-
Mike Levine · Data Analyst at Good Technology
Not sure how anyone puts A-Rod ahead of Jeter on any list…-
Josh Darnell · Top Commenter · Houston, Texas
-
Josh Darnell oh you must mean when he was using the juice… which was his whole career, until recently… when he has been clearly worse….
-
Andy Shapley · Top Commenter
-
Josh Darnell · Top Commenter · Houston, Texas
Mike Levine So steroids, and steroids alone made Arod one of the greatest players of all time? Arod is a DB, no doubt about that, but you can’t deny his talent, which has been there since basically high school. He said he didn’t start until reaching the Rangers, which is probably doubtful, but he was a stud and still the best SS in the game before that (and got robbed of one MVP). -
Andrew Santi · Top Commenter · Meat Department Clerk at Kroger
So you only want to judge A-Rod vs. Jeter using a time when they were both clean… So you choose 2012-2014-ish… When both players are in their upper 30’s… That makes sense… Also, and I can not stress this enough, seeing as it was the whole point of this article, this ranking does not factor PED’s or anything else into the ranking. Just, who were the best baseball players on the field, period. Not who were the best clean players. Not who were the best players then add a penalty for PED suspicion. Just who played the best baseball, no matter how they got there… And the answer of A-Rod vs. Jeter is pretty simple when you boil it down that far. It’s A-Rod. In a landslide. And I HATE A-Rod. And I respect the heck out of Jeter. I would root for Jeter over A-Rod in any situation, but A-Rod put a better product on the field than Jeter did… Simple as that.
-
-
Rolla Baumgartner · Indiana University
To rank Jeter 31st and Luke Appling at 101st simply shows the tremendous bias toward active players. Appling was every bit as good as Jeter, but played 70 years ago and didn’t play in the Yankee aura. -
Tzvi Ference · Top Commenter · Assistant at Office
Putting Griffey at #35 and Jeter at #31 tells me all I need to know about these terrible and biased rankings.-
Joe Halverson · Top Commenter · Jacksonville, Florida
-
Tzvi Ference · Top Commenter · Assistant at Office
Jeter at #31 is not appropriate for his career if Griffey is #34. Griffey was the better all around player and could easily have been a top 5 all time player if he didn’t struggle with injuries in the back end of his career. 660 HRs. Won an MVP award when Jeter didn’t. Much better defensively.
-
-
Benjamin Upchurch · Top Commenter
Bonds gets #3 and Aaron is #5? Let me put this into perspective. Bonds produced the majority of his numbers in what might be the most dominant hitting era of baseball. On the other hand Aaron produced most of his numbers in the 60’s. You know that wonderful time in baseball where pitching ruled with a iron fist. More importantly the best hitter by the numbers in the 60’s was Aaron as well. It’s kind of hard to hit 50 homeruns in a season when every team you face Bob Gibson, Juan Marichel, Sandy Koufax, etc.-
Gary D. Downard · Top Commenter · Founder at Work For Myself From home
Ben Upchurch – Hank was a great player – but you callin him THE best in the 60’s makes you just as stupid as the ESPN list. It’s impossible to call ANYONE THE best. Too many good players. Can you say Mickey Mantle for instance ?? Can you say Willie Mays ????? Besides that – you’ve COMPLETELY ruled out pitchers that could have been THE BEST instead of hitters????? -
Benjamin Upchurch · Top Commenter
Gary I called him the best hitter in the 1960’s, not best player. So no I didn’t take into acount pitchers as possibly the best hitters in baseball in the 1960’s. I also said Aaron was the best hitter by the numbers in the 60’s. Their is a reason why Aaron got 3,000 hits before mays and it’s because of his production in the 60’s. -
Andrew Santi · Top Commenter · Meat Department Clerk at Kroger
First off, Gary is right, it;s nearly impossible to say who was the best hitter of the 60’s. Secondly, Aaron got to 3,000 hits in the same season as Mays… So, I’m not sure that demonstrably proves that Aaron was better. Actually my vote would go to Mays. During the 60’s, Aaron had exactly 1 season of at least 9 WAR, 9.1 in 1961. Mays had 5 different seasons in the 60’s with a WAR higher than that, including 4 in a row that were over 10… -
Benjamin Upchurch · Top Commenter
Andrew Aaron was one of the best every single year, mays was injured after 66. Aaron was 157 hits behind mays when he started and then got his 3,000th hit two months before mays. Also unless you can calculate a stat it’s worthless to use, because you don’t understand it. -
Andrew Santi · Top Commenter · Meat Department Clerk at Kroger
-
-
Kyle Fletcher · Top Commenter
So Ryan is ranked 36, Griffey 35 and Jeter 31 while cheaters like Bonds and A-Fraud are near the top of the list. Clearly the voters for this list know absolutely nothing about the integrity of the game. It’s telling future generations “hey just go ‘roid up and you too can be considered among the greatest ever.” Cowherd’s a hack who knows nothing about the sport and just likes the sound of his own running mouth, but we should be able to expect better from the other so called experts who helped put this list together.-
Josias Gonzalez · Top Commenter
-
Kyle Fletcher · Top Commenter
It’s about proof. A-Rod, proven cheater. Nothing has ever been proven against Griffey. Even the PED witch hunters who vote for the Hall of Fame and are refusing to vote for guys like Bagwell and Piazza because of suspicion are calling Griffey clean and guaranteeing he will be a first ballot inductee next year. No guy who has been convicted of PED use the way A-Rod has should have any place on this list. Especially because it’s based on numbers, because his numbers are obviously tainted. -
Andrew Santi · Top Commenter · Meat Department Clerk at Kroger
Wow, man. They only wrote that there would be no penalty for PED’s or anything else like 15 times in the intro to these articles. The following is copy-pasted straight from the first line of the article that explains what the Hall of 100 is…
“The debate about baseball’s Hall of Fame is starting to become a lot more about the voters than the players, so we decided to change the conversation and get away from character clauses, who might have taken PEDs and what impact those PEDs might have had.
Simply put, we asked our panel of experts to rank the top 100 players in history based entirely on performance on the field.”You want your squeaky clean best players, get off your pedestal, go to Cooperstown… And then blissfully ignore the dozens upon dozens of awful humans who are enshrined there… But personally, as a somewhat younger fan, I’m pretty curious how players like Bonds and Clemens and even Rose stack up against the greats, and as a statistician, I’m totally cool with the methodology of this article, which is fairly clever… So, this article was for people like me. If you don’t like the article, go read a different one, and don’t attack the people who are taking the time and effort to do the research and leg work that the rest of us don’t have time for. And please read the introduction where they explain what the article is about, so then maybe you’ll understand why the writers of the article did exactly what they said they were gonna do.
-
Categories: (GM) General Musings, MLB, What We're Reading
THE MORNING BISCUIT 
Leave a Reply