Most underrated and overrated player??

[Skipper Steve]

Originally posted by timconnelly
I reran that list on OWP for players from 1955 to 1973. For players with 9000 PA, Robinson wasn't just 16th. He was 16th out of 17. He only bear out Luis Apparicio!

Just thought I would mention that to anybody who passes by because that made me see it differently. 16th is not so hot, 16th out of 17 is out and out not an offensive leader!

Tim - Buzz - -

I didn't go back, cause this is a long thread, but, I think Brooks' OWP was around .516. That alone means he was just barely above average at the plate. I look at it this way, if he was a baseball team, he would be a 84-78 record. OK - but not great. Just enough to keep some fans interested - but not enough to win the league.

[Skipper Steve]

Originally posted by BuzzBuzzard
As JP said, if his accomplishments are so ordinary, why hasn't any one else done it?

They didn't need to - they had saved their money. Rose had to keep playing because he owed the bookies so much. Just kidding.

[sweaver]

Rose was a great player, one of the 100 greatest of all time, but he is still overrated, because the media loved him. He was a great quote. B.Robby was not a great hitter, although he had a reputation as a clutch hitter. He was, however, the greatest defensive third baseman I have ever seen, and that gives him a lot of value.

Tim, perhaps I've missed an old thread, but what's your source for all this info? Lee's software? Some Internet site?

BTW, even if get heat for this, I thought that the person an award had been named for, whose AL recipient's worthiness has predictably generated lots of postings, seemed overrated to myself. 511 wins is beyond awesome, especially when you have 300+ or 400+ IPs, but 316 losses is 316 losses no matter which way you put it.

Seaver, a former NL CYA winner retired with 311 _wins_ and #300 is probably more unattainable than 500 HRs (to me, at least), since we've seen several 500 HR hitters play this season (Mac, Bonds) but no 300 game winners.

As for Pete Rose (please check out his full stats), he was on my short list for DH, per his productivity with the hitting. I wasn't familiar with his fielding but his Charlie Hustle nickname seemed like something admirable.

Originally posted by BuzzBuzzard
As JP said, if his accomplishments are so ordinary, why hasn't any one else done it?

They probably weren't given the opportunity to, since not too many people get their names written into the lineup that often.

Jimy Williams, like Joe Torre had their own lineup for LHPs. In Torre's case, Paulie O'Neill was often removed from this but other hitters probably weren't given the chance. That doesn't mean they necessarily would've had the same production had they been given the chance.

[BuzzBuzzard]

Originally posted by Yogi#8Fan
They probably weren't given the opportunity to, since not too many people get their names written into the lineup that often.

I don't believe it has anything to do with being given an opportunity. 4,256 hits don't happen because of the line up card.

Buzz, I also wrote

That doesn't mean they necessarily would've had the same production had they been given the chance.

Not discrediting Rose's hits number, just saying he'd had the opportunity to do so which others didn't.

As far as the record number of hits, I remember seeing something about his worthiness for the Hall despite his gambling and the great Hammerin' Hank said something to the effect that 4,000+ hits proved his worthiness, so please don't take the comments the wrong way. I personally am impressed.

BTW, aren't you and Mexi preparing any turkey yet?

One question about Rose. I know he was very athletic, per his speed, but wasn't he accused of showboating for running out hits which weren't even close? This was a question I'd had about him going back awhile now so _not_ trying to be negative on the guy.

[BuzzBuzzard]

Originally posted by Yogi#8Fan
That doesn't mean they necessarily would've had the same production had they been given the chance.

Yup, you did indeed say this, and I missed it the first time.

I am just a little surprised in general about the way Rose is being dissed in this thread. People ooh and aah over the 3,000 hit club, Rose is in the 4,000 hit club (a club of two) and posters are suggesting he's over-rated. I am sitting here shaking my head.

Originally posted by BuzzBuzzard
Yup, you did indeed say this, and I missed it the first time.

I am just a little surprised in general about the way Rose is being dissed in this thread. People ooh and aah over the 3,000 hit club, Rose is in the 4,000 hit club (a club of two) and posters are suggesting he's over-rated. I am sitting here shaking my head.

In a way, how Rose surpassed Ty Cobb reminds me of how Cal surpassed the Iron Horse, Gehrig. Both were able to attain their feats by being kept in the lineup often and I've heard both being said to be overrated (Cal and Rose).

