Kirk Gibson In Review

Fuzzy Bear · 06-24-2002, 06:03 PM

While active, Kirk Gibson was, in my opinion, one of the most overrated players of all time.

Gibson was often presented as the leading player on the Tigers between 1983 and 1987. He signed as a free agent with the Dodgers in 1988, and won what I consider to be one of the most outrageous MVP selections of any player who wasn't a relief pitcher.

The persona of Gibson in the mid-80s obscured the real stars of the Tigers; Trammell, Whitaker, Parrish, Morris, and Darrell Evans.
All of these guys were, in my opinion, equal to or superior to Kirk Gibson.

In 1988, Darryl Strawberry hit 39 HRs and drove in 101, scoring 101 runs, with a .269 avg. (.366 OBP). Gibson hit .290 with a .377 OBP, and 106 runs scored, but hit only 25 HRs and drove in only 76 runs, while hitting in the middle of the order.

Gibson had speed, but he was a substandard defender, mainly because of his poor throwing arm.

Was I wrong in making the observation that, while active, Gibson was considered to be the big star on the Tigers? Was I wrong to conclude that he was an outrageous MVP pick. Obviously he isn't a HOFer. (If someone says he is, I'll start a Harold Baines thread!) I personally think that the attention and accolades given to Gibson, while active, detracted from the REAL Tiger stars, some of which are HOF-worthy (Trammell, Whitaker, maybe Parrish, maybe Morris, maybe Darrell Evans). Gibson got accolades as #1 when he was only #6.

Why was that?

VNV Nation · 06-24-2002, 06:24 PM

No, I think Kirk Gibson was a legitimately good-great player, although hurt a lot. Among the all-time greats, Gibson ranks much lower than Trammell or Whitaker or Parrish but I do think Gibson was the star of the team.

As for the MVP selection, I feel that Will Clark should have won the award that year (played 162 games, was in the top 2 or 3 in almost every category, OBP, SLG, Runs, RBI), but i don't think Gibson's selection was "outrageous." The Dodgers overachieved all year, regular season, playoffs, World Series, and I think Gibson was a big reason why. Although I would probably pick Orel as the best player on the team. But it's a matter of degrees; I would pick Alomar as the MVP of the AL last year, but I think Gibson and Ichiro were fine choices.

I think Gibson is the rare legitimate case where a player was worth far greater than what his numbers show.

Far worse MVP selections have gone to, for example, Juan Gonzalez, Juan Gonzalez, Mo Vaughn.

VNV Nation · 06-24-2002, 06:37 PM

By the numbers:

In 1984, Gibson led the Tigers in slugging and runs, was second in OBP and RBIs and HR, first in SB. He's the MVP of the team, him or Hernandez, or Trammell.

In 1985, Gibson leads the team in OBP and slugging and steals, second in HR and RBI and R.

In 1986, Gibson led the team in OBP, SLG, SB, tied for lead in RBI, second in HR, despite missing 43 games.

In 1987, basically has the same season, but Trammell is by far the best player on the team.

In 1988, goes to Dodgers, Tigers fall off by 10 games, Dodgers improve 21 games. Gibson's by far the best offensive threat on the World Champs.

That's basically it. The rest of his career, he was hurt and trying to live up to his potential, or he was hurt and trying to get back to where he was. But for five years he was a multitalented and important player.

spitball · 06-24-2002, 07:08 PM

I agree with VNV. He made the Dodgers go. His presence in the clubhouse and on the field made a huge difference.
Hershiser pitched his heart out and the "Stuntmen" were incredible but the 88 championship would not have been won without him. The '88 Dodgers were mediocre at best before he came to L.A. and his amazing homer in game 1 set the tone for that series. The Dodgers , in my opinion were so outclassed in that series it was obscene but Gibson really broke the A's spirit with one swing.
Still one of my favorite baseball moments .

WiredTiger · 06-25-2002, 09:25 AM

Gibson was a good player but he was not the equal of Whitaker, Trammel or Parrish as far as overall career statistics go. Gibson gets credit because he was the emotional leader of those Tiger teams.

He made himself into an average OF after being very bad when he first got called up. He was an average hitter who drew a fair amount of walks and hit for a ton of power.

