Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Rhett</b><p>You are right, there are lots of teams that have payrolls like the Yankees, now name five...<br /><br />Edited to add: Sorry for not including Jeter's catalytic abilities in my earlier post as well, my bad.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p>Joe DeMaestri

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>They haven't won the World Series since they expanded their payroll and brought in all these All-Stars. Look at the roster of the teams that won those championships, there are no other All-Stars(save Bernie Williams) who played in the field, just a bunch of gritty baseball players. <br /><br />Jeter is about 2/3 of the way through his career. Based on 10, 000 at bats his stats will finish somewhere along these lines...310 average...300 HRS...1200 rbi's...400 steals...3, 400 hits. That's a lock for the HOF, not a maybe. Throw in the "intangibles" that people speak of and you have a career that is hard to match. <br /><br />He plays shortstop(the hardest position), he plays in New York(the hardest place to play), he plays to win and he does it with class. I can't believe there are so many "haters" out there. It's just jealousy. <br /><br />Name another shortstop who led their team to multiple championships with stats like he is going to have and you have a very short list. Throw in the "unmeasurable" things and the clutch playoff hitting and defense. <br /><br />Now I know I'm going to get killed for saying this but there is only one player to compare him to...Wagner. Or at least a poor man's verison.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Jeter couldn't carry Mantle's jock. It's apples and oranges anyway.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>CN</b><p> Any Yankee fan knows Mariano Rivera is the main reason they have won so much in the last 10 Years.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>There are four other teams with payrolls greater than $100 million - Boston, the Angels, White Sox, and Mets. There are five more with payrolls greater than $90 million - Dodgers, Cubs, Astros, Braves and Giants.<br /><br />So of nine teams with payrolls greater than $90 million, it looks like three of them - the Yanks, Mets, and Dodgers - will make the postseason.<br /><br />You're right. All it takes is a high payroll to have a winning baseball team. Ask the Red Sox, Angels, White Sox, Cubs, Astros, Braves, and Giants, who will all watch the postseason on television. <br /><br />Look, a Yankee hater will always be a Yankee hater; there's nothing I can say that would convince someone to change their mind about that. But to make comments about the Yankees buying their playoff berth when their success this season was driven by home-grown guys, and to make comments that Bernie Williams and Derek Jeter would be nobody's if they weren't in New York, well, comments like that are just plain silly. <br /><br />-Al

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>aro13</b><p>Jeter is vastly under-rated by those outside of New York who tend to think he is overhyped by the New York media. Regardless of what city he played in, his offensive statistics are worthy of first ballot Hall of Fame induction. <br /><br />However, he is vastly over-rated by those that cite his "intangibles" as being the reason for his greatness. Jeter has had countless opportunities to shine in the post-season and consequently he is going to come through big in some situations but for the most part his post-season hitting with men on base and in scoring position indicates anything but clutch hitting.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I don't think anyone is saying that they would be a nobody outside NY. What we are saying is that if you they didn't play in NY, they wouldn't be treated like gods and their feats blown out of proportion. That's pretty much the point I and others have tried to make. <br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>It is interesting that a team like the Yankees can spend $200 million and still lose a World Series to a team like the Florida Marlins, who have a payroll closer to a AAA team. I'm not sure I have an explanation for it but I don't think it would be a bad idea to have some kind of salary cap in baseball. It's not necessarily wrong that the Yankees pay their players more than other teams because they are the most famous franchise in any sport and it is New York City, but I think at some point enough is enough. For the amount of money they spend they really aren't getting ideal results and it couldn't hurt to have a little more fiscal balance in the league. The luxury tax isn't working because it hasn't curtailed the Yanks spending and it hasn't made Kansas City any more competitive.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>prewarsports</b><p>The things that many people overlook when looking at ANY players stats from todays game is the steroid influence. Would Derek Jeter have so many runs scored if he was not being driven in by Giambi and Sheffield? Would he be on base and get as many good pitches to hit if he was not hitting in front of these guys? <br /><br />Jeter is a slightly above average hitter. He will probably end his career with an average of around .300-.310. Good numbers, but not great. He will get over 3000 hits and that is a good enough number to make the Hall of Fame, but hitting in front of great players his entire career inflates that number quite a bit. He will score a bunch of runs (inflated by the steroid users hitting behind him) and play slightly above average defense, and provide a few memorable plays in the field.<br /><br />I guess the point I am trying to make is that if Jeter was on the Devil Rays, he wouldnt have the same numbers he has. People would pitch around him and nobody would be driving him in. I bet in a place like Kansas City, he would have a career .280 average and get about 180 hits a year, drive in 50 runs and score about 90. <br /><br />Something to think about

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>Those are just good numbers? For a shortstop? Tough crowd. He seems to be getting penalized for not taking steroids. His numbers might be better if he juiced up but would you have more or less respect for his game? His game isn't all about the numbers anyway. He sets the tone. He's a winner and I think if he played for the Royals or D-Rays then they would probably have good teams. <br /><br />Look at all of the HOF shortstops. Who would you rather have starting for you in the World Series?

