Quote:
Originally Posted by Touch'EmAll
Growing up in the 70's, I was a huge into baseball. Johnny Bench was the man. And there also was Lou Brock - perhaps the most fun player of the decade - amazing base stealer. Brock didn't run much against Bench. Of all the catchers, he knew the odds were against him.
My dad, a Yankee fan, always touted Yogi Berra as the best.
Well, now I am leaning towards Yogi as greatest.
In 1986, Bill James ranked Berra the #1 catcher of all time in career value. In peak value he ranked Berra behind Campanella, Cochrane, & Bench. "Yogi Berra was more valuable to his teams, over the course of his career, than any other catcher. He was never as great at any moment as Bench was in his best years. But Yogi's record of sustained excellence over a period of a decade is without parallel by any catcher in the history of baseball."
Yogi was the most winningest baseball player in the history of MLB. The multiple MVP's, Near MVP's, All star games, World Series rings, have heard it said he was a walking baseball encyclopedia. I go with Yogi at catcher.
|
Yogi's consistency is why I pick him too. Bench was incredible, every other year or so. Wins the MVP in 1970, in 1971 he has an OBP under .300. Wins the MVP in 1972, slashes .253/.345/.429 the next year, which isn't terrible but not that impressive. 1974 and 1975 he's excellent, super star seasons, and in 1976 he's just a hair over the league average. Bench has huge up and down spikes through his prime years, which the Bench argument tends to simply ignore instead of arguing that centralizing performance in certain years is more valuable to winning championships. Berra was consistently excellent, picking Berra you know what you are getting. Bench, he might be better but he might be worse too. Campanella had a similar trajectory, a lot of catchers have.