Tim Kurkjian and the greatest SS's

[clydepepper]

Seeing that Shortstop is considered a premium defensive position, if A-Rod is included in the discussion, then so should Vizquel, Aparicio, and Maranville.

I would hesitate placing Jeter above Ripken

Arky Vaughan may be the one of the best under-the-radar position players ever.

[ksabet]

It's funny because we romanticize old legendary players it's sometimes hard to figure out where they truly stand in history.

Wagner is almost unanimously considered the greatest shortstop and against his contemporaries (which IMO is how it SHOULD be judged) there is no doubt. But was he really better than Ripken or Jeter if you put him on today's field?

It's something we will never know but I i have always been curious how Ruth or Foxx or Mathewson would have fared against modern players.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by ksabet

It's funny because we romanticize old legendary players it's sometimes hard to figure out where they truly stand in history.

Wagner is almost unanimously considered the greatest shortstop and against his contemporaries (which IMO is how it SHOULD be judged) there is no doubt. But was he really better than Ripken or Jeter if you put him on today's field?

It's something we will never know but I i have always been curious how Ruth or Foxx or Mathewson would have fared against modern players.

This is why comparing greats across generations is so very difficult. To be accurate, you can only rank them within their own time. Babe Ruth would have had to be in better shape to be productive, Walter Johnson may have only been 'moderately fast' by today's standards. On the other hand, what if the old-timers had had all of the training and nutritional advantages that today's stars have....you could go back and forth forever about this...and I believe we will...part of the allure of the history of the game. '...a haunted game in which every players is compared to the ghosts of all those who came before.'

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

This is why comparing greats across generations is so very difficult. To be accurate, you can only rank them within their own time. Babe Ruth would have had to be in better shape to be productive, Walter Johnson may have only been 'moderately fast' by today's standards. On the other hand, what if the old-timers had had all of the training and nutritional advantages that today's stars have....you could go back and forth forever about this...and I believe we will...part of the allure of the history of the game. '...a haunted game in which every players is compared to the ghosts of all those who came before.'

That's why I hate when people bring up the past players talking about how they would do now, but not vice versa. Do you think any of these pampered stars would last a season riding trains, working an off-season job, playing with a scuffed up ball that gets thrown at their helmetless head if they crowd the plate, and using chewing tobacco spit as a form of healing a spike wound? 90% of them wouldn't last half a season playing in those old wool unis, always day games and exhibition games scheduled for off-days. Most of them would be a crying mess after the first week, calling their moms like a fat kid at summer camp. And people now think these guys are the better players, ha!

There isn't a shortstop that's played this game that should be mentioned in the same breath as Honus Wagner and I'm a Pirates fan that thinks Arky Vaughan was the second best shortstop of all-time. He's no Wagner though, not close.

[ksabet]

I do not think guys who played half their careers at other positions should be counted in the discussion.

I also Feel as though it is very tough to compare but the discussion is what makes baseball fun.

I remember as a kid we would challenge and test each other on who was the best at different positions and just seeing if we could name the greats in history. Great memories!

[stlcardsfan]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Seeing that Shortstop is considered a premium defensive position, if A-Rod is included in the discussion, then so should Vizquel, Aparicio, and Maranville.

I would hesitate placing Jeter above Ripken

Arky Vaughan may be the one of the best under-the-radar position players ever.

+1. Ozzie Smith saved 100+ runs per year in his prime. According to Whitey Herzog, not me. Probably also true about Vizquel. Most of this discussion is centered on offensive production. You guys are missing the boat.

[SmokyBurgess]

Never saw them of course, but must have been a pretty good shortstop in the Negro Leagues.

[mrvster]

Totally agree....

Wagner, Ripken, Jeter

[Jay Wolt]

Originally Posted by SmokyBurgess

Never saw them of course, but must have been a pretty good shortstop in the Negro Leagues.