He has said himself (he's on the radio in Detroit) that he is not even close to being considered a HOF.

KCBOOMER · 06-25-2002, 09:34 AM

All I know is that when he got to KC he was a cancer in the clubhouse.

poorme · 06-25-2002, 09:38 AM

he was a power/speed guy when that type of thing was uncommon. he was the best player on the team for about 5 years. If he played to that level for 15 years instead of 5, he would be a HOF'er.

Max Power · 06-25-2002, 10:41 AM

Two things about Gibson for me - -

1. When he went to LA, as a joke, someone filled his cap with shoe polish, suggesting that he do something about his lack of hair and present hairstyle. When he put the cap on, and the polish covered his head, he threw a fit - - - and laid down the line for the rest of the team, in that, he was not there for jokes and fun, he was there for playing hard and winning.

2. When he played for the Tigers, the first time, and he played against the Yankees (which is when I got to see him), I knew that every time he came up to the plate late in the game with a chance to win the game with a big/long hit, the game was over and the Tigers would win - - because the SOB killed the Yankees in those spots, just about every time. As a Yankee fan, I hated and feared his ABs.

Related, Joe Torre was asked if he preferred ability or character in a player. If I remember his answer right, it went along the lines of "ability allows you play; but, character allows you to perform" (these are my words, trying to sum up what Torre was saying).

This is how I measure Gibson - - yup, there were better players; but, the guy was a performer when it counted - - and, that has to count for something, in my book.

spitball · 06-25-2002, 12:05 PM

Agreed that he wasn't of the caliber of Whitaker,etal. It was his fire that got him over. When he was healthy he was a threat everytime he came to the plate in a crucial situation.
And yes, he had a weaker than weak arm in left but he was money in the 2 World Series he appeared in.
He's no HOFer but he had his moments in the sun that can never be forgotten.

06-25-2002, 12:39 PM

Gibson was a good player, but was helped immensely by his tough guy reputation. Playing football at Michigan State, where he is still a career leader in receptions, was the kind of things announcers absolutely ate up, allowing his reputation to grow. If Gibson did anything in an aggressive manner, it was his football background coming out. The fact is that multi-sport people are probably overrated as a rule. The argument could certainly be made that Winfield, Bo, Prime Time and Brian Jordan all have received more credit as baseball players than they deserve. (Not saying I think that, just that a legit case could be made for each).

WiredTiger · 06-25-2002, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Max Power
Two things about Gibson for me - -

1. When he went to LA, as a joke, someone filled his cap with shoe polish, suggesting that he do something about his lack of hair and present hairstyle. When he put the cap on, and the polish covered his head, he threw a fit - - - and laid down the line for the rest of the team, in that, he was not there for jokes and fun, he was there for playing hard and winning.

I had forgot about that incident but you are right he did set the tone for that season. He brought a lot of intangibles to the game that overcame some of his deficiencies.

calexpat · 06-25-2002, 01:13 PM

Didn't Bill James compare Gibson to Jesus of Nazareth in the 1988 Abstract? As in, he never did any of those things that are usually considered great, but he changed the world forever?

poorme · 06-25-2002, 01:41 PM

Kirk Gibson loved playing the game. He was a competitor and he busted his tail to win. He wasn't a showboat and he wasn't a big talker in the press. The more I think about him the more I like him.

Pilgrim · 06-25-2002, 01:41 PM

What I think is interesting about Gibson is that he won that MVP Award with the votes being cast BEFORE the post-season. As others have said, probably a case of "intangibles" over stats.

And (I'm starting another thread on this, coincidentally), I don't think he was over-rated -- he was never on an All-Star team despite his relative fame and success on the field.

An example of how a couple of October moments can remain in people's minds a lot more than a long career that always ends in September.

Skip · 06-25-2002, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by spitball
He's no HOFer but he had his moments in the sun that can never be forgotten.

A perfect summation. Not a bad thing to say about somebody either.