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>aro13</b><p>Yes, Jeter would score less runs in almost any other lineup and drive in less - but that does not make him any less of a hitter. Jeter had his best year in 1999 when the Yankee lineup was nowhere near as formidable as it is today. His career OBP is .386 which is excellent for a shortstop, his career SLG is .461, again excellent for a shortstop. He is a very good basestealer, he hits equally well on the road as he does at Yankee Stadium. By any offensive measuring stick he is a great hitter for a shortstop.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p> How do you know Jeter never did steroids? Have you seen his size difference from his early years till now? Besides steroids arent just for bulking up,they improve stamina and the ability to heal quicker and if every home run hitter is scrutinized then why isnt every guy who plays every day? Basically no one has proof he never did them so i wouldnt claim he didnt or use it to prove a point when its been said over 50% of players were using at one time.<br /><br /> I do agree with Rhett that his stats are inflated by playing everyday in a lineup like the Yankees have bought thru the years. Its also ridiculous to compare any other teams payroll to theirs because the difference between the Yankees and anyone else is enough to buy another great team of players.Theyre basically working with 3 average teams worth of payroll,or 4-5 below average teams.Until baseball has a salary cap they will keep taking advantage of their seemingly endless means and BUY teams that will make the playoffs every year.With a salary cap of 120 million which could only be afforded by a few teams anyway the Yankees would lose any advantage because of the fact they spent wreckless, taking advantage of their fans who pay ridiculous prices to watch games.Why not spend wisely and invest money into making the neighborhood fans walk thru safer?<br /><br /> They actually havent bought a world series winner yet but they will one of these years and you dont have to be a Yankees hater to realize that.Also their payroll is 220 mil,they added 20 from the Phillies and didnt cut any,and if you want to be technical you would include the luxury tax which is a direct cause of their payroll,and they wouldnt pay without it being so high....so really theyre at 250+ mil.When they win again with a payroll of 125 or less ill give them some credit but until then i just call it how I and everyone else not blinded by pinstripe glasses, sees it.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>Here is a list of payrolls directly off of ESPN.com<br /><br /> MLB TEAM PAYROLL (US$) <br />1. NY Yankees 198,662,180 <br />2. Boston 120,100,524 <br />3. LA Angels 103,625,333 <br />4. Chicago Sox 102,875,667 <br />5. NY Mets 100,901,085 <br />6. LA Dodgers 99,176,950 <br />7. Chicago Cubs 94,841,166 <br />8. Atlanta 92,461,852 <br />9. Houston 92,101,503 <br />10. San Francisco 90,862,064 <br />11. Seattle 87,924,500 <br />12. Philadelphia 87,148,333 <br />13. St. Louis 86,912,217 <br />14. Detroit 82,302,069 <br />15. Baltimore 72,585,712 <br />16. Toronto 71,915,000 <br />17. San Diego 68,897,179 <br />18. Texas 65,129,570 <br />19. Minnesota 63,810,048 <br />20. Washington 63,267,500 <br />21. Oakland 62,322,054 <br />22. Cincinnati 59,162,015 <br />23. Arizona 58,884,226 <br />24. Cleveland 56,795,867 <br />25. Milwaukee 50,540,000 <br />26. Kansas City 47,294,000 <br />27. Pittsburgh 46,867,750 <br />28. Colorado 40,791,000 <br />29. Tampa Bay 35,417,967 <br />30. Florida 14,344,500 <br /> <br /><br />Al, you are right there are many teams close to the Yankees (if by "close" you mean around 50%). Looks like $198M doesn't buy the intangibles it once did.<br />-Rhett<br /><br />Edited to add: Earlier I said Jeter made $19M, I just found out he makes a modest $21M

