Clemente: Inner circle of the elite, or on his way?

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Joey Gallo has a career strike out rate of 45%.

Don't let Joe Sewell know about this, or else he would turn over in his Hall of Fame grave.

Brian

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Don't let Joe Sewell know about this, or else he would turn over in his Hall of Fame grave.

Brian

Gallo already has struck out more than DiMaggio did in his career. In just 291 games.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Gallo already has struck out more than DiMaggio did in his career. In just 291 games.

Is this a credible attempt at Gallo humor?

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Is this a credible attempt at Gallo humor?

More like a California whine

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Paul S

More like a California whine

Paul Masson's commercials were better -- no wine before its time, pitched by Orson Welles.

[tedzan]

Some of you guys get carried away with this relatively new "WAR" factor in the ranking of BB players. I think can be misleading.

Old time statistics are absolute numbers....while this WAR stat can be "played" with. And, I understand that it's calculation has recently been modified.

Furthermore, it does not really provide us the complete picture of a given BB player since it does not take into account that player's World Series stats.

Any factor that does not include World Series performance (in my opinion) is absolutely meaningless in any discussions regarding the ranking of Base-
ball players. Yes, Mantle has an advantage because he played in 65 - W. S. games. But, that is so because his superior play during the regular season
greatly contributed to his team getting into the World Series.

Therefore, if we take into consideration World Series numbers, then Ruth, Mantle, and Gehrig are the top three guys.

Mantle leads this trio with 18 HR's....59 Hits....42 Runs....40 RBI's


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[ValKehl]

So Ted, do I correctly understand that a really good player who never made it to the World Series because he played his entire career for mostly lousy teams, someone like George Sisler for example, wouldn't get any or much consideration from you?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Some of you guys get carried away with this relatively new "WAR" factor in the ranking of BB players. I think can be misleading.

Old time statistics are absolute numbers....while this WAR stat can be "played" with. And, I understand that it's calculation has recently been modified.

Furthermore, it does not really provide us the complete picture of a given BB player since it does not take into account that player's World Series stats.

Any factor that does not include World Series performance (in my opinion) is absolutely meaningless in any discussions regarding the ranking of Base-
ball players. Yes, Mantle has an advantage because he played in 65 - W. S. games. But, that is so because his superior play during the regular season
greatly contributed to his team getting into the World Series.

Therefore, if we take into consideration World Series numbers, then Ruth, Mantle, and Gehrig are the top three guys.

Mantle leads this trio with 18 HR's....59 Hits....42 Runs....40 RBI's


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Yogi had 71 WS hits. I doubt anyone will ever match that.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Gallo already has struck out more than DiMaggio did in his career. In just 291 games.

I truly enjoy watching Joey Gallo strike out.

Hi again, Pete,

Larry

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Don't let Joe Sewell know about this, or else he would turn over in his Hall of Fame grave.

Brian

Wow, 114 Ks in 1,903 games played. And, that's in the live ball era.

Gallo could do that in a half a season.

[Mark70Z]

I really don’t understand the stats guys who rank players with all these advanced metrics, and believe they can define the play of players decades ago, both hitting and fielding, and be positive who was the better player UNTIL the metric is “updated” and a new list is now generated.

Back to the original topic. Clemente was a great player and I enjoyed watching him as a player, possibly a bit of a hypochondriac, but had all the tools. The only problem I have is that Clemente keeps getting better, and better, and even better as a ball player over the years. While great players, like Kaline (who was mentioned in this thread), becomes a player in history that was half way decent in the minds of baseball fans. The main reason, in my opinion, is because Clemente has a STORY. It’s a very good story, BUT Clemente hasn’t gotten any better since he played the game.

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

For the most part I would agree, but in baseball particularly we have somewhat refined our perspective on what makes players great, for example we realize now the importance of drawing walks in a way that perhaps was less appreciated in bygone times. So to that extent, it's possible to legitimately reassess players in light of new norms.

Now that said, Clemente did not walk much, so a reassessment really is not favorable to him. Whereas it helps Mantle a great deal.

