The Greatest CF Ever

[sweaver]

This could be the toughest position. Who do you think is the best ever? Make your pick, then state your reasons!

[BuzzBuzzard]

The Say Hey Kid!

[Skip]

Mays, Cobb, Mantle, Speaker, DiMaggio. In that order.

Mays perhaps the best all around player in the game. Cobb was all that could be when he played. Mantle could have been greater had his speed not been taken along with his liver. Joe D. was overrated but certainly is in the top grouping.

[WiredTiger]

Very tough choices, probably the hardest position out there. I went with Cobb in a narrow margin over Willie Mays. I then had Speaker, Mantle, Dimaggio in that order.

Cobb advantages are speed and hitting for average. Mays had the advantage at Power and defense. Tough call.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Originally posted by WiredTiger
Very tough choices, probably the hardest position out there. I went with Cobb in a narrow margin over Willie Mays. I then had Speaker, Mantle, Dimaggio in that order.

Cobb advantages are speed and hitting for average. Mays had the advantage at Power and defense. Tough call.

This is tough. Perhaps this is an idiosyncratic choice, but I am picking Speaker.

He had a long career, like Cobb, was only .005 behind on OBP, was a better defensive CF, and played on more winning teams.

He had a longer career than DiMaggio and Mantle, although Mantle and Cobb may have had better peak seasons.

It's hard to deny Willie the #1 spot, though. The more I think about this, the more I have to rate this a tie.

[wyvern37]

I am going with Cobb due to his consistency. He played at a very high level for a very long time (24 years). He was a great player as a teenager, a great player in his prime and was still great at age 41 when he retired. His 1911 season ranks as one of the best single-season performances ever.

[gyb13]

Close, but I'd rate them:
Cobb, Mantle, Speaker, Mays...

[TGwynn19]

I guess I am in the minority here. I see it as Ty and everyone else. There is a reason when they had the first HOF class that Ty had the most votes. That reason is he was a better ball player than Babe. To break it down on a scale from 1-10 Ty 10, Mays 8.5, and Speaker 7.75

[SmedIndy]

Ty Cobb - he said so himself, and I wouldn't dare argue with him, even with him in his grave....

I am firmly convinced that he could do anything he wanted to do in the game, but chose to play the way he was taught, even when the game changed, because darn it, that was the way to play. SCIENTIFIC BALL!

[Golden Bear]

Mays. He could do it all; best long-term five tool set of the whole bunch.

I'd love to have the worst of this bunch on my team any day.

[sweaver]

I wanted very badly to vote for Oscar Charleston, arguably the best of the Negro Leaguers, but couldn't do it. Not enough hard evidence. Hamilton was not the complete package. DiMaggio was terrific, but just not quite a long enough career.

I came down to Mantle, Mays and Cobb. Mantle has the highest peak value of the three. Mantle has a peak matched only by the Babe, and Barry Bonds last year. But, his career is a little short for guys on this list.

Cobb or Mays. Mays or Cobb. I have a feeling, if you could magically shift them to each others' eras, their stats would pretty much reflect also. They were similar players, in talent and effect. Ty had few homers and lots of steals, but he hit #3 or #4. He was one of the great "power hitters" of the dead-ball era, a doubles and triples man who would hit a lot of homers today.

In the end, I give it to Willie on defense. I don't see an inch worth of space between them as hitters.

[pwdennis]

A toughie - for career value probably Mays, Cobb, Speaker, Mantle and DiMaggio (in that order) - for peak value Mantle. I cannot comment intelligently on Negro League stars but Oscar Charleton should probably be in the top five for peak value

[hmrsf]

During the draft game I spent a long time reading and reshuffleing the list.

Mayes, Cobb, Speaker. Ask in 20 minutes, Cobb, Speaker, Mayes. Give it another 20 Speaker, Mayes and Cobb.

So the answer is...........;) Still can't pick!

[moose]

i want to give credit to mays for being a nice type of guy and detract from cobb for being a prick - but even when i do that, it's cobb cobb cobb.

mays may have been a better fielder, but when they other 4 tools are like they were with cobb, i don't think it matters.