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>The difference between the Yankees and the next highest payroll is $78M. That's more than what half the teams spend on their entire payroll. Or to put it another way, they spend more than the bottom 5 teams combined.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I'm not a Yankees fan but I'm still capable of appreciating what Jeter is as a ballplayer. The anti-Yankee and NY basis is kind of laughable here. The small ball guys claim that Jeter is overrated cause his power numbers aren't huge. The small town guys claim that the NY press over-praises Jeter (without acknowledging what the NY press has done to ARod this year). The fact is that NY is the toughest place to play and Jeter has won big, with great SS numbers, and done it with style and big plays (did we forget that flip against the A's in the playoffs that got the runner out at home? Think Manny could have made that play?). 3000 hits, 300 HRs, 2000 runs, 400 SBs and all the intangibles ever and he's still overrated? Admit it: you hate him because he's on the Yankees, he makes a lot of money, he's biracial and he's good looking. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I hate him cuz of the women he dates <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>At last, honesty. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <br /><br />I hate him for that too.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>John Kalafarski</b><p> I think the Yank's payroll is higher (prorated) after their pickups at the trading deadline. If you figure what they spend on signing talent (for example, the stud catcher Jesus "Forgot last name") and minor league baseball operations, they will be spending about double what the Red Sox spend. This only figures to expand further when they get in the new stadium.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>The most amazing stat on that list is Florida's. It's not even half of the next highest total, and not even close to what one Yankee superstar makes. Nevertheless, they still are alive for the wild card. How does one explain that?

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>No doubt that the lack of a true cap has hurt baseball. Notice how in football and basketball any team can win, for real. I find it incredible that the owners don't put their foot down and insist upon it.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>Only 3 of the top 11 in payroll are going to make the playoffs. It is an advantage but nothing is guaranteed. The other 5 teams are between 12 and 21. <br /><br />

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Dave</b><p>I always find it interesting that a debate about a player can be turned into a way to bash a team. It always happens with the Yankees.<br /><br />As for the payroll argument... the Yankees pay other teams to compete (but most of the owners pocket the cash)... they fill seats in visiting ballparks. They are more valuable to baseball than anything else. Payroll means nothing to winning. The Yanks have proved that themselves. If anything, bash the Yankees because they can afford to keep their players and can take other teams "problems" with payroll (Abreu & A-Rod). They haven't won a thing since they started spending all this money.<br /><br />As for Jeter... 3000 hits. Enough said. The other players in the line-up didn't put his bat on the ball. And how about the winning HR in the WS against AZ? Or the play to cut the ball off & flip in Oakland? It's hilarious that people here talk about Ray Durham or Phil Linz. Your hatred blinds you. He's a class act and a hell of a shortstop.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>No one can really argue with the 3000 hits point. Find me a player on that list that is overrated. Clemente? Musial? Mays? Lajoie? Eddie Collins? Seriously, guys, how can you criticize anyone on that list?

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Dave</b><p>When all is said and done about this era... he may be one of the only hitters people talk about without suspicion of steroids. Sure, he's dwarfed by the big power guys these days... but he may be one of the few guys that could have actually hit well in the dead ball era. If you watch his approach closely at the plate... he is such a professional hitter. He uses all fields, occasionally hits for power (when needed)...etc It's probably better to compare him to the likes of Gwynn or Boggs than most of the guys in the game today. He won't come close to their averages, but he's more that type of player. He won't peak the way they did, but he's as consistent as they come.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>Let me be the 100th person here that isn't a Jeter fan to say... NOBODY is saying Jeter sucks, or that he is even mediocre. He is a very good ballplayer, he has been a part of some great Yankees teams. What most people that have responded here are saying is that HE gets the credit for everything the Yankees accomplish. Yankees fans will never understand why people don't like him, and non-Yankees fans will never understand why he gets so much credit for being a good (not great) ballplayer. Undoubtedly, Jeter will make it into the Hall if he keeps up what he does. The whole 3000 hits talk is a little premature (~2100 hits currently), so that doesn't even warrant a comment. About the payroll of teams not being a guarantee for success, you are right it doesn't guarantee anything, but is sure as heck helps quite a bit, imagine a team that can pay scrubs $10M and then release them or send them to the bullpen...must be nice. Every time a free agent or disgruntled player is available the first team to get a crack at him is the Yankees because they can afford to [over]pay that player the most, the Red Sox have been pretty bad the last few years as well, but are still behind the Yanks by $80M. <br />-Rhett Yeakley<br /><br />Also, my vote for closest historical ballplayer (obviously a tough thing to do) would be Zach Wheat (quality ballplayer, average HOFer, definately not Joe D. or anybody else a Yankees fan will choose to compare him with)

