Ted Williams<br /><br />Best eye:<br />Ted Williams<br /><br />Best Power:<br />Babe Ruth<br /><br />Best contact hitter:<br />Nellie Fox<br /><br />Best Right-handed hitter:<br />Hank Aaron<br /><br />Best Singles Hitter:<br />Wade Boggs<br /><br />Hitter I would most want to see in the cage and on the tee:<br />Tony Gwynn<br /><br />Hitter I would most want to see take BP on the field:<br />Babe Ruth<br /><br />Hitter I want up in the clutch:<br />Eddie Murray<br /><br />Hitter I want to see hit a triple:<br />Mickey Mantle <br /><br />Hitter I want to see drag bunt:<br />Ty Cobb and Bill Madlock<br /><br />Hitter I would use to pitch:<br />Babe Ruth<br /><br />Best Power/Speed:<br />Barry Bonds and Rickey Henderson<br /><br />Best hitting Catcher:<br />Josh Gibson<br /><br />Best hitting 1B:<br />Lou Gehrig<br /><br />Best hitting 2B:<br />Rogers Hornsby<br /><br />Best hitting 3B:<br />George Brett<br /><br />Best hitting SS:<br />Honus Wagner<br /><br />Best hitting LF:<br />Ted Williams<br /><br />Best hitting CF:<br />Ty Cobb<br /><br />Best hitting RF:<br />Babe Ruth<br /><br />Best hitting P:<br />Babe Ruth<br />Kid Gleason<br />Walter Johnson<br />Red Ruffing

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Lyle</b><p> 1.Ty Cobb-He had both dominance and longevity<br /> 2.Babe Ruth- If he had taken better care of himself...?<br /> 3.Ted Williams-His numbers without missing his prime???<br /> 4.Joe Jackson-Talk about missing his prime years !<br /> 5.Rogers Hornsby-He stood out even during a hitter's era<br /> 6.Joe Dimaggio- He was often favorably compared to Teddy<br /> 7.Lou Gehrig-Model of consistency<br /> 8.Stan Musial-Often overlooked and greatly underrated<br /> 9.Josh Gibson-Tragic that he couldn't play in the Majors<br />10.George Brett-His average of .390 is the highest since Teddy .

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Holstein</b><p>1) Cobb<br />2) Ruth<br />3) Williams<br />4) SJ Jackson<br />5) Gehrig<br />6) Wagner<br />7) Boggs<br />8) Lajoie<br />9) Carew<br />10) Aaron<br /><br />I can't get myself to include Bonds. The guy admitted to using steroids. Steroids have the proven effect of increasing muscle mass. More muscle mass turns pop flies into homeruns. Maybe if he did not take them he would be one of the greatest at hitting sacrifice flies. Then I might include him. Look at Bonds' stats - he did not hit over 40 homeruns until his 8th year in the big leagues (28 years old). Then he hits 49 at age 35 and 73 at age 36. Hmmm.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Bonds never admitted to using steroids.<br /><br />Gwynn batted .393 in 1994 - 14 years after Brett hit .390.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Holstein</b><p>"Barry Bonds testified to a grand jury that he used a clear substance and a cream given to him by a trainer who was indicted in a steroid-distribution ring, but said he didn't know they were steroids, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Friday.<br /><br />Bonds told a U.S. grand jury that he used undetectable steroids known as "the cream" and "the clear," which he received from personal trainer Greg Anderson during the 2003 season. According to Bonds, the trainer told him the substances were the nutritional supplement flaxseed oil and a pain-relieving balm for the player's arthritis."<br /><br />The above excerpt is from the 12/4/2004 ESPN.Com News Services. The transcript of the Government's questioning (which probably should not have been made public) is very interesting.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Shannon</b><p>Gwynn hit .394, Sisler was and is one of the greatest hitters to play. Everyone makes outs, thats a given but not to have Sisler on a top 10 list is funny. Not taking anything away from Mays and Aaron, both great hitters, but to call Sisler a free swinger is too funny. Was Aaron and Mays free swingers? They both struck out over a 1000 times more than Sisler.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Mark</b><p>Sadaharu Oh was a pretty good hitter too. He hit more home runs than anyone previously mentioned in this thread other than Josh Gibson, lifetime average over .300, won two consecutive triple crowns, was a 20-time all-star, led his team to 9 consecutive world series wins, and led in RBIs for 9 consecutive years.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>Andrew, you raise a good question. How do you measure power before Babe Ruth? Was it that nobody was able to hit the longball prior to the 20's or is it that the dynamics changed? <br /><br />While we want to glorify the era that we enjoy collecting, I'm hard pressed to not include more current ball players. Stats put all eras on an even playing field. However, the game has changed and readapted to many of the different dynamics. I don't think anyone can argue that. After all, look at the list that Andrew just posted. As he pointed out, we're missing the last 60 years of players. <br /><br />I think the dynamics have evolved to what is more interesting for the average fan......long ball.<br /><br />Michael Schell, a professor of biostatistics, authored a book about the all-time greatest hitters. He approached it using mathematical analysis and taking a few liberties, of course. However, I do find many of his arguements to be valid.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p>My list would have to include Stan Musial. 4th all time in hits. 7 batting titles. 3 NL MVP awards. 11th all time in walks. 475 HRs and might well have had 500 if not for WW II. And he plays harmonica.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Charlie O'Neal</b><p>I have a hard time including current players such as Arod and Pujois on my list for now b/c their careers are not over. While there is no doubt that I wanted to add Arod to my list, his stats are not complete and his stats could dive over the next 5 years making him a average player overall. Ken Griffey Jr. would be a good example of what I am talking about.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Lyle</b><p>on the highest average since Williams...and you passed the test ! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /> So far ( not counting those that said , " in no particular order " ) Cobb has 7 1st place votes, Williams 6 votes and Ruth 3 votes . Did I count correctly ?