[Sablewolf]

I love Mays, he was one of the greatest players of all time hands down ... just not better than Cobb ... Ty Cobb could do whatever he wanted on the field, his power numbers may not match, but he was from a different era.
There's always the story of how towards the end of his career when people were fawning all over Babe, Ty said he could hit homers if he wanted ... he went out and swatted, what like 4 in 2 days, then went back to his old swing, said he thought it was better. He may have been a prick, but he was an incredible ball player.

[LeGrandOrange]

The best CF of all time was Al Oliv---just kidding, I picked Mays. I always felt Mays was one of the great all-around players period. He was a 7-tool player, showing average, power stroke, speed, defense, throwing arm, batting eye, and most importantly, personality for SUCH a long time, and while Mantle was a 7-tool player himself, and better in several aspects, I think few players, almost no one if it weren't for his godson, pulled it off as well as Say Hey.
Cobb may well have been better then both, but I think for my money, no one was better at doing whatever you wanted him to do then Willie.
Your mileage may vary.

[KCBOOMER]

I think you could take the top five and be happy with any one of them. I picked Cobb, but....

[nightal]

I picked Mantle and before anyone comments, I take it that we want to take the player we pick at his best. I believe at their best, Mantle was the superior player. And btw, this position isn't any harder than selecting left field or catcher. Other than right field, shortstop and third base, all positions are difficult.

[sweaver]

Speaking of which...

[KCBOOMER]

Originally posted by nightal
Other than right field, shortstop and third base, all positions are difficult.


Most of us didn't have any difficulty at 1B either.:)

[pathogan]

cant go by what might have been{Charleston] or what should have been{Mantle} or what other would have believe was{Dimaggio] Sam Crawford cast my vote for me. He said that Honus wagner was the greatest player he ever saw. Cobb and mays might be a tossup, but willie had power and was a brilliant fielder, had a joie`de vie that was memorable 35 years later...Mays for me

[spitball]

Mays Mays Mays
Then Del Unser
Kidding

Seriously though. Range, Power,Speed , and hella-style points.

[Skip]

Originally posted by KCBOOMER
Most of us didn't have any difficulty at 1B either.:)
I'm sorry to say there was a time in life when I had plenty of difficulty at 1B, as well as 2B, etc. :naughty:

[Throwback]

Cobb by far. Behind him, Mantle and Mays (interchangeably), Speaker, and Dimaggio.

[b-ball-lunachik]

Originally posted by Skip

I'm sorry to say there was a time in life when I had plenty of difficulty at 1B, as well as 2B, etc. :naughty:

:loud: poor Skip...you crack me up sometimes! :D

I vote Mays...during the contest, took him my first player in the draft -- Willie could do everything and while others may have been better at an individual skill, no one could combine all tools at his skill level....and he had the showmanship and love of the game that showed that it was his job to produce the best for his team, but loved entertaining the fans as well...

Cobb would have been my second choice....

[Duque]

I'm gonna side with nightal and take Mick. He and Willie are very close - but I don't think Mantle gets enough credit as the offensive powerhouse he was, even when he wasn't fully healthy.

[b-ball-lunachik]

Originally posted by Duque
I'm gonna side with nightal and take Mick. He and Willie are very close - but I don't think Mantle gets enough credit as the offensive powerhouse he was, even when he wasn't fully healthy.


aww, andy -- doesn't seem right to vote against Willie on his birthday...I was reminded earlier that he turned 71 today...here are some quotes about him that may influence some on the fence voters! :D


"As a batter, his only weakness is a wild pitch." - Bill Rigney

"I can't very well tell my batters don't hit it to him. Wherever they hit it, he's there anyway." - Gil Hodges

They invented the All-Star game for Willie Mays. -- Ted Williams

"He was something like zero for twenty-one the first time I saw him. His first major league hit was a home run off me and I'll never forgive myself. We might have gotten rid of Willie forever if I'd only struck him out." - Warren Spahn

"I can't believe that Babe Ruth was a better player than Willie Mays. Ruth is to baseball what Arnold Palmer is to golf. He got the game moving. But I can't believe he could run as well as Mays, and I can't believe he was any better an outfielder." - Sandy Koufax