06-25-2002, 10:41 AM	#8
Max Power NetShrine Creator & Curator Join Date: May 2002 Location: NetShrine WHQ Posts: 5,548	Two things about Gibson for me - - 1. When he went to LA, as a joke, someone filled his cap with shoe polish, suggesting that he do something about his lack of hair and present hairstyle. When he put the cap on, and the polish covered his head, he threw a fit - - - and laid down the line for the rest of the team, in that, he was not there for jokes and fun, he was there for playing hard and winning. 2. When he played for the Tigers, the first time, and he played against the Yankees (which is when I got to see him), I knew that every time he came up to the plate late in the game with a chance to win the game with a big/long hit, the game was over and the Tigers would win - - because the SOB killed the Yankees in those spots, just about every time. As a Yankee fan, I hated and feared his ABs. Related, Joe Torre was asked if he preferred ability or character in a player. If I remember his answer right, it went along the lines of "ability allows you play; but, character allows you to perform" (these are my words, trying to sum up what Torre was saying). This is how I measure Gibson - - yup, there were better players; but, the guy was a performer when it counted - - and, that has to count for something, in my book. __________________ Steve, Forum Administrator "They come and they go, Hobbs. They come and they go." That's why there's NetShrine.com

06-25-2002, 01:41 PM	#14
Pilgrim NetShrine MVP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 191	What I think is interesting about Gibson is that he won that MVP Award with the votes being cast BEFORE the post-season. As others have said, probably a case of "intangibles" over stats. And (I'm starting another thread on this, coincidentally), I don't think he was over-rated -- he was never on an All-Star team despite his relative fame and success on the field. An example of how a couple of October moments can remain in people's minds a lot more than a long career that always ends in September. __________________ Never trust a car salesman from Milwaukee. [/color]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DIPS in Review	KCBOOMER	2003 Baseball History Archives	14	10-14-2003 11:56 AM
Josh Gibson by William Brashler	sweaver	Baseball Library	2	08-03-2003 06:57 PM
Josh Gibson and the Negro Leagues	timconnelly	2002 Baseball History Archives	7	01-10-2002 03:53 PM
Bob Gibson and Denny McLain	timconnelly	2001 Baseball History Archives	6	11-02-2001 05:12 AM
NDF All-Draft Contest - Josh Gibson	NetShrine	2001 Baseball History Archives	0	10-26-2001 10:52 PM

06-24-2002, 06:03 PM	#1
Fuzzy Bear NetShrine's Evangelist Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Living by faith, and not by sight! Posts: 2,194	Kirk Gibson In Review While active, Kirk Gibson was, in my opinion, one of the most overrated players of all time. Gibson was often presented as the leading player on the Tigers between 1983 and 1987. He signed as a free agent with the Dodgers in 1988, and won what I consider to be one of the most outrageous MVP selections of any player who wasn't a relief pitcher. The persona of Gibson in the mid-80s obscured the real stars of the Tigers; Trammell, Whitaker, Parrish, Morris, and Darrell Evans. All of these guys were, in my opinion, equal to or superior to Kirk Gibson. In 1988, Darryl Strawberry hit 39 HRs and drove in 101, scoring 101 runs, with a .269 avg. (.366 OBP). Gibson hit .290 with a .377 OBP, and 106 runs scored, but hit only 25 HRs and drove in only 76 runs, while hitting in the middle of the order. Gibson had speed, but he was a substandard defender, mainly because of his poor throwing arm. Was I wrong in making the observation that, while active, Gibson was considered to be the big star on the Tigers? Was I wrong to conclude that he was an outrageous MVP pick. Obviously he isn't a HOFer. (If someone says he is, I'll start a Harold Baines thread!) I personally think that the attention and accolades given to Gibson, while active, detracted from the REAL Tiger stars, some of which are HOF-worthy (Trammell, Whitaker, maybe Parrish, maybe Morris, maybe Darrell Evans). Gibson got accolades as #1 when he was only #6. Why was that?

06-24-2002, 06:24 PM	#2
VNV Nation Membership Suspended 11/19/02 Join Date: May 2002 Location: VNV Nation Posts: 2,952	No, I think Kirk Gibson was a legitimately good-great player, although hurt a lot. Among the all-time greats, Gibson ranks much lower than Trammell or Whitaker or Parrish but I do think Gibson was the star of the team. As for the MVP selection, I feel that Will Clark should have won the award that year (played 162 games, was in the top 2 or 3 in almost every category, OBP, SLG, Runs, RBI), but i don't think Gibson's selection was "outrageous." The Dodgers overachieved all year, regular season, playoffs, World Series, and I think Gibson was a big reason why. Although I would probably pick Orel as the best player on the team. But it's a matter of degrees; I would pick Alomar as the MVP of the AL last year, but I think Gibson and Ichiro were fine choices. I think Gibson is the rare legitimate case where a player was worth far greater than what his numbers show. Far worse MVP selections have gone to, for example, Juan Gonzalez, Juan Gonzalez, Mo Vaughn.

