Adrian Beltre

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

I guess I see a top ten player differently than most. One great season, followed by several mediocre season, at best, doesn't make for a great player, certainly not one of the ten best players in the game. Consistency over time makes a player great. Anybody can have a career year, and as referenced already, that 2004 season seems suspect, to say the least. He has a 1.017 OPS in '04, and then averages a .759 OPS over the next five seasons, going over .800 only once--barely--in 2007, with an .802.

Then, he goes to Boston, a team notorious for PED use, and boom, he's a .321 hitter with nearly 50 doubles, and 30 home runs, after being a .270 hitter nearly 7,000 plate appearances into his career.

Sorry, I just can't vote him in. One great season, and eleven average, or below average, seasons in his first twelve doesn't scream all-time great to me.

Andre Dawson is the most similar batter according to BBR. HE also had a career year that was clearly better than his norm.

He hit 49 HRs for the Cubs under a famously 'blank' contract...just to get off the turf in Montreal. His next three highest HR totals were 31,31 & 27. Beltre's top four were 48, 36, 32 & 30.

Both had four 100 RBI seasons; both lead the league in Hits and doubles once.

Beltre's Career OPS is .813 to Dawson's .802

The next two most similar batters were Dave Parker (HOF except for baggage either real or assumed) and Billy Williams, another Cubs HOFer.

Dawson did have twice as many gold gloves and a lot more stolen bases, but he is a much closer hitter comparison than Chipper Jones- who is not listed in the top 10 most similar to Beltre (so I'm kind of correcting my previous post ).

I'd have to say that since Dawson is in, Beltre should be.

[nat]

Beltre has had only one season in his career that he was below average, 2001. 2 WAR is an average player, Beltre was never below 3.2 in his time in Seattle. He's been worth 3 already this season. His raw offensive numbers were suppressed by his park during his time in Seattle. Once you adjust for his park he was a below-average hitter two seasons and above average in three. But what really makes Beltre special isn't his hitting (which is good but not great), it's the fact that he's one of baseball's all-time great defenders. He is 13th all-time in dWAR (the defensive part of WAR). The only third baseman who ranks ahead of him is Brooks. All the others are shortstops. A good hitter, with a long career, who has a fair argument for being the second greatest defensive player ever at his position, is a pretty good HOF case.

Let's leave the steroid speculation for people for whom there is actual evidence. He's never failed a test, never turned up on documents from shady doctors. Not everyone follows a nice smooth aging curve. And the "maybe he's juicing before a contract" theory doesn't hold water, since his worst offensive season was his last in Seattle (hence a year in which he needed a new contract), and he's been playing at a consistently high level his entire time with the Rangers.

[packs]

That year in Seattle was due to an injury. He only appeared in 111 games. You could argue it's a fluke but it seems pretty suspicious to me that his best seasons all came during walk years. In 2012 he signed a 5 year extension with Texas after hitting 32 homers in 2011, the first time he hit 30 homers since he hit 48 during his walk year in Los Angeles.

He also hit 321 with Boston in 2010 on a a one year deal. The first time he hit 300 since his walk year in Los Angeles. Also the first time he drove in 100 runs.

The pattern is suspicious.

[UnVme7]

I've watched Beltre for a long time, have a huge collection of him, and straight up love the guy for his on and off the field contributions.

Guy is tougher than nails. Broke a finger that needed surgery and opted not to have surgery and played the season with a bad hand. Ever read where he got real sick early in his career and had to wear a colostomy bag when he played?? Yeah, guy plays hurt all the time and gets mad when the manager wants to give him a day off.

He got better with age--- his best years came from 2010 to present. How do you explain that? Steriods? Just stop...

One thing I hate is when someone looks at numbers for someone and doesn't fully understand them. Guy could retire now and get voted in.

[packs]

Well what is your reasoning behind not being suspicious? When Brady Anderson hit 50 homers wasn't that suspicious? Why was it suspicious? I would say it's because nothing he did before that suggested he was that talented. I would say the same about Beltre and his walk years.

[UnVme7]

Originally Posted by packs

Well what is your reasoning behind not being suspicious? When Brady Anderson hit 50 homers wasn't that suspicious? Why was it suspicious? I would say it's because nothing he did before that suggested he was that talented. I would say the same about Beltre and his walk years.

His 2011, 2012 and 2013 years were some of his most productive years of his career, and I have zero suspicion that he was on anything in those years, where drug testing was and has been pretty high in the order compared to 2004.

I suspect guys like Frank Thomas, Piazza, Thome, etc, but I'm not going to say I wouldn't ever vote for them when I don't know for a fact that they actually did