"He should play in handcuffs." - A Sports Writer on Willie Mays

"If he could cook, I'd marry him." - Leo Durocher


"I don't make history, I catch flyballs." - Willie Mays

"(Ruth) never played a night game, he never hit against fireball relief pitching, he never traveled cross-country for a night game and played a day game the next day, he never performed before millions of television viewers, he never had to run on artificial turf. It is the changes in the game, the modern factors that have made the game more difficult, that bring Babe in here as number three, behind Mays and Aaron. His feats were heroic. So were theirs. They simply did them under tougher conditions." - Maury Allen

"Joe Louis, Jascha Heifetz, Sammy Dave and Nashua rolled into one." - Leo Durocher describing Mays

"Snider, Mantle and Mays. You could get a fat lip in any saloon by starting an argument as to which was best. One point was beyond argument, though. Willie was by all odds the most exciting." - Red Smith

"The only man who could have caught that ball just hit it." - radio announcers everywhere

"There are 499 Major League ballplayers. Then there's Willie Mays" - SABR member

"There have been only two geniuses in the world. Willie Mays and Willie Shakespeare." - Tallulah Bankhead



and my favorite:

"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I get the feeling it's Willie Mays." - Ted Kluszewski


Okay, I'll stop now...I just love that guy...

[Duque]

Well, like I said, it's a really close call, but heck, since it's subjective anyways, so by golly, I'm sticking with the Mick. :D

"We never thought we could lose as long as Mickey was playing. The point was, we had Mickey and the other team didn't." - Tom Tresh


"One of these days he'll hit the ball so hard, it'll burst and all he'll get for his efforts will be a single." - Casey Stengel

"I never saw anybody hit the ball so hard. When he swings the bat, you just have to stop and watch." - Phil Rizzuto

"I played with DiMaggio before I played and managed Mickey. Nobody but nobody could hit a ball as hard and as far from both sides of the plate as Mickey could. He was just awesome." - Ralph Houk

"That's what Mickey was all about - winning. Nobody cared more about winning, and nobody took losing harder." - Whitey Ford

"If that guy were healthy he'd hit 80 home runs." - Carl Yastrzemski

"I'd say Mantle is the greatest player in either league." - St. Louis Brown's Manager Marty Marion

Touche!

[calexpat]

Originally posted by sweaver
In the end, I give it to Willie on defense. I don't see an inch worth of space between them as hitters.

I was going to say it's Mays hands down because there really isn't an inch between them as hitters (though Cobb gets the centimeter):

OPS (league) (difference)
Cobb: .945 (.706)(.239)
Mays: .941 (.729)(.212)

And there's a mile between them on defense:

RF (league)(difference)
Mays 2.57 (1.91) (.66)
Cobb 2.30 (2.05) (.25)

Mays was .41 plays *per game* more above league than Cobb; that's almost 1200 balls Mays caught over the course of his career that would have fallen with Cobb out there. Add that to Mays' offensive totals, and you start getting a pretty big difference.

That difference tightens a little when you factor in the other tools:

SB CS
Cobb 892 178
Mays 338 103

Assists (games)
Cobb 392 (2934)
Mays 195 (2842)


I'd still give it Mays, though, given that :

a) Range factor already includes assists
b) SB's and A's are not era-adjusted
c) giving Mays a big negative for his baserunning and throwing doesn't pass the laugh test.

[SmedIndy]

Originally posted by calexpat



And there's a mile between them on defense:

RF (league)(difference)
Mays 2.57 (1.91) (.66)
Cobb 2.30 (2.05) (.25)

Mays was .41 plays *per game* more above league than Cobb; that's almost 1200 balls Mays caught over the course of his career that would have fallen with Cobb out there. Add that to Mays' offensive totals, and you start getting a pretty big difference.



Based on the win shares research, can you state for a fact that Mays was that much better? Did he have more fly ball teams than Cobb? Didn't Cobb play in RF for a while, which would unfairly tip the range to Mays, since CF get more plays for the most part?

[wyvern37]

Cobb produces 11% more Win Shares per game and more total Win Shares (722 to 642).

I did some calculation to try to decide whether Mays defense does, in fact, make up for his offensive deficiencies. Here are some considerations:

Using Runs Created, I calculated that Cobb produces 3% more runs per game than Mays does. If you look at OPS+, Cobb is ahead 7%.

