CO_Hoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by CO_Hoya on Jan 13, 2007 23:45:59 GMT -5
i could care less about position. IMO he was, and continues to be, one of the most overrated players in baseball history. only 4 100+ rbi seasons, only once with 30+ homers, only 5 times above .300, and over 20 errors 6 times. not to mention he has by far the lowest SB total of any HOF shortstop. people are blinded by the streak and how much of a 'good guy' ripken supposedly is. I thought you don't like stats? Well, if you now think it's alright to cite stats, I'll cite some back to you ( plagiarized from Jay Jaffe): Ripken is 16th in career WARP3 (169.2) [average HOF SS = 112.3]. His seventh best season was worth 9.7 wins over replacement. From 1982-1991 (ages 21-30) his EQA was 0.298! During that same stretch, his fielding rate averaged better than 107 - so no slouch in the field. Thanks, in large part, to that unbelievable 10 year stretch, Ripken is 2nd only to Honus Wagner in JAWS score for all shortstops at 129.2 (average HOFer = 89.7). He was a very good to mediocre at best ballplayer as he aged through his 30s (except a nice half season in 1999 at age 38 - did he get hurt?), and his pursuit of Gehrig's streak was a circus (Chris Berman especially contributed to the embarrassment), and I think that may be how you are remembering him. I don't know how old you are (you do seem a fan of the 70's Reds), but if you only watched Ripken play in the 90s, I can understand why you'd have your opinion. If you don't like the guy, that's fine. If you want to argue that you can't use stats to judge a player, I won't agree with you, but I will recognize that you're entitled to that opinion. But don't try to run down this guy's stats, because you can't win that argument, and you'll only end up looking foolish trying. Cheers! P.S. - And for the record, I was never really a fan of his, but I do recognize his greatness.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,987
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 14, 2007 4:08:11 GMT -5
I hate the Dodgers. I like Joe Morgan, but saying Concepcion was better than Trammell or Ripken, or even the same, is silly.
Fanny, are you aware that certain positions are harder to play than others? And because of that, the average player who plays those positions tends to be a worse hitter? Because it seems like you aren't. Your Hall of Fame would have two hundred corner outfielders and no middle infielders.
Ripken is probably the second best shortstop of all time, and maybe third. If Davey Concepcion is something special because he was the best SS, in the national league, in the 70s, doesn't the THIRD best shortstop for all leagues of all time deserve to be in?
|
|
HoyaFanNY
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,044
|
Post by HoyaFanNY on Jan 14, 2007 14:48:12 GMT -5
we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
|
|
hoyaclap
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 202
|
Post by hoyaclap on Jan 14, 2007 20:14:50 GMT -5
Jumping into the fray late Re: McGwire. Was there anyone out there that thought Mark McGwire was clean until Conseco's book dropped? Did you think he was clean until he declined to deny steroid usage before the Congressional panel? I'm not bringing anything new into the arguement when I state that MLB turned a blind eye to performance enhancing throughout its history....However, it bothers me that baseball experts can clamor around self-righteously about Mark McGwire being a cheater, not deserving his spot. I dont understand...what bombshell hit that exposed Mark McGwire as anything more or less than what we previously thought...Pundits praised him and Sammy Sosa for saving the game post-strike...and now...
The difference between professional athletes and those media folk that cover them is that athletes are awarded the opportunity to make their mark on the sport on through their own skill and hardwork, while individuals in the media hopelessly claws at an opportunity to be seen as relevant in the annals of sports lore. (this is not to take away from those inquisitive writers, analysts and historians whose work speak for itself.) If it so happens that Mark McGwire never makes it to Cooperstown, I can imagine his nay-voters reciting to their grandchildren their oldtimer story of the days they defended the hall from 'roid raged meatheads.
But were these defenders of the purity of the nation's pastime using their medium to question a drug policy year behind contemporary major American leagues?
And Mark McGwire is a victim of precidence building to keep Barry Bonds out of the Hall. That's fairly nauseating, if you ask me.
|
|