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Paul, you obviously are not member of SABR. If you were, you would have read ad nasium about what Bonds did or did not say. The one thing that every seems to pretty much agree on is that he did NOT admit to using steroids. Much of what was reported in the initial SF Chronical report was the reporter wanted people to think, not what was actually testified to. I wish I had kept all the SABR posts about this, but reposting them here would bore pretty much everyone. <br /><br />In a nutshell, Bonds admited to nothing illegal and all you holier than thou fans need to get off your high horse and realize that players ahve cheated since the game started. If you are going remove Bonds for supposedly cheating with steroids, then you better remove every player from the post WW2 era, Mantle, Williams, Mays, Aaron, etc because they were all using "greenies" while they played. Players have aways cheated, and always will, no matter what the rules are. Get over it.<br /><br />Tim, if you go with only players you've seen, how can you leave off Will Clark?<br /><br />t206king, according to your list, all the greatest hitters in the game played before 1937. Do you honestly believe this?<br /><br />For all the collectors of 19c material, there is a serious lack of 19c players. Aside from my nod to Brouthers, only Delahanty and Anson got nods from one person. Do you all think that there is no worthy 19c hitter?<br /><br />JAy<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>We will just have to disagree Andrew. There were only 8 people to bat over .400 in the 20th century and one of those 8 was Sisler. I just don't think your inflated stats theory holds true here or there would have been more to accomplish the feat. Anybody that bats over .400 in the 20th century is a pretty darn good hitter in my book.Sisler did it twice. Plus Sisler only struck out 327 times in his career. So he always made contact. Over 2800 hits in 15 seasons is pretty good to me. Especially when he missed the entire '23 season when he would have most likely collected another 200 at least. I just don't believe you have to be a power hitter to be a good hitter. I have always thought Sisler was underrated and I still believe that.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>As Andrew pointed out, all .400 hitters are not created equal. The people of SABR are looking more and more at the number outs a player creates instead of the traditional numbers to determine the greatness of a hitter. Sisler created far more outs than other hitters of his era. The 1920s saw more .400 hitters than any era except the 19c which had changing and varying rules for what constituted a hit.<br /><br />Sisler was undoubtable a great hitter, just not in the top 10 all-time.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>If you want to go strictly off of that arguement, Heilmann would have to make your list too. After all, he eclipsed .400 as a RIGHT handed hitter and missed the mark 3 times by a total of only 9 hits. <br /><br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Holstein</b><p>Jay-<br /><br />I am a member of SABR, but my opinion is not based on reading any posts by SABR members. I acknowledge that my opinion is based on the only information available, inappropriately leaked Grand Jury testimony. As neither I nor any other SABR members (unless they are attorneys for the Government or for Bonds or were members of the GJ) have seen an official transcript, we cannot be sure exactly what Bonds said. However, my opinion is based on media reports of that testimony and observations about Bonds' performance. Hank Aaron has stated to the media that he too has concerns about Bonds' "alleged" use of steroids. I am not sure if Hank Aaron is an SABR member, or if he has read any SABR posts, but he seems to feel that performance enhancing steroids give an athlete an innappropriate advantage when it comes to phsysical recuperation. The Government case against Bonds, as reported by the media, raises very serious questions. Bonds has stated that he had no knowledge that the substances he was using were steroids at the time he took them. That may be true. But if they were steroids, he still had an unfair advantage over other major leaguers who were not taking steroids. <br /><br />I did not mean to offend you by my comments concerning Bonds. I enjoy reading your posts and consider you a knowledgeable individual. However, I do not believe past alleged behavior by former major leaguers excuses any bad conduct by present major leaguers. In my opinion, baseball is sacred and each transgression must be addressed when it occurs. I want my children to know that baseball will not stand for cheating, in any form. I am sure we will not ever stop cheating entirely, but we make a powerful statement when we confront it directly. <br /><br />Paul

