Jeter - minus 1? WTF??

[mattsey9]

It's certainly possible that someone had 10 candidates on their ballot and left Jeter off knowing he was a lock in favor of a player who needed a lift.

That or someone was a good friend of Tony Perez or Andre Dawson and was giving a receipt.

[Kenny Cole]

Yawn. Doesn't matter a bit. He's in.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by rats60

Ray Davies not Chrissie Hynde.

Ray wrote it, the Kinks originally played it, Chrissie made it famous...

[perezfan]

Ah yes, the great Ray Davies... Such a marvelous and underrated band, The Kinks.

But if I didn't use Chrissie, we wouldn't have gotten the very clever Pretenders post (#40 in the thread) from Brent!

Somewhat ironically, both The Pretenders and The Kinks are in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. I wonder if anyone in that particular Hall of Fame missed being unanimous by a single vote? Now if that happened to The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, or Rolling Stones, we would have a real problem!

[cammb]

Originally Posted by pclpads

First, I'm neither a Jeter fan, nor a Yankees fan, so, no sour grapes or an axe to grind here. But, how could a supposed, informed baseball writer / voter deny Jeter a unanimous selection to the HOF? I fully realize there is one in every crowd, but this is inexcusable. This BBWAA HOF voting member should be stripped / barred from any future HOF balloting participation. Quite possibly it's the same moron who did this to Griffey, denying him unanimous election. That said, congrats to Mr. Jeter for an exemplary career and honor.

Spoken like a true yankee fan

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

And I'm surprised that guy from the other recent HOF thread isn't here writing smug diatribes about how overrated Jeter was.

Not that I don't agree with the sentiment.

If you're referring to me, nothing "smug" about my post. Facts are facts. If you don't like it....if your delicate sensibilities can't handle frank discussions, avoid them.

Jeter is a worthy Hall of Famer. I never said he wasn't. I never said he didn't deserve to be in on the first ballot. Never said I didn't like the guy. I'm a fan. I thought he was a great teammate, worthy of the Yankee captainship. I did say that he didn't deserve 100%, as he's clearly not in the class of the game's all-time greats. I didn't broach the subject, but since people make such a big deal over vote percentage now, I'm going to weigh in. And this ridiculous "outrage" from some because one voter left him off the ballot, as if it were the end of the world-those people need to get a life.

If you don't like my posts, that's fine. Put me on ignore, or shut the fuck up about what I have to say. Or, gulp, try to make a post repudiating what I've said. But you can't-far easier for people like you to shit on someone than to discredit what they've said.

Jeter is incredibly overrated. He was a singles hitter. He didn't hit doubles or triples. His home run rate, for the era, and even compared to his peers, was low. He didn't walk. His OBP was almost entirely driven by his average. He struck out way, way too much for a guy having so little power. He was an average defender at best.

Prove me wrong! Otherwise, keep your fucking snide comments to yourself.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I also noticed his absence in this thread. Walker is one of the best ever and Jeter is a no hit, no power, no glove overrated scrub.

I never said Walker was one of the best ever. I said he was one of 12 players to ever reach a .310 lifetime AVG, 350 home runs, and 1,000 RBI. What he did put him into select company that would seem to dictate he should have been in Cooperstown before his last ballot.

If you don't like my posts, same advice for you: put me on ignore, add something intelligent to the conversation (and saying "Jeter has more hits, and more RBI" doesn't qualify), or shut it.

Walker was better than Jeter across the board. Prove me wrong, if you can.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

I never said Walker was one of the best ever. I said he was one of 12 players to ever reach a .310 lifetime AVG, 350 home runs, and 1,000 RBI. What he did put him into select company that would seem to dictate he should have been in Cooperstown before his last ballot.

If you don't like my posts, same advice for you: put me on ignore, add something intelligent to the conversation (and saying "Jeter has more hits, and more RBI" doesn't qualify), or shut it.

Walker was better than Jeter across the board. Prove me wrong, if you can.

No way would I put you on ignore. You posted 2 F bombs in the post before you replied to mine. I disagree with you but damn are you funny to read.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by bnorth

No way would I put you on ignore. You posted 2 F bombs in the post before you replied to mine. I disagree with you but damn are you funny to read.

Simpletons are easily amused.

