Tim Kurkjian and the greatest SS's

[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

[Peter_Spaeth]

You might be defining the modern era differently.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by 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

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

[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.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Leading the league in home runs or winning an MVP award is meaningless.

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

Originally Posted by jhs5120

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

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

Originally Posted by jhs5120

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.

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

[the 'stache]

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

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

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

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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

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

Major head scratch is right...

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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

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

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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

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

[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

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

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

I absolutely agree.

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[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.