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Bonds played in an era dominated by steroids. He wasn't the only player to use them. It has been born out by the positive test results, more pitchers are using steroids than hitters. Bonds' numbers are so far above what anyone else has put up, that there is little doubt he is a great hitter. If steroids were the sole answer to great hitting, then baseball would be dominated professional wrestlers.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>1. Ruth<br />2. Williams<br />3. Cobb<br />4. Hornsby<br />5. Gehrig<br />6. Bonds<br />7. Wagner<br />8. Jackson<br />9. Gwynn<br />10. O'Doul

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Andrew Parks</b><p>A free swinger doesn't mean that the hitter strikes out a lot. It means that they swung at everything. A guy who walks 30 - 40 times a year makes way too many outs to be a great hitter. I don't care what he hit. Who would you rather have? A guy who goes 1-for-3 with 7 walks or a guy who goes 4-for-10? <br /><br />According to Bill James, as of 2002 George Sisler is listed at number 101 in the all-time win shares list for hitting. That means according to the greatest stats guru in baseball history (the Einstein of baseball stats) there are 100 players who were worth more to their team than Sisler was.<br /><br />Now I know that Bill James failed miserably as an advisor to the Red Sox, but his research and methods for evaluating players historically is unparalleled.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Interesting concept regarding outs made. However it was also stated that he (Sisler) struck out only 327 times. Therfore the outs he did make were outs that put the ball in play and thus moved runners along and drove some in too. Also outs made include reached on error i imagine.<br /><br />Pete Rose made alot of outs too as did I am sure Henry Aaron<br /><br /><br />Anyway my list would be:<br /><br />Williams<br />Dimaggio<br />Ruth<br />Mantle<br />Mays<br />Musial<br />Cobb<br />Jackson<br />Boggs<br />Brett<br />Gwynn<br /><br />Edited to add Aaron<br /><br />I know i cheated I have listed more then 10. Give me a break I am new <br /><br />Steve

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Glenn</b><p>Awarding 10 points for each first place vote, 9 for each second place vote, 8 for each third place vote, etc. here are the results of the Net 54 poll.<br /><br />VBC Top 25 hitters (first place votes in parentheses)<br /><br />1. Ruth (3)<br />2. Cobb (6)<br />3. Williams (6)<br />4. Hornsby<br />5. Gehrig<br />6. Bonds<br />7. Jackson<br />8. Aaron<br />9. Wagner<br />10. Gibson<br />11.(tie) DiMaggio<br />11.(tie) Musial<br />11.(tie) Speaker<br />14. Sisler<br />15. Mays<br />16. Foxx<br />17. Mantle<br />18. LaJoie<br />19. Delahanty<br />20.(tie) Anson<br />20.(tie) Gwynn<br />22.(tie) Boggs<br />22.(tie) Brouthers<br />24. Rose<br />25.(tie) Carew<br />25.(tie) Keeler

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Brian H (misunderestimated)</b><p>I though I would approach this somewhat chronologically (giving each decade & the Negro Leaguers a representative). The loosers in this game are basically the second best players of any decade or two (Joe Jackson, Tris Speaker, Lou Gehrig, DiMaggio),and long career players whose greatness is based on 15-25 yrs of excellence such as Cap Anson or Pete Rose. I did try to credit power and On Base percentage rather than simply batting average (hence Frank Thomas' inclusion over Griffey and Delehanty over Keeler):<br /><br />Dan Brouthers<br />E.J. Delahanty<br />Honus Wagner<br />Ty Cobb<br />Babe Ruth<br />Rogers Hornsby<br />Oscar Chaleston<br />Stan Musial<br />Ted Williams<br />Josh Gibson<br />Mickey Mantle<br />Willie Mays<br />Hank Aaron<br />Frank Thomas<br />Barry Bonds<br /><br /><br />Also, how did Bill James fail the Red Sox ? You must know something I don't. More or less when he became involved (presumably at Theo Epstein's urging) they won their first World Series in ... (well we all know the story)

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Bill James proposed his philosophy about relief pitching when they hired him three or four years ago and it failed miserably. I suppose some credit could be given to him for their recent win. I stand corrected.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>Hey Andrew, Who goes 1 for 3 with 7 walks? Your comparison there makes no sense if nobody has those stats. I don't no of anyone in baseball who has walked more than twice the number of their official AB's or 7 times the number of hits they got. So yeah I will rtake that guy that walks 7 times and goes 1 for 3 but show me who he is. If not getting outs is so important to who the best hitters are shouldn't we just measure it by who has the best OB %?