[mckinneyj]

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

What do you think the reaction would have been had the Pirates Joe Brown approached the GMs of Yankees, Giants, or Braves suggesting an equal swap for Mantle, Mays, or Aaron? What if he offered to throw in Maz? How about Maz and Skinner or Groat? I doubt any of that gets a deal done (the opinion of one who's youth was spent idolizing these guys... fwiw).

[rats60]

Originally Posted by mckinneyj

What do you think the reaction would have been had the Pirates Joe Brown approached the GMs of Yankees, Giants, or Braves suggesting an equal swap for Mantle, Mays, or Aaron? What if he offered to throw in Maz? How about Maz and Skinner or Groat? I doubt any of that gets a deal done (the opinion of one who's youth was spent idolizing these guys... fwiw).

Probably the same thing that happened when the Red Sox and Yankees agreed to trade Ted williams and Joe DiMaggio. Willie Mays has said that Clemente was the best player (other than himself) that he saw play. Orlando Cepeda, who was a teammate of Aaron and Mays, said Clemente was better. In the mid- sixties there was definitely a big 3 of Aaron, Clemente and Mays and it was debated who was the best.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by rats60

Probably the same thing that happened when the Red Sox and Yankees agreed to trade Ted williams and Joe DiMaggio. Willie Mays has said that Clemente was the best player (other than himself) that he saw play. Orlando Cepeda, who was a teammate of Aaron and Mays, said Clemente was better. In the mid- sixties there was definitely a big 3 of Aaron, Clemente and Mays and it was debated who was the best.

Clemente is not and has never really been considered the “big 3” with Mays and Aaron. If anything someone like Frank Robinson would be more the person that should be in that conversation, and even he doesn’t measure up to those two (but does have superior statistics than Clemente). I like Clemente but he was no Mays or Aaron.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Clemente is not and has never really been considered the “big 3” with Mays and Aaron. If anything someone like Frank Robinson would be more the person that should be in that conversation, and even he doesn’t measure up to those two (but does have superior statistics than Clemente). I like Clemente but he was no Mays or Aaron.

Clemente had higher WAR per game played. I think Clemente measures up quite favorably to Frank Robinson when his whole game is considered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

I really don’t understand the stats guys who rank players with all these advanced metrics, and believe they can define the play of players decades ago, both hitting and fielding, and be positive who was the better player UNTIL the metric is “updated” and a new list is now generated.

That is certainly your prerogative. Sometimes the more time that elapses, the more we understand certain things better. Your line of thinking would preclude you from having a fundamental understanding given all known relevant data of a subject, be it sports or politics or science or any sort of historical context. The more we learn about a subject, the better understanding about that subject. Thus the possibility for change through new valid inputs.

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Back to the original topic. Clemente was a great player and I enjoyed watching him as a player, possibly a bit of a hypochondriac, but had all the tools. The only problem I have is that Clemente keeps getting better, and better, and even better as a ball player over the years. While great players, like Kaline (who was mentioned in this thread), becomes a player in history that was half way decent in the minds of baseball fans. The main reason, in my opinion, is because Clemente has a STORY. It’s a very good story, BUT Clemente hasn’t gotten any better since he played the game.

I would largely agree. Kaline did not have the sustained high peak that Clemente had, but Kaline was a very good player for a long time. Clemente wasn't nearly as good as Kaline untile he reached age 25. And from that point until the end of his life, Clemente was largely better than Kaline. Clemente is a legend due to his actions as a person, which gives him the iconic status he deserves. Kaline has only his very very good stats to fall back on. Thus Clemente seems to get more and more "relevant" as the years go on, and as social consciousness becomes more and more important to more and more people. That is not a knock against Kaline. Just a fact in favor of Clemente. Statistically they were very close. If I had to choose one or the other for my team for the entire length of that player's career, I would likely take Kaline.

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

No. Not in the least. People who watched these players brought their biases of "how the game should be played" and what was important statistically "back in the day" as a means to understand a player's perceived value. These are biases that tilt someone one way or another based on things we understand today to be largely irrelevant.