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Rhett, no one is dopey enough to say he sucks. But you're saying that a player with over 2100 hits, who just turned 32, who is averaging nearly 200 hits a season for the past 11 years, is just a good player? I'm not a Yankee fan and I have enough clarity and honesty to admit that his numbers as a SS are fantastic over the long haul and he will end up as a first ballot HOF. How many first ballot HOF players are overrated? He hardly gets all the credit for everything the Yankees accomplish. Have you heard of John Wetteland, Mo Rivera and Scott Brosius? Those were the other 3 guys that won the WS MVPs during the Yankees' WS championship run from 96-00. Can't help but notice that Jeter only won one of those. Funny how he didn't win all four considering he gets all the credit for their success. Also, I note in your post that you spent a few words criticizing Jeter and the rest attacking the Yankees. Admit it...you hate them...and hate him because he is their public face.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>Jeff, I actually called Jeter a "very" good ballplayer. And reread my post I hardly spent a "few words" criticizing Jeter and the rest attacking the Yanks, it was half an half. I don't hate the Yanks, but they are hardly my favorite team. I do feel strongly that as a "very" good ballplayer Jeter gets too much credit from people like you who already have him hitting 3000 hits, 400 SB's, 300 HR's (he's only about half way there), and 2000 runs. IF he does all those things you think he will, someday he might be elevated to "marginally great" until that time however, he will be relegated to the "very good" category. Also, what NY fans did to Arod this year was grotesque, how do you do that to somebody that just won an MVP award, all booing Yankee fans should be ashamed of themselves. I love it how Yankees fans can justify their actions booing Arod because he makes so much, but last year when Jeter was hitting less than .250 to start the season nobody was booing, but then again he makes so much less than Arod ($25M vs. $21M). Also, would you call Wheat, Manush, etc. great ballplayers or very good? I think we each have a different definition as to what great is, in my opinion great palyers are the best to ever play, Jeter is NOT in that class. <br />-Rhett

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>I'm finding some of the comments here pretty silly. Lets look at it this way-there are 22 shortstops currently in the HOF:Aparicio, Appling, Bancroft, Banks, Boudreau, Cronin, Davis, Jackson, Jennings, Lloyd, Maranville, Reese, Rizzuto, Sewell, Smith, Tinker, Vaughn, Wagner, Wallace, Ward, Wells and Yount. With the exception of Wagner, and maybe shortstop/first baseman Ernie Banks, who would you rather have than Jeter. I think if Jeter keeps doing what he has been doing he is a first ballot HOFer. BTW, I would take Jeter over soon to be HOFer Cal Ripken any day of the week.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>It wasn't just the fans that torched ARod, it was the NY press. You know, the NY press that routinely inflates the value of its hometown players simply because they are marginally good. Imagine that happening in Minnesota. The reason ARod gets treated like crap is because he doesn't hit in the clutch, he chokes in October and he whines and makes excuses. As for Jeter, he is the complete opposite. Also, when you have someone as consistent as he is it is not so farfetched to project stats 7 years into the future. With his numbers over the past 11 years, if he plays similarly he'll end up with 300 HRs, 400 steals, 1200 RBI, etc. etc. I guess Albert Pujols isn't a great player yet either cause he's only done what he's done over 7 years or so. The fact is as much it hurts to say it, Jeter is a first ballot HOF player and the press has had nothing to do with it.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>And finally, Jeter for his career has a .307 batting average and a .413 OBP when hitting with 2 out and men in scoring position. ARod is hitting .270 with a .394 OBP in the same situation for his career. In contrast, David Ortiz, the greatest clutch hitter in baseball is hitting .273 and has a .397 OBP in his career with men in scoring position and 2 out.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>The truth of stats is that 27-32 are peak performance years. Jeter is on the down side of his career and will not be posting similar numbers until the day he retires, unless he finds the miracle that Bonds found. HRs won't taper off too badly, but SBs will decline very rapidly. Then there is the chance that some freak accdent may occur, ala Puckett getting beaned. IF he stays healthy, I'd be very surpised to see him end his career with 300 HRs and 400 SBs, even if he plays for 10 more years he needs to average 11 HRs and 18 SBs to reach those marks. For a player of his type, the SBs are pretty much out of reach and he may need all 10 years to get the HRs.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>Jeff, if you are trying to respond to my comments I don't think you are actually reading them. I never said he was marginally good or anything like that. I also stated in an earlier post that NY press was involved in blasting Arod, I still think it was rediculous for anybody to be blasting him like they did. Projecting stats 7 years into the future is silly, and I will never do that for any player, people did the same thing for Griffey in 1999 and that hasn't turned out to be true at all. Pujols is incredibly dominant (Jeter has never put up Pujols numbers, and never will because thay are 2 totally different types of players.) You keep getting hung up on me not wanting to call Jeter great, so what, in my opinion he is a very good ballplayer, not yet worthy of being called great. <br /><br />Jay, I also would take Jeter on my team before I took Ripken.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Rhett, which of the 3000 hit players who weren't caught taking steroids would you considser not to be great?