06-24-2002, 06:37 PM	#3
VNV Nation Membership Suspended 11/19/02 Join Date: May 2002 Location: VNV Nation Posts: 2,952	By the numbers: In 1984, Gibson led the Tigers in slugging and runs, was second in OBP and RBIs and HR, first in SB. He's the MVP of the team, him or Hernandez, or Trammell. In 1985, Gibson leads the team in OBP and slugging and steals, second in HR and RBI and R. In 1986, Gibson led the team in OBP, SLG, SB, tied for lead in RBI, second in HR, despite missing 43 games. In 1987, basically has the same season, but Trammell is by far the best player on the team. In 1988, goes to Dodgers, Tigers fall off by 10 games, Dodgers improve 21 games. Gibson's by far the best offensive threat on the World Champs. That's basically it. The rest of his career, he was hurt and trying to live up to his potential, or he was hurt and trying to get back to where he was. But for five years he was a multitalented and important player.

06-24-2002, 07:08 PM	#4
spitball Guest Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Studio City, Ca. Posts: 1,751	I agree with VNV. He made the Dodgers go. His presence in the clubhouse and on the field made a huge difference. Hershiser pitched his heart out and the "Stuntmen" were incredible but the 88 championship would not have been won without him. The '88 Dodgers were mediocre at best before he came to L.A. and his amazing homer in game 1 set the tone for that series. The Dodgers , in my opinion were so outclassed in that series it was obscene but Gibson really broke the A's spirit with one swing. Still one of my favorite baseball moments .

06-25-2002, 09:25 AM	#5
WiredTiger Guest Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: The city of Kaline, Cobb and Greenberg Posts: 3,395	Gibson was a good player but he was not the equal of Whitaker, Trammel or Parrish as far as overall career statistics go. Gibson gets credit because he was the emotional leader of those Tiger teams. He made himself into an average OF after being very bad when he first got called up. He was an average hitter who drew a fair amount of walks and hit for a ton of power. He has said himself (he's on the radio in Detroit) that he is not even close to being considered a HOF.

06-25-2002, 09:34 AM	#6
KCBOOMER NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Home of the T-Bones Posts: 11,116	All I know is that when he got to KC he was a cancer in the clubhouse. __________________ KCBOOMER *Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball*

06-25-2002, 09:38 AM	#7
poorme Guest Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: washington dc Posts: 2,625	he was a power/speed guy when that type of thing was uncommon. he was the best player on the team for about 5 years. If he played to that level for 15 years instead of 5, he would be a HOF'er.

06-25-2002, 12:05 PM	#9
spitball Guest Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Studio City, Ca. Posts: 1,751	Agreed that he wasn't of the caliber of Whitaker,etal. It was his fire that got him over. When he was healthy he was a threat everytime he came to the plate in a crucial situation. And yes, he had a weaker than weak arm in left but he was money in the 2 World Series he appeared in. He's no HOFer but he had his moments in the sun that can never be forgotten.

06-25-2002, 12:39 PM	#10
digger Posts: n/a	Gibson was a good player, but was helped immensely by his tough guy reputation. Playing football at Michigan State, where he is still a career leader in receptions, was the kind of things announcers absolutely ate up, allowing his reputation to grow. If Gibson did anything in an aggressive manner, it was his football background coming out. The fact is that multi-sport people are probably overrated as a rule. The argument could certainly be made that Winfield, Bo, Prime Time and Brian Jordan all have received more credit as baseball players than they deserve. (Not saying I think that, just that a legit case could be made for each).

06-25-2002, 01:13 PM	#12
calexpat All-NetShrine Team Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: New Haven, CT Posts: 448	Didn't Bill James compare Gibson to Jesus of Nazareth in the 1988 Abstract? As in, he never did any of those things that are usually considered great, but he changed the world forever?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)