After adjusting Cobb's range to account for his time in right field, I calculate that he is about 17% better than the league in Range Factor versus 35% for Mays.

The question is: how much weight do you give to defense? If you suppose that defense is 15% of a centerfielders total value, then they are about dead even in value. If you weigh it less, then you have to go with Cobb. If you weight it more, then it is Mays.

BUT...it is a mistake to assume that but for Mays there would have been 1,200 more balls falling in. A significant number of those balls would have been caught by other fielders anyway. Remember that the Centerfielder is the captain of the outfield and often catches balls that could easily be handled by the other fielders.

Which is why I give the edge and the vote to Cobb.

[Throwback]

Plus, you have to factor in the assumption (which I would think is true), that when Cobb played, there were fewer fly balls in general since hitters were more oriented toward the base hit than the home run.

I also take great exception to the Maury Allen quote about Ruth not playing under tougher conditions...That, to me, is a joke, and not a very funny one. Ruth had to ride in cramped train cars rather than planes and/or charter busses. He had to face tougher overall pitching. The fireball reliever thing doesn't hold water because as long as relievers have been used, they've tended to be inferior and only used when the starter lost it or was getting shelled. Granted, there are exceptions, but I don't think it's a coincidence that teams feel they have a better chance when Randy Johnson gives way to the bullpen, for instance. Then there's all the gab about better conditioning, diet, etc. of players today. Those who would say players are better today use that as a major point, so obviously that was tougher on Ruth, as well. Plus he wasn't all that into conditioning or diet of any kind, anyway. As for astroturf, it tends to make players and hit balls move faster, so it has its advantages, too. Plus, Mays didn't play all that much on turf anyway. He was on the home stretch of his career by the time it was used. Also, Ruth's equiptment was not as advantageous as that in the times of Mays. His glove was smaller, his shoes were less comfortable, and his bat was not as scientifically constructed. As for some other "modern factors": Mays hit off pitchers throwing from a lower mound toward the end of his career, he did not spend 5 years playing in the dead ball era, the ball, at any given time during Mays' career (with the possible exception of 1968, was more lively than in any given time during Ruth's career (with the possible exception of 1930), none of the fields Mays played on were uneven and filled with pebbles like some that Ruth contended with, by the time Mays was through playing, the league had swelled to half-again as many teams and thus, many more inferior pitchers than Ruth got to feast on, and Mays didn't have to live in constant fear of death by beanball, since he had a helmet, unlike Ruth. Although obviously Ruth didn't have to play on TV, who's to say that that is a negative? Some people do well with added pressure, assuming that would have added any. I doubt the players today think much about the difference between the 50, 000 fans in the seats and the million at home. Besides, Ruth had to contend with the pressure of being THE focus of media attention in all of baseball. Mays was not as head and shoulders above the rest in his day. I've honestly never heard anyone say that the conditions were easier in the day...

It's also ridiculous that Aaron should be put at #2 on Allen's list...he's nowhere close to the 2nd best, even that played under the harsh "modern conditions".:rolleyes:

Ok, that's my peace, and it's been said.

[calexpat]

Originally posted by wyvern37
Cobb produces 11% more Win Shares per game and more total Win Shares (722 to 642).

I did some calculation to try to decide whether Mays defense does, in fact, make up for his offensive deficiencies. Here are some considerations:

Using Runs Created, I calculated that Cobb produces 3% more runs per game than Mays does. If you look at OPS+, Cobb is ahead 7%.

After adjusting Cobb's range to account for his time in right field, I calculate that he is about 17% better than the league in Range Factor versus 35% for Mays.

The question is: how much weight do you give to defense? If you suppose that defense is 15% of a centerfielders total value, then they are about dead even in value. If you weigh it less, then you have to go with Cobb. If you weight it more, then it is Mays.

BUT...it is a mistake to assume that but for Mays there would have been 1,200 more balls falling in. A significant number of those balls would have been caught by other fielders anyway. Remember that the Centerfielder is the captain of the outfield and often catches balls that could easily be handled by the other fielders.

