|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Larkin or Reese? | |||
| Barry Larkin |
  
|
11 | 84.62% |
| Pee Wee Reese |
  
|
2 | 15.38% |
| Larkin for peak, Reese for career value |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| Reese for peak, Larkin for career value. |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| Voters: 13. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
08-30-2003, 02:32 PM
|
#1 |
|
Netshrine Cleanup Hitter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Mountain State
Posts: 8,883
  |
Barry Larkin or Pee Wee Reese?
Fuzzy used the Steve Garvey Standard for first basemen, I am using the Barry Larkin Standard for shortstops. Barry or Pee Wee? And why?
|
|
|
08-30-2003, 02:47 PM
|
#2 |
|
NetShrine All-Century Team
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winter Springs, FL
Posts: 2,503
|
Barry Larkin
THis isn't even close - Reese played for better teams but Barry is the better player - more power - better OB Through 2002 season Reese 2166 games 1338 runs - 885 RBI - .269 BA - .366 OBA - .377 SLG Larkin 1999 games 1235 runs - 898 RBI - .296 BA - .372 OBA - .448 SLG Remember too, Reese played in a bandbox so his slugging percentage was aided by his park
__________________
"I would submit that if the world survives for a million years, perhaps its finest hour may be that in the last half of the 20th century, when the power to blow up the world rested in the hands of a few men in two very unsophisticated and suspicious countries, we didn't do it, and one American, Richard Nixon, moved the cold war away from permanent confrontation toward victory. How could any wrong that he did compare with that?" - John Sears Last edited by pwdennis : 08-30-2003 at 02:56 PM. |
|
|
|
08-30-2003, 03:05 PM
|
#3 | |
|
NetShrine's Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Living by faith, and not by sight!
Posts: 2,194
|
Quote:
If this were politics, Reese would carry D.C., only. That's HOW MUCH BETTER Larkin is. Higher BA. Higher OBP (although Larkin's is falling) More power. An MVP. Larkin may even be superior defensively. Reese was not the premier defensive shortstop of his day. Reese wouldn't be a HOFer if he weren't a Brooklyn Dodger. That he was, and that his teams won pennants, and that he was one of the stars of that team, is relevant. But he wasn't the best player on the team. He was probably the best SS in the NL, with the possible exception of Marty Marion (who DID win an MVP, unlike Reese) but not in all of baseball. If Larkin v. Cronin is the 2000 election, Larkin v. Reese is something like 1936, 1972, or 1984; a landslide, not a contest. This verdict is so clear-cut, I can't see how anyone could argue the other side. There is no aspect of playing baseball where Reese outplayed Larkin, except in the "fewer injuries" department. |
|
|
|
|
08-30-2003, 06:43 PM
|
#4 |
|
NS Omnipresent Brasilian
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Crazy George's playground
Posts: 10,903
 |
So does Bill James grossly overrate pee wee?
Win Shares Larkin 320 (229 off/92 def) Reese 314 (204 off/111 def) Career RCAA (peak season) Larkin 274 (49) Reese 13 (26)
__________________
Gustavo  NDF ModeratorThose who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin |
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 12:39 PM
|
#5 |
|
NetShrine All-Century Team
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Home of the T-Bones
Posts: 11,116
|
One of the most prominent arguments in favor of Reese's quality is the Dodgers sucked before they got him and they sucked after he left.
Maybe Win Shares are better than RCAA's???
__________________
KCBOOMER Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball |
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 02:15 PM
|
#6 |
|
NS Omnipresent Brasilian
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Crazy George's playground
Posts: 10,903
|
by that rationale, does ARod suck?
__________________
Gustavo NDF ModeratorThose who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin |
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 02:18 PM
|
#7 |
|
Netshrine Vacuum Cleaner
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Potsdam, N.Y.
Posts: 3,723
 |
Larkin, easily.
|
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 06:30 PM
|
#8 | |
|
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Scrappers territory
Posts: 2,515
|
Quote:
But Win Shares actually slightly favor a good player on a losing team, as shown in the introductory study in the book. |
|
|
|
|
09-02-2003, 10:24 PM
|
#9 |
|
Netshrine Cleanup Hitter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Mountain State
Posts: 8,883
|
I say Larkin by a small margin. It's a fairly large margin unless you give Pee Wee credit for wartime service. They were fairly similar players, good hitters with speed and some power, good but not great defensively.
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Barry Larkin or Joe Cronin? | sweaver | 2003 Baseball History Archives | 10 | 08-30-2003 11:17 AM |
| ATM report--Regular season ends; Lots of Bonds charts; Managers start to get fired | nyy26wc | Around The Majors Reports | 3 | 09-30-2002 12:04 PM |
| Barry Larkin and the Hall of Fame | JamesI | 2002 Baseball History Archives | 21 | 07-30-2002 09:18 PM |
| Sunday stat package--April 7 | nyy26wc | Around The Majors Reports | 9 | 04-07-2002 02:08 PM |
| Reese Pokes At Junior | Xanadu Dragon | 2002 Hot Baseball Chatter Archives | 22 | 02-27-2002 03:17 PM |
Linear Mode