In Cal's case, he was criticized because there were other younger players who could've won more games for the Birds so just continuing the record wasn't worthwhile to the team.

In the case of Rose, I guess some people just weren't as impressed with that number alone. Look at Roger Clemens, people aren't always impressed with his 20-3 record but cite other things about him which they feel are more "telling" of his record. I figure it's the same thing w/Pete Rose, people thinking he wasn't all the great one he's made out to be. Perhaps very good or excellent, but not as "great" as others imply. Not _my_ view, just what I sense people may be thinking here (no names, please).

[BuzzBuzzard]

Originally posted by Yogi#8Fan
Look at Roger Clemens, people aren't always impressed with his 20-3 record but cite other things about him which they feel are more "telling" of his record.

There is an important distinction, though (and this is not Roger bashing). Roger's W-L record is not a pure reflection of him. His team has to score runs to allow him to win. He could pitch masterfully, but without at least 1 run, he gets a L. Conversely, he could pitch terribly, but get 10 runs of support and still get a W. Fielders have to catch and throw the ball, too. Rose, on the other hand, had to hit the ball. No one else could do that for him. No teammate could help him in any way. It is purely an individual effort and statistic and reflective on no one else but him.

[sweaver]

Rose was a pretty good outfielder in his youth, won a Gold Glove or two out there. He was a pretty decent all-around player who hung on after his usefulness was gone.
And since when is running out ground balls showboating? I wish more players would do it. They're certainly getting paid enough money.

Originally posted by sweaver
Rose was a pretty good outfielder in his youth, won a Gold Glove or two out there. He was a pretty decent all-around player who hung on after his usefulness was gone.
And since when is running out ground balls showboating? I wish more players would do it. They're certainly getting paid enough money.

I personally wish more people _would_ run out more tight plays, since the work ethic is always something that shouldn't go south.

I'm not saying that a player _shouldn't_ run out a grounder that's tight. It's just that if you've got a double which wouldn't quite make it into a triple and you slide or if you hit a blooper to the short OF (like just over 3B-man's head), some would say you've hot dogged it.

I've also heard people getting on his case when he slid and he could've run and stopped quickly. It's like the subtle difference b/w doing what's needed to get done (running out a grounder) and overdoing it (sliding into 2B or barrelling into 1B when you've beaten the throw by 10 seconds).

Originally posted by BuzzBuzzard
There is an important distinction, though (and this is not Roger bashing). Roger's W-L record is not a pure reflection of him. His team has to score runs to allow him to win. He could pitch masterfully, but without at least 1 run, he gets a L. Conversely, he could pitch terribly, but get 10 runs of support and still get a W. Fielders have to catch and throw the ball, too. Rose, on the other hand, had to hit the ball. No one else could do that for him. No teammate could help him in any way. It is purely an individual effort and statistic and reflective on no one else but him.

Buzz, I can certainly understand what you're saying, appreciate you weren't bashing Roger. I would very much agree that the W-L record is a group thing, since if you've got big sluggers supporting you, that could be seen as artificially inflating any pitcher's W-L record.

I only mentioned it not so much to compare Roger's or anyone else's worth as a player, but some of the reasons I'd gotten the gist of as to whether or not he was overrated to some, at least in Roger's case, for this year's CYA. There are also lots of Yankee fans who disagree over whether or not Roger deserved it so nothing unique on anyone's part.

The pitcher has to face lefty and righty hitters, the batter has to face LHPs & RHPs, with both having to face those of varying experience and overall difficulty. With this, I suppose there are similarities.

[BorisP]

Whether Rose is overated depends on who how highly you think the is rated.

In my view he was a good player for a very long time and probably belongs somewhere in the top 200 players of all time.

There are casual baseball fans who think that becaue he has more hits than Ty Cobb he was a better player than Cobb, and that he should be considered with Mays, Aaron, Ruth, et. al. as one of the 20 or so greatest players of all time. This is, of course, ridiculous, and if this view is held generally then he is one of the most overated players of all time.

My vote for the most overated player of all time is Rey Ordonez, who I once heard some NY met fan argue was better than Alex Rodrieguiz.

Among the all time greats, I have some suspicion that, if I considered the numbers carefully, I would conclude that Clemente was overated, but he was my favoirte player when I was a kid, and a heroic figure, so I refuse to examine the issue carefully.

Bill James in his new book says that George Sisler is the most overated player of all time, although in his last book he said he was one of the most underrated.