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Greg Ecklund</b><p>To say A-Rod chokes in October isn't borne out by the numbers - he had a lousy division series again the Angels last year, but his career postseason batting average is .305. Jeter edges him out slighly in that category with a .307 average, but he also has four times the postseason at bats as A-Rod does. When you have that amount of at bats and highlight plays in October people will tend to remember the great moments and gloss over the lousy performances.<br /><br />In 1998, Jeter hit .200 in the ALCS against Cleveland, .118 in the 2001 ALCS against Seattle and .148 against Arizona in the 2001 World Series. He also hit .233 and .200 against Boston in the ALCS of 2003 and 2004, respectively. If A-Rod has a series like any of those this year he might be run out of town, while if Jeter has one it will be talked about for a while and forgotten come next season. Certainly A-Rod's demeanor when compared to Jeter's is a factor in how they are treated, but I don't think it is entirely fair.<br /><br />Give A-Rod, or most any other great player, the number of postseason at bats that Jeter has and I would bet he would produce roughly the same number of great moments that Jeter has.<br /><br />I'm not saying Jeter isn't a great player and I would take him one of my teams any day. If he retired today he would still be a Hall of Famer without a doubt, especially when you stack him up against the others already in.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I'd say Boggs is the weakest of the 3000 hit club. Not much of a fielder and had no speed. All the other members were more than just hitters. Jeter would be among the bottom 5 in the club.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Koteles</b><p>Mr Peabody. All the Yanks, uh, nevermind.<br /><br />Boughten and forgotten !

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>Jay--I would rank Jeter ahead of these members of the 3000 hit club:Yaz, Molitor, Ripken, Yount, Winfield, Brock, Palmeiro and Boggs.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>What about Carew?

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Brian H (misunderestimated)</b><p>... on a team of great players. He may in fact be the 2nd best SS on his own team to the much maligned AROD. AROD lacks Jeter's sterling winner's rep but he is also statistically about 2 standard deviations above Jeter and was a gold glove calliber SS before he switched to 3B when he arrived in the Bronx. By the end of his career, AROD will be recognized as easily the greatest 3b ever. Schmidt will have more gold gloves but Arod will annihiliate him in every offensive category (including HRs)<br /><br />Historically, I think of Jeter as something of a combination of Rizutto and Yogi Berra, two other big winner's whose greatness extended well-beyond the boxscore. <br />Berra to me is more valuable, he played the most valuable everyday position and won more than Jeter (so far). Yogi's 10 world series rings is tops of all time. Rizutto was also a winner although I think he was a lesser player than Jeter. Scooter was on the right team at the right time, and benefitted from who he played with: DiMaggio (at first) and then Berra, Mantle, Ford etc., while under the stellar management of Casey Stengel for many of those years. Scooter has 8 rings, twice as many as Jeter.<br /><br />Jeter has played with many HOFers and solid HOF candidates as well: Clemens, Boggs (on his way out), Rivera, AROD, Soriano (he looks like an eventual HOFer right now), Giambi (I bet the writers who love this guy don't hold his steroids against him), Mussina and Randy Johnson. And there are others. Also, he plays for a pretty good manager too -- future HOFer Joe Torre.<br /><br />When he finishes Jeter will clearly be the Yankee's greatest SS but he will have trouble cracking the top 3-4 of SS's in general. Statistically, he will never approach Wagner -- who is still regarded by many as the greatest all around player... ever at any position. I'm not certain he will end up better than Arky Vaughan (check the numbers) or 2-time MVPs at SS Ernie Banks and Cal Ripken, either.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Rhett- $14 million total payroll for players for the Marlins??? That's incredible. That's less than half what USC's players receive each year.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>Brian--I have to disagree with you about Vaughan and Ripken. First, Vaughan finished his career in 1946 but was only inducted into the HOF in 1985. He had decent stats but obviously not many of his contemporaries thought of him as a HOFer. We've all seen Ripken play and he isn't close to the player Jeter is. He showed up every day. Other than that he is a marginal HOFer at best.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>Greg Ecklund</b><p>There really is nothing that makes Phil Rizzuto a "winner" other than the luck in playing for the right team at the right time - had he played for a marginal team or for a bottom feeder of the time like the Browns or Athletics he would barely be remembered today. <br /><br />You could take most any shortstop and put them on the 1941-56 Yankees and they would have been on just as many World Series winners as Rizzuto. What would make a guy like Rizzuto a winner and someone like Billy Rogell, Woody English, or Marty Marion not one other than Rizzuto's sheer luck of arriving on the scene during the start of a long stretch of Yankee dominance?