[BeanTown]

Let's remember the game Jeter had his 3000th hit. He went 5-5 and the 3000th hit was a Homerun. Then to break the tie in the 8th inning he had a single which scored the winning run from thirdbase. He has been clutch most of his career and sometimes you just need a single. Toughest base to get on in baseball is first.

https://youtu.be/IhXSgy5CbSI

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by BeanTown

Let's remember the game Jeter had his 3000th hit. He went 5-5 and the 3000th hit was a Homerun. Then to break the tie in the 8th inning he had a single which scored the winning run from thirdbase. He has been clutch most of his career and sometimes you just need a single. Toughest base to get on in baseball is first.

https://youtu.be/IhXSgy5CbSI

I completely agree that Jeter has come up huge, in the biggest moments. His post season play enhances his Hall candidacy immensely. He hit .310 in the regular season, and, iirc, .308 lifetime in the playoffs. He had essentially the same performance level against decidedly tougher competition. Every team in the playoffs is good. Jeter clearly elevated his play in the playoffs to meet the level of opposition.

Would I have had Jeter on the Brewers? In a New York minute. I'd have loved to have him on my team. His influence on his teammates goes beyond mere stats. Jeter did things that don't show up in the box score. He was a complete professional. He came to play every day, and played his heart out. He led by example. Never beat his chest, never stood there watching one of his home runs sail over the wall. Jeter is a bit of a throwback, imho; he'd have been the first guy in the dugout to quietly pull a player aside, and tell them, "you need to do better." He thrived in the biggest sports media market in the world.

I don't understand why some people make a discussion of this kind so personal. When the names of Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, et all are invoked, if we're talking about Jeter, an accurate picture should be painted, shouldn't it? There's nothing wrong with being labeled a second tier Hall of Famer. There are relatively few guys that have ever achieved the level of play that Ruth, Williams, Walter Johnson, Stan Musial, Ty Cobb, Tom Seaver et all reached. Being in the Hall is an incredible honor. But it's vitally important that history gets depicted accurately.

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Jeter is incredibly overrated. He was a singles hitter. He didn't hit doubles or triples.

Prove me wrong! Otherwise, keep your fucking snide comments to yourself.

So how did not hitting doubles end up with him leading the Yankees all-time in doubles? Past Gehrig, Ruth, Mantle, Dimaggio, Berra, Mattingly (a doubles machine) - you name it, everyone that ever wore the pinstripes.

And yes, he mostly was a singles hitter. But he's #6 all-time, and in fewer years (20) than anyone in front of him. In fact, you have to go all the way down to #15 on the all-time hit list to find anyone with fewer years (some guy named Pujols with 19).

Jeter's not the greatest Yankee or greatest shortstop ever, but he was great. And in an era where PEDs had a major impact on the game, his name was never mentioned. Which can't be said of his teammates (Giambi, Pettite) or his biggest rival at SS - ARod.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

So how did not hitting doubles end up with him leading the Yankees all-time in doubles? Past Gehrig, Ruth, Mantle, Dimaggio, Berra, Mattingly (a doubles machine) - you name it, everyone that ever wore the pinstripes.

And yes, he mostly was a singles hitter. But he's #6 all-time, and in fewer years (20) than anyone in front of him. In fact, you have to go all the way down to #15 on the all-time hit list to find anyone with fewer years (some guy named Pujols with 19).

Jeter's not the greatest Yankee or greatest shortstop ever, but he was great. And in an era where PEDs had a major impact on the game, his name was never mentioned. Which can't be said of his teammates (Giambi, Pettite) or his biggest rival at SS - ARod.

First of all. Don Mattingly? The "doubles machine" had 7,003 career at bats. Jeter had 11,195 at bats. You think Jeter might have a few more doubles in 4,192 more at bats? DiMaggio? He had even fewer at bats than Mattingly, 6,821. And he was too busy hitting triples (131) and home runs (361). Gehrig? 8,001 at bats. Only 3,194 fewer AB than Jeter. And Gehrig had 163 triples, 493 home runs. Ruth? 8,399 at bats. 2,796 fewer than Jeter. And Ruth had 136 triples and 714 home runs. Mantle? 8,102 at bats. 72 triples, 536 home runs, and, oh yeah, he lost a lot of at bats because he was getting walked 1,733 times. Berra only had 7,555 at bats, and like Mantle, he wasn't a great doubles machine.

Think about the questions you're asking before you ask them. Why did no Yankee have more doubles than Jeter? The ones you listed had far fewer at bats, and were generally trotting around the bases after hitting the ball into the seats! And by the way, Mattingly was a double machine at his peak. 1984-1986, he hit 145 doubles, or 50 per 162 games. From 1997 until the end of his career, he averaged 38 doubles per 162 games, only 6 more than Jeter's 32.