Which is why I give the edge and the vote to Cobb.


A lot of points here:

1) Fair enough about the Win Shares. I have no idea how Win Shares work, and I'm suspicious of any system that boils so many considerations down to a single totally intransparent measure (eg, the Human Development Index). Bill James is a genius, so I do give Win Shares weight; but he's not infallible.

2) What percentage of his career did Cobb play in right? At some point, it detracts from his case as the best center fielder, doesn't it?

3) I don't think assigning an arbitrary weight to defense is the way to go. A hit taken away is equal in value to a hit. So the question is, does the number of balls Mays caught that Cobb didn't outweigh Cobb's offensive advantage? Let's begin with the 1200 more plays above league average that Mays made. Discount it by how the percentage of his career Cobb played in right--I'm guessing, 25%, to 900. I'm not sure you can discount it by the number of times Mays called off the right or left fielder but Cobb didn't, because I don't know of any evidence Mays did this more than Cobb. Let's say he did, though, and discount another 25% to 675. You can't discount it by pitching staff, because both Mays and Cobb played behind enough different pitchers to even that out. You can discount it a bit for the Polo Grounds, but that's less than a quarter of Mays' games, and plus, a bigger outfield doesn't help you unless you're good enough to cover it, so let's just go another 25%, to about 500. So let's say, conservatively, that Mays got to 500 balls Cobb didn't (and this is already accounting for Cobb's assists).

Now let's add those 500 hits to Mays's offensive totals. Of course, many of these would be extra base hits, but let's just assume they were all singles. Adding 500 singles to Willie's totals brings his OPS up to 1.027, or .298 better than league, compared to Cobb's .235 better than league. A pretty big advantage.

4) You also have to give Mays a little edge for playing in an era when the nation's best baseball players were in the major leagues. Cobb's stats certainly benefitted a bit from not having to hit off the Don Newcomb's and Bob Gibson's of the world--and not having his doubles caught by the Willie Mays's of the world!

Of course, I'd be interested to see why Cobb has more Win Shares. But for now my money stays with Mays.

[SmedIndy]

I still don't know why you have an axe to grind against Aaron?

[SmedIndy]

Originally posted by calexpat



A lot of points here:



3) I don't think assigning an arbitrary weight to defense is the way to go. A hit taken away is equal in value to a hit. So the question is, does the number of balls Mays caught that Cobb didn't outweigh Cobb's offensive advantage? Let's begin with the 1200 more plays above league average that Mays made. Discount it by how the percentage of his career Cobb played in right--I'm guessing, 25%, to 900. I'm not sure you can discount it by the number of times Mays called off the right or left fielder but Cobb didn't, because I don't know of any evidence Mays did this more than Cobb. Let's say he did, though, and discount another 25% to 675. You can't discount it by pitching staff, because both Mays and Cobb played behind enough different pitchers to even that out. You can discount it a bit for the Polo Grounds, but that's less than a quarter of Mays' games, and plus, a bigger outfield doesn't help you unless you're good enough to cover it, so let's just go another 25%, to about 500. So let's say, conservatively, that Mays got to 500 balls Cobb didn't (and this is already accounting for Cobb's assists).

Now let's add those 500 hits to Mays's offensive totals. Of course, many of these would be extra base hits, but let's just assume they were all singles. Adding 500 singles to Willie's totals brings his OPS up to 1.027, or .298 better than league, compared to Cobb's .235 better than league. A pretty big advantage.



But if there were less balls to be had by outfielders anyway, you're giving credit to Mays for opportunities that Cobb never had.

[calexpat]

Originally posted by SmedIndy


But if there were less balls to be had by outfielders anyway, you're giving credit to Mays for opportunities that Cobb never had.

Why are there fewer balls for outfielders? The 1200 total is era-adjusted. The league average range factor is 2.05 for Cobb, 1.91 for Mays. That makes sense, because there were more home runs in Mays's era.

[sweaver]

I laughed when I saw "offensive deficiencies" used in the same paragraph with "Willie Mays." In reference to him, even.

It is probably true that Cobb was a better hitter than Mays. Playing in the same era, Cobb would likely have had better numbers. Remember, though, that while most of Cobb's career came in the dead ball era, he played several years in the offensive explosion. Also, Willie's career came largely in the "second dead ball era" of the 1960s and 1970s.