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>Jay: How is winning 5 batting championships and having 200 hits 7 times weak? The most similar careers per baseball-reference are: <br /><br /> 1. Rod Carew (881) *<br /> 2. Tony Gwynn (851)<br /> 3. Paul Waner (828) *<br /> 4. Sam Rice (807) *<br /> 5. Zack Wheat (802) *<br /> 6. Frankie Frisch (798) *<br /> 7. Roberto Alomar (778)<br /> 8. Tim Raines (768)<br /> 9. Jimmy Ryan (765)<br /> 10. Charlie Gehringer (757) *<br /><br />Not exactly weak company to keep. Let's not also forget that Boggs languished in the minors for at least a couple of seasons beyond his time. Had he come up earlier, he would not have had to hang on for an extra few seasons to get to 3000 hits and we'd be looking at a guy around .335 instead of .328 (which is nothing to sneeze at either). <br /><br />Winfield's on base % and average (.283, .353) are considerably lower than Boggs's (.328, .415). Even slugging % (Boggs .443; Winfield .475) isn't that far apart. Take away the 3000 hits from longevity (took him nearly 2000 more at bats and several more years than Boggs to get there) and he isn't a HOFer. Well, he did top 30 homers twice...<br /><br />Brian: Banks's career is about half playing first base. As a shortstop he was adequate. <br /><br />Greg: I agree that Rizzuto has enjoyed a "halo effect" from being a Yankee; so did Pee Wee Reese from being a Dodger. I think Marty Marion is underrated but really was a cut below the other two. Vaughn was a terrific player; read Bill James's analysis of his career. <br /><br />WE at the Warshaw Group will take Boggs over Winfield any day. Don't hate us because we're pompous <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Adam, among the 3k club he is the weakest player there. Not neccessarily the weakest hitter. Boggs offered nothing to his team other than his BA. He was a marginal fielder and had no speed. Essentially, he was a one tol player and that one tol was exceptional enough to keep him in theleague a long time. Winfield was a decent fielder and had decent speed. Basically, Winfield was a 5 tool players. I'll take that over Boggs any day.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay wolt</b><p>Although I always liked Boggs...<br />I agree w/ Jay that Winfield was a far superior player.<br />W/ superior speed (as Jay stated) and power.<br />Winfield had 465 HR's, Boggs 118<br />Winfield had 88 triples, Boggs 61<br />Winfield scored 1669 runs, Boggs 1513<br />Winfiled stole 223 bases, Boggs 24

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay wolt</b><p>Also...Winfield had 7 gold gloves, Boggsie 2

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>I always thought of Winfield as a guy who underperformed. He did accumulate some nice career numbers but never really had any monster seasons. He hit .208 with 2 hr's and 9 rbi's in 26 career postseason games. Post season success matters.<br /><br />

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>jay wolt</b><p>"Post season success matters"<br />True!<br />But Boggs wasn't that spectacular either, <br />In 9 post season series, he hit .273<br />over 50 points lower then his career reg season mark.<br /><br />And if you are going to give props on Post Season work.<br />Then Jeter's value is higher. This is his 11th year<br />and all 11 years he's been in the post season. He's nicknamed<br />"Mr November" as well.<br />Granted Steinbrenner spends a fortune each year. But Steinbrenner<br />did this as well before Jeter came up and has never had 11 straight<br />post season visits.

Who can you compare Derek Jeter going back to 1869.
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>Of course Ty Cobb hit over .100 points less than his career average in 17 career postseason games so...<br /><br />I think today's culture places more of an emphasis on winning than in the pre-war days and that it's much harder to win now than it was in the past.