For his career, on a 162 game basis, and 743 plate appearances per 162 games played, Jeter averaged 32 doubles. He went over 40 doubles one time in a season. Once.

That's not hitting doubles. His career total looks impressive until you look at how long he played, how many plate appearances he had. That he hit over 500 is merely a product of how long he played the game.

There are, as of this posting, 63 players in Major League history with over 500 doubles. Derek Jeter averaged one double every 23.17 plate appearances in his career, the third lowest rate of all 63 players on the list. Only Willie Mays (a double every 23.89) and Rickey Henderson (a double every 26.17) had a lower double-per-PA-rate. Willie Mays walked 1,464 times, had 140 triples and hit 660 home runs. Mays was doing a lot more than hitting doubles, so the relatively low double rate can be excused. And Henderson? Well, he walked 2,190 times, more than double Jeter's 1,082 walks. Then there's Henderson's 1,406 stolen bases, which is only 1,048 more than Jeter. In short, the other two guys with a lower double rate were doing other things. Mays was sending the ball into the seats, and Henderson was getting a free pass, and then turning that walk or single into a double a few seconds later.

It's great Jeter has 3,465 hits. Respectfully, I said he was a great pure hitter. A .310 AVG is fantastic for that long. You'll get absolutely no argument from me there. But that's also the problem. Offensively, that's really all that Jeter did. We're talking Hall of Fame, here. Within the context of the offensive players in Cooperstown, Jeter, comparatively, didn't do nearly as much as most of the greats. My contention has never been that Derek Jeter didn't belong. He does, clearly. No, my whole contention, from post one, has been that he didn't measure up to the immortals of the game-Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio and Mantle from the Yankees, as well as Cobb, Mathewson, Johnson, Musial, Williams, Mays, Aaron, etc. Once the subject of induction on 100% of the vote came up last year with Mariano Rivera, and it was mentioned that Jeter would probably replicate it-there I had an issue with it. In the grand scheme of things, does it matter? Nope. But when people discuss it beyond the hallowed halls of Cooperstown, they'll point to a 100% vote as evidence that "Jeter was one of the small handful of all-time greats". No, he wasn't. He wasn't on par with Honus Wagner, who is still the gold standard for Jeter's position. Jeter wasn't even the best shortstop on his own team for much of his career. Ripken and Yount were both, in their prime, better than Jeter. Nomar Garciaparra, whose career was ruined by injuries (why? I won't speculate here, though the argument made that it could have been due to steroids, given the others on the Red Sox we know used)-he was every bit Jeter's equal offensively, and better defensively.

I give Derek Jeter a hell of a lot of credit for playing as long as he did, and at that position. Playing 156, 157, 158 games every year, while people are sliding into you turning the double play--his durability, and his consistently high average, are major checks in the plus column for him. I mentioned Garciaparra. Jeter was still an All Star by the time Garciaparra's career, for all intents and purposes, was over. No matter how you slice it, almost 3,500 hits, and nearly 2,000 runs scored is impressive. It's just not the creme de la creme.

-He did not walk. Of the 32 players with over 3,000 hits, Jeter is 24th in walk rate at 8.6%
-He didn't hit for power. Of the 32 players over 3,000 hits, Jeter's 870 extra base hits (25.11% of his hits total) is 26th. Albert Pujols ranks #1, as 1,333 of his 3,202 hits were extra base hits.
-He hit singles. A lot of them. Of the 32 3,000 hit members, Jeter is 5th all-time in singles with 2,595, and three of the guys ahead of him, Cobb, Eddie Collins and Cap Anson, played in the dead ball era. Only Pete Rose, with 3,215 singles, had more in the modern era. But Rose had 3,288 more plate appearances to get them.

Typically, an immortal, an all-time great, does more than one thing well, right? Jeter got on base, and scored runs. That's it. I just can't label him an all-time great, not when so many Hall of Famers did so many things better than him.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

And yes, he mostly was a singles hitter. But he's #6 all-time, and in fewer years (20) than anyone in front of him. In fact, you have to go all the way down to #15 on the all-time hit list to find anyone with fewer years (some guy named Pujols with 19).