It is reasonable to say that Cobb was an above average defender, but Mays was an excellent defender. Some measures make Willie Mays the best outfielder ever, for defensive value.

Taken as a whole, I put Mays above Cobb, with the defensive difference outweighing the offensive difference.

[wyvern37]

Originally posted by sweaver
I laughed when I saw "offensive deficiencies" used in the same paragraph with "Willie Mays." In reference to him, even.

My tongue was planted firmly in my cheek when I wrote that. ;)

[Throwback]

Originally posted by SmedIndy
I still don't know why you have an axe to grind against Aaron?
I don't have anything against Aaron, just against the people who consider him among the top 5 of all-time. I don't have time at this point to go into a statistical argument...finals are looming for me, but once I get a chance I'll try to lay out my basis for you.

[SmedIndy]

Your rhetoric seems to indicate you think Aaron is in the second tier of HOF players ("nowhere close")...and I find that dubious, but I'll wait...

[Throwback]

No, Aaron is very legitimately among the top 25 of all time, but I just think that top 10 is a stretch and when I see him at #2 from a respected baseball journalist, it occurs to me that he is heavily overrated.

[Duque]

Another plug for Mantle - #11 all-time in OPS, #5 in Adjusted OPS, both tops for CF.

[SmedIndy]

Originally posted by Throwback
No, Aaron is very legitimately among the top 25 of all time, but I just think that top 10 is a stretch and when I see him at #2 from a respected baseball journalist, it occurs to me that he is heavily overrated.

You still haven't shown me why he isn't in the top 10...he's fourth in all-time runs created.

[Gibby]

Has to be Willie Mays. My only complaint with the poll here
is why is Ken "the kid" Griffey even on it?

[Throwback]

Runs created means about as much to me as a Portugeuse insult. My good old fashioned stats are fine with me, thank you. I see a guy who was a heck of a good player in lots of ways...no doubting that, but his career average was not impressive compared to hall of famers, he was consistant with homers, but he never hit 50 like Willie or Mickey or Babe. His RBI totals in any given year were good, but nothing special for a hall of famer. He had good speed, but he only stole bases for about half his career. I mean it's hard to make the guy sound bad, just like any top 25 player, but I think he is a little bit of a stretch for top 10 and nowhere near two for sure. I'd rather not spend the time it would take to make a case for 10 guys better than him, because time is something I don't have a great deal of right now.

[moose]

Originally posted by Gibby
Has to be Willie Mays. My only complaint with the poll here
is why is Ken "the kid" Griffey even on it?
Even going by career numbers, i think you can make a strong case for putting griffey on the list.
[i do not think you can make a strong case for putting him in the top 3 or 4, even on peak numbers. man, is griffey done with his peak? that stinks for baseball fans :(.]

[Duque]

Guys - if you want to have a discussion on Hank Aaron, please start another thread on it.

[sweaver]

Originally posted by Gibby
Has to be Willie Mays. My only complaint with the poll here
is why is Ken "the kid" Griffey even on it?
Hey, you do the poll, you can put your favorite player in it too.

[Gibby]

Sorry Sweav, I just don't care too much for someone
that is more into himself than his team. Sad too, because
he has more talent than anyone out there playing today.
Just my opinion, did not mean to upset anyone.

[sweaver]

I think that, even with the great players, it can often be said they were "more into themselves than the team." A certain single-mindedness and drive is necessary to be the best.

[Gibby]

Maybe. But it is a team game. No one person wins
a World Series or for that matter a game.

[b-ball-lunachik]

Originally posted by Duque
Well, like I said, it's a really close call, but heck, since it's subjective anyways, so by golly, I'm sticking with the Mick. :D


Touche!

Okay, Andy...touche on the quotes -- although there were no quotes on any defensive prowess!! :D ;) Still say Mays was best all around!