Pop Lloyd is probably the top man on the list

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Jay Wolt

Pop Lloyd is probably the top man on the list

I agree, but pretty good arguments could also be made for Willie Wells, Dick Lundy and perhaps Dobie Moore

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

I agree, but pretty good arguments could also be made for Willie Wells, Dick Lundy and perhaps Dobie Moore

Dobie Moore:

His career ended abruptly in mid-1926 when he was shot in the leg by a girlfriend and suffered a compound fracture jumping from a second-story balcony to escape from her. He reportedly played semi-pro ball in Detroit into the 1930s as a stiff-legged first baseman.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Dobie Moore:

His career ended abruptly in mid-1926 when he was shot in the leg by a girlfriend and suffered a compound fracture jumping from a second-story balcony to escape from her. He reportedly played semi-pro ball in Detroit into the 1930s as a stiff-legged first baseman.

Definition of a bad day.

[bbcard1]

I would agree Jeter is a first ballot hall of famer, but I am not sure I would take him in the top five shortstops, if so he would probably be #5. We are in this weird era where we unreasonably amplify a person's achievements at the time of their death or at their retirement. I remember someone saying that Tony Gwynn was not only one of the best baseball players ever, but the best people ever. That's a really big claim. When Gerald Ford died I remember someone comparing him to Lincoln. There's not really a great harm in it, but it doesn't mean it's accurate. Jeter was consistently excellent for a very long time, but I am not sure there was a moment when he was considered the most dominant player in the game, a claim two of his contemporaries at the same position could argue (Rodriguez and possibly Garciaparra).

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's weird how Jeter's WAR stats are really mediocre (12th among SSs) but in some other categories he is really high (11th among ALL players in hof monitor). Bottom line, one of those players I think that just defies statistics. ARod blows him away statistically, but who would you want?

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by stlcardsfan

+1. Ozzie Smith saved 100+ runs per year in his prime. According to Whitey Herzog, not me. Probably also true about Vizquel. Most of this discussion is centered on offensive production. You guys are missing the boat.

A run per game saved is just a stupid exaggeration. Nobody cones even close to doing that - the opportunities simply don't come up that often.

[Tabe]

Arod is #2, at the VERY least. 40/40, batting title, three 40 homer seasons, and Gold Glove-level defense - all before leaving Seattle. Whatever came later, at their very best, Ripken, Jeter, et al, simply couldn't touch the player Arod was in Seattle.

[stlcardsfan]

Originally Posted by Tabe

A run per game saved is just a stupid exaggeration. Nobody cones even close to doing that - the opportunities simply don't come up that often.

SS robs a basehit up the middle. Next guy up hits a home run (or even a double). One run saved.

Enough about Arod. On the juice since day 1.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by stlcardsfan

SS robs a basehit up the middle. Next guy up hits a home run (or even a double). One run saved..

I can certainly figure out how a SS can save a run. What in saying is they don't do it 100 times a year. I'd venture it's more like 10-15. Tops. It simply doesn't come up that often.

[SteveMitchell]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Seeing that Shortstop is considered a premium defensive position, if A-Rod is included in the discussion, then so should Vizquel, Aparicio, and Maranville.

I would hesitate placing Jeter above Ripken

Arky Vaughan may be the one of the best under-the-radar position players ever.

[emphasis added]

That Tim Kurkjian included Vaughan so high was, frankly, suprising - pleasingly so. And Raymond's comment is spot-on, in my view. It's amazing to me that Arky was ignored so long by the Baseball Writers (who had years to honor him but did not) but, belatedly, was selected by the much reviled Committee on Veterans.

I like:

1. Wagner
2. Vaughan
3. Banks
4. Ripken
5. Vizquel
6. Smith
7. Yount
8. Jeter
9. Larkin
10. Trammell

[Peter_Spaeth]

Wagner, Banks, Jeter, Ripken, Yount, Vaughan

Could be biased, I love Jeter and always thought Ripken was overrated a bit due to the streak

[Marckus99]

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.

[arexcrooke]

Originally Posted by Marckus99

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.

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

[Peter_Spaeth]

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.

[KCRfan1]

Originally Posted by Marckus99

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.

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......

[the 'stache]

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.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

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.

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.

[the 'stache]

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

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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.

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.

[Al C.risafulli]

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.

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

[KCRfan1]

Originally Posted by KCRfan1

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......

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