Forgot to answer this. You shouldn't be thinking in terms of years, because not all years are alike. First of all, the seasons now are 162 games. They used to be 154, right? I seem to remember a lot of discussion about Roger Maris and an asterisk because he didn't break Ruth's record in 154 games. That's 8 games a season more that Jeter played than many of the guys on this list. So, when you say Jeter played in fewer seasons, well, 8 games more played a season, after a few decades....it adds up.

Additionally, depending on where a guy hits in the lineup, they could see significantly more plate appearances, right? Jeter had 12,602 career PAs. 4,649 of those came from the #1 spot in the batting order. 6,753 more came from the #2 position. 11,402 of his career PAs came from the first or second position in the lineup. Many of the guys you referenced as having played more years...they're power hitters, and will be batting in the #4 or 4 slot in the lineup. Fewer PAs per season.

Of the 32 guys in the 3,000 hit club, Jeter had the most PAs per 162 games played:

Jeter 743 PA
Molitor 734
Anson 727
Rose 722
Boggs 713
Biggio 710
Pujols 701

Except for Pujols, all singles hitters, for the most part. Not a lot of real power.

Yastrzemski 685 PA
Aaron 685 PA
Musial 680 PA
Mays 676 PA
Kaline 662 PA

Jeter came to the plate a lot more than the guys behind him. That he achieved his hit total in "fewer seasons" is really a misnomer.

[the 'stache]

I owe cardsagain and Ben an apology for the way I responded to their posts. There was no need for profanity. I'm not going to redact what I posted-I'll leave that to Leon, if he feels doing so is warranted.

But you know what, guys? Again, if you don't like what I post, or the length of my posts annoys you, there's an ignore feature on the forum for a reason. I suggest you use it. Badmouthing someone behind their back is incredibly low class. I have a right to express my opinion, respectfully, and you can either agree with what I have to say, and respond in kind, disagree with what I have to say, and provide evidence as to why you disagree with me, or you can say nothing.

Yes, I tend to write a lot. I put a lot of thought into my posts because, honestly, I see a lot of this kind of talk elsewhere, and statements are presented as fact, and there's no supporting evidence. None. We throw things out there quite casually, and there's little to no truth to much of it. If the sheer length of my carefully thought out posts offends you, ignore it, and move on.

I have to find ways to try and fill my time. If my analysis isn't appreciated, there are plenty of other threads about rampant fraud, and the crooks in the hobby to hold your attention. Plenty of talk about the latest scandal in baseball ("sign stealing"), or football ("deflated balls, taping practices"), etc etc.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

I owe cardsagain and Ben an apology for the way I responded to their posts. There was no need for profanity. I'm not going to redact what I posted-I'll leave that to Leon, if he feels doing so is warranted.

But you know what, guys? Again, if you don't like what I post, or the length of my posts annoys you, there's an ignore feature on the forum for a reason. I suggest you use it. Badmouthing someone behind their back is incredibly low class. I have a right to express my opinion, respectfully, and you can either agree with what I have to say, and respond in kind, disagree with what I have to say, and provide evidence as to why you disagree with me, or you can say nothing.

Yes, I tend to write a lot. I put a lot of thought into my posts because, honestly, I see a lot of this kind of talk elsewhere, and statements are presented as fact, and there's no supporting evidence. None. We throw things out there quite casually, and there's little to no truth to much of it. If the sheer length of my carefully thought out posts offends you, ignore it, and move on.

I have to find ways to try and fill my time. If my analysis isn't appreciated, there are plenty of other threads about rampant fraud, and the crooks in the hobby to hold your attention. Plenty of talk about the latest scandal in baseball ("sign stealing"), or football ("deflated balls, taping practices"), etc etc.

You keep using words that don't apply like "annoyed", "offended", and so on, but we were just poking a little fun at the laborious nature of your posts (and the pompous nature with which that omniscience is often delivered.) This is just an internet forum; most people don't share your need to get so involved with every detail about Larry Walker and Derek Jeter being presented and considered down to the nth degree. A random online person's misconceptions about such topics really aren't that big of a deal.

[AndrewJerome]

Hi Bill,

I enjoy your analysis. Just curious where you'd put Jeter in your all time rankings of just shortstops.

I'd have

1) Wagner
2) Arod
3) Probably Jeter. Close call between Ripken, Jeter, Banks, and Yount

Andrew

[CMIZ5290]

Jeter was incredible, slam dunk first ballot HOF....As far as 100% of the vote goes, I would lean more towards Ken Griffey Jr.....In actuality they both should be, just saying....