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Believing that history will diminish the accomplishments of the steroid aided current stars, here's my Top 10.<br /><br />Ruth<br />Cobb<br />Gehrig<br />Ted Williams<br />Shoeless Joe<br />Hornsby<br />Speaker<br />Lajoie<br />Foxx<br />Heilman

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Andrew Parks</b><p>Chris,<br /><br />Sorry about that, Chris. I was making a point using hyperbole. How's this?<br /><br />2-for-6 with 4 walks or 4-for-10 with no walks? And no we shouldn't just use OBP. Why throw out the point I made about power? <br /><br />Let me reiterate it:<br /><br />SLG combined with OBP is a better indicator of a great hitter than AVG is.<br /><br />Once again Batting Average claims a single is equal to a double which is equal to a triple which is equal to a home run and walks equal nothing.<br /><br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>One other thing Andrew, has anyone ever batted 400 and had 120 walks? That can't be a very long list. No disrespect Andrew but if you are going to make arguments for the types of hitters that would be better than someone else shouldn't that hitter exist. Yes I would love to have a guy on my time with a .700 OB % but who are those guys? I do however see where many would say Sisler is not one of tyhe greatest hitters of all time. I mean when I was making my list I was amazed at who I left off. I am curious as to what your list looks like Andrew. Who are your top ten? BTW, Ty cobb would have hated you! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Andrew Parks</b><p>The examples I have used are merely attempting to illustrate certain points for which I seem to be failing miserably...<br /><br />Anyway,<br /><br />My top ten are in the second post of this thread. But here they are again:<br /><br />1. Williams<br />2. Ruth<br />3. Cobb<br />4. Aaron<br />5. Musial<br />6. Mays<br />7. Wagner<br />8. Bonds<br />9. Speaker<br />10. Mantle<br /> <br />Notice that all these guys had power and got on-base a great deal compared to the era in which they played. Please note that this list was compiled using power, OBP, longevity, categories led league, park adjustment factors, era adjustments, among others...<br /><br />I love this topic! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>How do you measure power from pre 1920's guys? It seems the information we have to work off of is purely anecdotal. On the other side, again removing steroids, how can we measure power from post 1980's players to reflect some sort of equality with the players of the 20's-40's?<br /><br />I'm still seeing lists heavy in players from the Ruth/Foxx era. I can't believe that apx 6 of the top 10 hitters all came from that era. <br /><br />I'm playing devil's advocate from the stanpoint that of seeing some different analysis and justification. My list also included mainly prewar folks. But, I still feel that ARod or Manny would beat the living *&%^ out of the ball if we transported them back to the Ruthian days. So, do you consider quality of pitching, conditioning, travel, specialists, DH, new pitches, etc...into the equation? I hate to say it, but pitchers are a HELL of a lot better now than they were back then, overall.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Shannon</b><p>I dont think the pitchers are any better today then they were back in the 20s-40s. The pitching today is diluted, much like a lot of the players in general. Only a couple pitchers stand out in my mind from todays era who I consider great ones. Clemens and Maddux. I also say put Randy Johnson on that list. He didnt have a great year, but for the past 10 years or so hes been awesome.Clemens could pitch in any era, he is without a doubt the best pitcher I have seen play.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Andrew, I agree that Sisler isn't a top 10 hitter, but his OBA is right in line with all the other .400 hitters of the 20c. Almost everyone is between .460-.500. Terry is the worst at .452 and Williams the best .553. Hornsby was the only other player to have an OBA over .500 when they hit .400.<br /><br />I also agree with Andrew that there are far too many players on the list from 1920-30. The introduction of a new ball and changing it out often during the course of the along with the spitball being outlawed, gave hitters a huge advantage. It took pitchers a long time to catch up.<br /><br />I also don't buy the contention of dilution of talent in the modern game. If this were true, then the truely great players should be putting even better numbers than the players when talent was susposed to be so much better. In a nutshell, the worst player today, would be a good player in the deadball era and the worst deadball era players wouldn't get out of the low minor leagues today. I won't go into detail on this since it been covered here before and be found if you do a search.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>ERA was significantly lower in the deadball era due to lack of homeruns. All earned runs had to be manufactured. While Mathewson, Johnson, and Young were all dominant during their time, they didn't have to contend with a guy walking and the following hitter mashing it out of the park = 2 earned runs in the blink of an eye.<br /><br />Pedro Martinez,, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Maddux, Ryan, Carlton, etc would all have been extremely effective back then. To solidify my point, look at the best ERAs of the 20's-40's. You'll see that the BEST pitchers had 3.00-4.00 ERAs. I guess that tells us how really special Clemens and Pedro are.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>Andrew, I agree that OB + slugging tells you a lot about the productivity of a hitter. If you actually compare Wagner's numbers to Sisler's with your criteria, they are very similiar. Very similiar OB and SLG. Neither drew a ton of walks. Honus averaged 15 more a season than Sisler. Similiar avg of RBI's per season. Not a big difference in the two stats wise. To sum it all up Andrew I can see where you are coming from with everything except for calling Sisler a free swinger. I just don't see how a guy that struck out so few times is labled a free swinger. Also, I don't think Sisler's manager was telling him to go up to the plate and take a walk. Do you? He probably told him to go up there and do what he does best. Get a hit. What are some of the things you think favored the hitters of this era? Jay mentioned the new ball. I believe the sac fly rule was changed sometime in the 20's also. What are some other things you think favored the hitters of this era?

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Anson, the reason for the lower ERA is not lack of power numbers. The reason for the lower ERA is high error rate. Lack of HRs is a small contributor, but ERA were kept down because of the huge number of errors committed. <br /><br />Go out and get the computer baseball simulation Diamond Mind and play a deadball or 19c era game. You pull your hair out with the number of errors your players committ. I've been playing the 1887 season. Seeing games with 10 runs scored and 10 errors isn't uncommon.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>ERA was significantly lower in the deadball era due to lack of homeruns. All earned runs had to be manufactured. <br /><br /><br />Earned runs are runs that a pitcher allows w/o the benifit of errors and passed balls and in some case interference calls.<br /><br />Lets say that the pitcher has 2 outs and the batter reaches on an error. The next 10 guys could all hit home runs and all those runs are Un earned.<br />The pitcher would have been out of the inning.<br /><br /><br />Steve

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Chris,<br /><br />You can't compare Sisler's and Wagner's stats at face value - two entriely different offensive eras. <br /><br />1900's-1920 == few walks, few HR's, few strike-outs<br />1920-1939 == many more walks, more HR's, more K's, more runs.<br /><br />Therefore, Honus's stats are far more valuable than Sisler's.<br /><br />Somebody asked how to measure power from pre-1920. It's actually very easy == doubles and triples translate into pre-1920 power.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>Well Andrew, If you can't compare those two eras you can't compare those two eras with today. Or those eras with the 50's. Or those with the 40's. Come on Andrew. All eras have some differences. Why is it acceptable for players in Honus' era to not walk but not acceptable in the 20's? I would think it would have been more important in the deadball era to draw a walk. You have convinced me of one thing though, since players tended to strike out more in the 20's, I stand corrected that Sisler must have been a free swinger for striking out a whopping 327 times during his career. Think about it Andrew, 327 career strikeouts. That is NOT a free swinger. You don't strikeout that few times by swinging at bad pitches. I guess you don't want to concede on that though so I will concede and say George Sisler was one of the great free swingers the game has known. Right up there with Dave Kingman. As far as triples and doubles equalling speed in the pre 20's, I don't know if I totally agree with that as the fields were so much larger then. I think it was more speed when you got douples and triples. That part of the game was different as well. A double or triple then is not what a double or triple now is in all cases. By the way since you can't compare one era to another let's just compare Sisler to his own error before his eye problem. 1917 2nd in league BA. 1918 3rd. 1919 3rd. 1920 1st. 1921 4th. 1922 1st. Lastly since you are such a big OPS guy as judging a players hitting ability. 1917-1919 4th. 1920 2nd. 1921 6th. and 1922 3rd. Do those stats make him a free swinger? George Sisler may not be one of the ten greatest hitters of all time but for you to call him a free swinger is just silly. There are no stats you can throw out to back that claim up. He didn't strike out much. He was among the league leaders in OPS, BA, hits, total bases. You don't have to call Sisler one of the 10 greatest hitters but please stop calling him a free swinger. It doesn't make sense.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Chris,<br /><br />It doesn't make sense to you because I must not be explaining myself very well. I apologzie for that.<br /><br />Let me try again.<br /><br />On Free-swingers:<br /><br />A free swinger swings at lots of pitches. That's it. I never said Sisler swung at bad pitches. I never said free-swingers strike out a lot. I already told you that a free-swinger is merely a guy who is very agressive at the plate - Vladimir, Yogi Berra, Gary Pettis - free swingers. Berra rarely struck out but he rarely walked. He was one of the great bad-ball hitters of alltime. He’s an example of a free-swinger who rarely struck-out. Sisler was an excellent free-swinger. Does that make sense now?<br /><br />So here's my stat to support my claim that he's a free-swinger: Sisler walked once every five games. What does that mean? He swung at everything - borderline strikes, borderline balls, strikes, first pitch strikes, you name it - he was going to swing. This means that he would walk less. This means that he would make more outs. This means he was a less valuable .350 hitter than Babe Ruth or any other hitter who walked a lot.<br /><br />On Comparing eras:<br /><br />Let me be more clear. You can compare eras but you HAVE to adjust the stats so that they are all in-line. You can NOT compare Sisler's stats to Wagner's stats STRAIGHT UP. That's all I'm saying. A HR in Wagner's time is worth much more than a HR in Sisler's time. A walk in Wagner's time is worth much more than a walk in Sisler's time. <br /><br />In 1909 (the year Wagner hit .339), the National League batted .244, had a league OBP of .305 and slugged .314 as a league.<br /><br />In 1922 (the year Sisler batted .420), the American League batted .285, had a league OBP of .344 and slugged .398.<br /><br />See the difference? <br /><br />On His OPS finishes:<br /><br />"1917-1919 4th. 1920 2nd. 1921 6th. and 1922 3rd"<br /><br />That's weak if you ask me. We're talking about the ten greatest hitters EVER. And he was never first and only placed top ten 7 times? <br /><br />Williams was first ten times. Ruth - 13. Cobb - 11. Wagner - 8. Aaron - 3. Mays - 5. Mantle - 8. Speaker - 1. Musial - 7. Bonds - 9.<br /><br />Does all that make sense?<br /><br />On Triples – speed vs. power<br />I never mentioned triples were a result of speed. It must have been someone else.<br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Brian H (misunderestimated)</b><p>Andrew's top 10 (except Speaker) all made my top 15.... I agree with his point on Sisler as well. I also gave repesetation to the current crop of hitters, regardless of whether or not hey benefitted from "unfair enhancement." Nonetheless Barry Bonds was the only one on my list that I have ever really heard accused of having an unfair advantage. Frank Thomas has never been seriously accused of steriod use to my knowledge.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseballreference.com/s/sislege01.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseballreference.com/s/sislege01.shtml</a><br /><br />clearly a top notch hitter -- especially in his best seasons but, his On Base percentage + Slugging average (The stat gurus call this an "OPS") was, in the context of his era (this is called the "OPS+ Adjusted" with 100 equalling the average for the season), not on par with Honus'.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseballreference.com/w/wagneho01.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseballreference.com/w/wagneho01.shtml</a><br /><br />As the links above show, Sisler's best OPS+ Adjusted was 181 in 1920 and Honus' was 205 in 1908. This means basically that in 1920 Siler was 180% of the league average in 1920 and Wagner was 205 % in 1908. Because of era (i.e Babe Ruth et al) Sisler never led the league in OPS+ while Wagner did it 7 times between 1900-1909. <br /><br /><br />Babe Ruth, still the all-time king in this category was 1st in the league 13 years in a row starting in 1918. Ruth's lifetime OPS+ is still the only one over 200. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseballreference.com/leaders/OPSplus_career.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseballreference.com/leaders/OPSplus_career.shtml</a><br /><br />The top season ever: Barry Bonds 275 in 2002 (Bonds also placed second with 262 the year before).<br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseballreference.com/leaders/OPSplus_season.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseballreference.com/leaders/OPSplus_season.shtml</a><br /><br />Additonally Sisler didn't dominate nearly as long as Wagner (not many did). Sisler, unfortunately, suffered an eye injury or something that brought him back from the realm of the "truly great" to the merely "good" after 1922. In fact he missed the entire 1923 season recuperating.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Bill Stone</b><p>1.Mantle<br />2.Ruth<br />3.Long<br />4.DiMaggio<br />5.Wee Willie Keeler<br />6.Foxx<br />7.Roger Doc Cramer<br />8.Mel Ott<br />9.Hornsby<br />10.Gehrig

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Cobby33</b><p>1. T. Williams<br />2. B. Bonds<br />3. L. Gehrig<br />4. B. Ruth<br />5. W. Mays<br />6. J. DiMaggio<br />7. T. Cobb<br />8. W. McCovey<br />9. J. Jackson<br />10. J. Foxx

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>No big deal Andrew. We just disagree. Before you call his OPS finishes "weak" you should look at the players in the AL finishing ahead of him. Ruth, Jackson, Cobb for example in 1919. Only Ruth in 1920. Don't forget he played in the same league in his prime years as Cobb, Ruth, Speaker, Heilmann, as well as many other greats so I think he was in pretty good company even finsihing 4th in OPS. Like I said though no big deal. I think Sisler was a great hitter. The fact he continued to hit after his vision problem makes me wonder how great he could have been as his vision problem was never fully corrected.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>These are the All-Time Leaders in adjusted OPS. This is an interesting list. It makes me want to re-think my picks. Wagner is way down the list.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseballreference.com/leaders/OPSplus_career.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseballreference.com/leaders/OPSplus_career.shtml</a><br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>OPSplus is a good indicator, but would you really rather have McGwire ahead of Musial? I could probably think of 100 hitters I'd rather have than Mac, yet he ranks 11th, tied with Foxx.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>Only 100, Jay?

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> Jay <br /><br />Isn't the ops+ indicator that this list goes by flawed? it does not take into account era's played in? I mean how can (Browning) be higher then 86 other guys?<br /><br />And like you said McGwire ahead of Stan the man?<br /><br /><br />I guess stats can be skewed to prove just about anything.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br /><br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Daniel Bretta</b><p>I'm surprised no one has mentioned Sam Thompson on any of their lists. He was the best power hitter of the 19th Century and averaged nearly an RBI/game. In 1895 He had 165 RBI in 119 games.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Brian H (misunderestimated)</b><p>No stat can ever be perfect but you have to recognize its definition before simply discarding it. Musial is behind Mac because he played much longer and for several years at the end his good but not great seasons brought down his OPS. Mac was injured so much in his last seasons (of which there were fewer) that his sub-par performances didn't bring down his lifetime average as much.... like any statistic OPS+ doesn't take off points for things like being a jerk, being a great teammate (or a poor teammate) or using performance enhancing drugs... <br /><br />It also neglects RBIs and Runs, which explains why Sam Thompson, statisically the greatest RBI man is outshown by several other 19th Century players. Thompson, by the way got many of his RBIs during the high scoring 1890's and hit behind some pretty good scorers (Hamilton, the greatest runs/game player ever) and Delehanty, who was a better hitter than Big Sam. The three of them made up the only outfield to ever have 3 .400 hitters in a season in 1894, the year the mound was moved back to its presnt distance.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>PoorYorik</b><p>Steve, the reason why a guy like Browning, or David Orr sits very high upon the career OPS+ list is because OPS+ is a rate stat, and those guys didn't play after their prime years...Browning retired after age 33, orr after age 30! So they didn't have any old man years to bring down their OPS+, like most Hall of Famers go through. That is also why you see Dick Allen high on that list. <br /><br />That is why you see those guys higher than somebody like Stan Musial, who played a very long time. A better stat to use are the linear weight stats, as those weight the TRUE value of each offensive event(BB, 1b, 2b, 3b, Hr, out). However, if you want to look at OPS+, and figure the value of a Browning vs. Musial, all you have to do to see who truly was the more dominant/better player was, is to look at how they ranked on a yearly basis in OPS+...The following list will tell a much clearer story between browning and Musial than what their career OPS+ number tells.<br /><br />League Rankings in the top ten in OPS+<br />Musial...1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,4,4,4,6,7,7,7<br /><br />Browning...1,1,2,2,2,3,5,6,6. <br /><br />Browning was impressive, but as you can see Musial was much more impressive. Browning only has a higher OPS+ than Musial because he didn't play long enough for it to come down. His career rankings are actually pretty similar to a Dick Allen, who also didn't play very long, but was dominant when he did. <br /><br /><br />Can people manipulate the numbers any way they want? Yes, if they want to create an argument that is without merit they can. However, using the correct criteria which has been poured over, checked, re-checked, and re-checked again, you are gonna get their 95% of the way. <br /><br />There has been considerbal debate on Sisler, and the people backing him are ignoring the context of his numbers. His best yearly rankings were 2,3,3,4,5,6, and 8. Good, but nowhere near the rankings I've seen him on these top ten lists. They are waaaay overvaluing NOT striking out. Here is a quick way to check how valuable Not striking out truly is...<br /><br />Go through every game that Mike Schmidt played, and Bill Buckner played. "King K" vs. "NoN King K", and you will see how little Buckner's contact ability actually equated into moving runners up OR getting on base via error. One can check EVERY game of their career to see those results, and you will see what I mean. Then add in the fact more double plays will be hit because of more contact, and you will notice that striking out only costs a hitter(and team) about 2-3 runs per every 100 strikouts. There is a difference, but very small, and nothing remotely close to what I hear fans talk about. It's all in black and white. <br /><br />Here is a teaser...Mike Schmidt Reached on error (ROE) 118 times in 8300+ at bats, Buckner 128 times in 9300+ at bats. Per at bat, virtually no difference between the K and NON K man. Buckner's contact netted him 247 GIDP, and Schmidt 156. <br /><br /> Reaching on error is more prevalent in Sislers time, but it is also more prevalent for all of Sisler's competitors as well <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>. <br /><br />Cross era comparisons? That is a book. That is for another day. <br /><br /><br />Sisler doesn't even come close to cracking the top ten in Pre War guys, let alone all-time. Yes, all those stats, even the relative to the league ones are slanted towards the 20's-30's, and this current era right now. They are skewed, as it is ridiculous that all those stats, as they presently sit, suggest that all of the best players ever came from the 20's or late 90's. Or that all the best pitchers ever came pre 1900, or late 90's, yet that is what those skewed stats say. <br /><br />There are some adjustments to be made. When doing an all-time thing like this, always compare to their contemporaries, AMD THEN knock down even more the value any hitter or pitcher from the late 90's to now, any hitter from the 20's-30's, and any pitcher pre 1900. It can get involved, but if you want to know reality, as opposed to the lists that are normally posted, then make the proper measurements. <br /><br /> It was far easier for the superstars of the league to dominate pre war baseball, and to dominate this current time in baseball. <br /><br />EVERYONE SHOULD FIND IT ODD THAT...If you just look at straight OPS that only ONE player from the late 60's trough the 80's cracks the top 100 hitting seasons of all time! So you should use OPS+ to make it relative to the league, well...<br /><br />Only FOUR hitters from the late 60's through the 80's crack the top 100 OPS+ seasons of all time. Right there you should know something is wrong. It isn't just OPS+, all the best metrics do the same thing, unless they are corrected! ERA+ is only a smidge different, as pre 1919 has all the best, yes that is even relative to the league. Pre 1919 has about double the best seasons compared to 1966-1993!

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Yorik Thankyou for answering many of my questions. Interesting.<br /><br />Putting the ball into play does not have the importance/wght I thought it had. (as opposed to K'n. At least for those 2. Is that true basically across the board too? <br /><br /> <br /><br /><br />the info regarding what some of these pre 1900 guys is very interesting as well.<br />thanks for taking the time in that reply.<br /><br />Steve<br /><br />edited typo<br />

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Steve, it typically is true across the board. That 2 to 3 runs per 100 k's is based on EVERYBODY's hitting, not just those two players. That is the best example to highlight the discussion though...it really polarizes it. <br /><br /> However, that 2 to 3 runs per 100 strikeouts could change depending on how often a player does it in certain situations. Usually those situations even out over time though and fall back to the 3 runs per. But if you could find somebody that did do that, then sure it makes a difference.<br /><br />That 2 to 3 runs also goes a little higher when the errors were made more often, but EVERYBODY struck out less than, so even if Sisler did make contact more often, so did everybody else in the league. It isn't like there were guys striking out 150 times a game like now. So the difference between Sisler striking out 20 times, and a stud HR hitter 80 times, is really minimal. Think about, half of those 60 extra k's will come with nobody on to begin with, so it doesn't matter much there. Only a few will come in the crucial 1st and 3rd less than two out situation. So you may be talking about 4 runs per 100 k's in that time. It does make a differnce, but only very little <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>identify7</b><p>Brian H.,<br /><br />I have often wondered why the Phillies were able to produce four .400+ hitting outfielders the year after the mound was moved to 60.5'; and the first year that the pitchers had to contend with that increased difference, there was no significant change in hitting performance.<br /><br />Edited to add:<br /><br />Actually, my statement is not entirely true. Upon reviewing the stats, the League BA increased about 30 pts. the year that the pitcher's mound was moved back, and another 30 pt. increase the following year.<br /><br />Then following that 60 point BA increase, the pitchers regained a twenty point decrease in averages.<br /><br />But still - I wouldn't have thought that following the moving of the mound to 60.5 feet - a two year, 30pts/yr. increase would result. Id have thought that the sixty points would be realized right away.

Your all time Top 10 Hitters !!
 

Posted By: <b>TheBig6</b><p>1.Cobb<br />2.Ruth<br />3.Gehrig<br />4.Hornsby<br />5.Delahany<br />5.Wagner<br />6.Speaker<br />7.Lajoie<br />8.Brothers<br />9.Aaron<br />10.Williams<br />Honorable Mention Musial<br />I'm old School