Originally posted by Duque
Another plug for Mantle - #11 all-time in OPS, #5 in Adjusted OPS, both tops for CF.

yup...and #1 in RCAP for CF and #3 in RCAA...Mays was #3 and #4 respectively, but I still take Mays! ;) :P

[say hey student]

I remember when Canseco was closing in on 40-40 and was being lauded as the next great one to play the game. I always disliked the guy (but that has to do more with a jealous antipathy that has always governed my relationship with the Athletics).

Anyway, I'll never forget when they interviewed Willie about Canseco and the magnificent accomplishment of Canseco. He said, "Hell, if I had known they were gonna make such a big deal about 40-40, I would have done it 6 or 7 times."

And he could have. It's not hubris if you are that good.

[Ytown Tribe fan]

Cobb - overall career value.

Cobb - career hitting.

Speaker - career fielding.

Mantle - peak hitting.

[chainlink]

overall career value - Mays

career hitting - Cobb

career fielding - Speaker

peak hitting - Mantle

overall peak value - Mantle

[Cooper]

Is there wat to quantify ability and popularity as an evangelist?

If someone can, I think you can make a strong argument for Hamilton.

(btw, cast my vote for Mays, I just couldn't do a better job arguing it than has already been done).

[pwdennis]

Originally posted by pwdennis
A toughie - for career value probably Mays, Cobb, Speaker, Mantle and DiMaggio (in that order) - for peak value Mantle. I cannot comment intelligently on Negro League stars but Oscar Charleton should probably be in the top five for peak value

My only post to this debate occurred way back near the beginning. Since then the debate has gotten rather spirited.

Of the outfielders I've seen, I would rate Andruw Jones first defensively followed by Ashburn and Mays. I have no way of assessing Speaker defensively since only the declining phase of his career was played in the lively ball era and I'm not sure how to quantify the difference between playing the outfield under deadball conditions and current conditions. I wonder how leaving dirty and battered baseballs in play affected an outfielder's being able to see the baseball.

As far as team play value is concerned I am not sure there is a valid way to quantify this since so much is dependent on other factors. If winning World Series competitions is the prime determinant then Yogi Berra is the greatest player in baseball history (as opposed to being the greatest catcher), and Mantle is #1 among CFs.

That said I'll stick with my initial assessment

[pathogan]

Originally posted by pwdennis
My only post to this debate occurred way back near the beginning. Since then the debate has gotten rather spirited.

Of the outfielders I've seen, I would rate Andruw Jones first defensively followed by Ashburn and Mays. I have no way of assessing Speaker defensively since only the declining phase of his career was played in the lively ball era and I'm not sure how to quantify the difference between playing the outfield under deadball conditions and current conditions. I wonder how leaving dirty and battered baseballs in play affected an outfielder's being able to see the baseball.

As far as team play value is concerned I am not sure there is a valid way to quantify this since so much is dependent on other factors. If winning World Series competitions is the prime determinant then Yogi Berra is the greatest player in baseball history (as opposed to being the greatest catcher), and Mantle is #1 among CFs.

That said I'll stick with my initial assessment


I agree with PW, and too bad about Charleston...I think Andrwu Jones is the best I have vever seen, also

[TimmyB]

What??? Nobody even mentions Gary Pettis?

[pwdennis]

Originally posted by TimmyB
What??? Nobody even mentions Gary Pettis?

only in jest :)

[WiredTiger]

Originally posted by TimmyB
What??? Nobody even mentions Gary Pettis? Not if we are to include hitting. Take away hitting and Pettis was one of the best.

[TimmyB]

Originally posted by WiredTiger
Not if we are to include hitting. Take away hitting and Pettis was one of the best.

Pettis was one of those guys who made you wish there had been a Designated Fielder.

[TimmyB]

BTW -- I did vote in this survey, back last summer (and not for Pettis)... thing is... I didn't post my opinion back then, and when I looked at it again, I had no idea for whom I voted. I could make a compelling arguement for Mays, Cobb, Speaker and, to a lesser extent, Mick.

Today I think my answer is Cobb. I think that was my answer last time, too.

(One side note: Mays' deadball era wasn't nearly as dead as most of Cobb's.)

[sweaver]

Originally, I defended Mays as the best. Since that time, I have changed my mind, and would now choose Cobb as tops among CF. It's very, very close, but I would give Ty the edge now.

Ask me next year, and see if I've changed again. :D