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by AndrewJerome

Hi Bill,

I enjoy your analysis. Just curious where you'd put Jeter in your all time rankings of just shortstops.

I'd have

1) Wagner
2) Arod
3) Probably Jeter. Close call between Ripken, Jeter, Banks, and Yount

Andrew

Andrew I know you weren’t asking me but I like the idea.

1. Wagner
2. Arod
3. Ripken
4. Arky Vaughan (could have been higher if he didn’t lose several seasons because he hated Leo Durocher)
5. Jeter-Banks-yount group (pretty similar overall in my opinion, each with different strengths and weaknesses)
6. The next tier of guys like Ozzie Smith, Barry Larkin, Joe Cronin, etc

Also keep in mind Arod and Yount both played about half their games at other positions so you could make an argument that they shouldn’t be on the list at all when speaking of purely shortstops.

[RCMcKenzie]

Nice list, Rhett. I saw the whole careers of Ozzie Smith and Derek Jeter, and I have Smith slightly ahead, as does this "JAWS" list of the best of all time. Don't ask me to explain this advanced stat, but it seems to churn out the right names....some notables: 8th Smith, 10th Dahlen, 12th Jeter, 18th Glasscock, 24th Joe Tinker, 4th George Davis...

Here are a few Pebbly Jack cards. I'd like to see him in the HOF.

www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_SS.shtml

[Bigdaddy]

Bill, you simply threw out a challenge - "Prove me wrong" and I took up the challenge, though not with the thoroughness that you tend to reply with.

I think we probably both rate Jeter about the same - first ballot HOF, but not in the rare air of Mays, Ruth, Cobb, etc. I might rate him a tad higher, but that's only because of seeing him so much on TV (especially in the fall), in person and because he was my son's favorite player. We made many trips to Baltimore to see the Yankees over the years.

And in response to the other question about all-time shortstops and especially Arod, I believe he might have been THE BEST all-time if he hadn't juiced. The PEDs gave him some more power, but along with the bulk he picked up he lost his range, quickness and flexibility that are required to play SS. Made him a great 3rd baseman, where you only need two steps to either side, but diminished his skills at short.

Overall, my list today is:

1. Wagner
2. Ripken
3. Jeter/Ozzie
5. Yount/Arod (because of time spent elsewhere on the diamond)
6. Banks?

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Bill, you simply threw out a challenge - "Prove me wrong" and I took up the challenge, though not with the thoroughness that you tend to reply with.

I think we probably both rate Jeter about the same - first ballot HOF, but not in the rare air of Mays, Ruth, Cobb, etc. I might rate him a tad higher, but that's only because of seeing him so much on TV (especially in the fall), in person and because he was my son's favorite player. We made many trips to Baltimore to see the Yankees over the years.

And in response to the other question about all-time shortstops and especially Arod, I believe he might have been THE BEST all-time if he hadn't juiced. The PEDs gave him some more power, but along with the bulk he picked up he lost his range, quickness and flexibility that are required to play SS. Made him a great 3rd baseman, where you only need two steps to either side, but diminished his skills at short.

Overall, my list today is:

1. Wagner
2. Ripken
3. Jeter/Ozzie
5. Yount/Arod (because of time spent elsewhere on the diamond)
6. Banks?

Even before (and after) he juiced, ARod was a better SS than Jeter. By far. Jeter should have moved, not ARod. ARod was sooooo much a better SS than Jeter was that it isn't even funny. FAR more range, more glove, more everything. Yet he moved. Jeter didn't. I always viewed that as selfish.

I don't disagree that Jeter is a first ballot HOFer, whatever that means. He was offensively, a consistent and productive hitter, particularly in the clutch situations. Not a doubt. I agree with Bill's analysis in that regard. But he is still not nearly the best HOFer as a SS ever. That argument literally can't be made with a straight face except, maybe, by a diehard Yankee fan. That is my problem with that silly 100% argument. It doesn't matter any more than if you are elected on the 1st or last ballot. If you are in, you are in. You are, by definition, a 100% HOFer. At that point WTF does it matter what your vote percentage is?

[jchcollins]

How is it possibly rational to suggest stripping the writer of his BBWAA credentials for not making Jeter unanimous, when for all but one person ever in the HOF, it has NEVER worked that way? That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in a while. Babe Ruth wasn’t unanimous. Walter Johnson wasn’t, Willie Mays wasn’t, Griffey Jr. wasn’t. It’s how it works. Get over it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk