Clemente: Inner circle of the elite, or on his way?

[Mark70Z]

I really don’t understand the stats guys who rank players with all these advanced metrics, and believe they can define the play of players decades ago, both hitting and fielding, and be positive who was the better player UNTIL the metric is “updated” and a new list is now generated.

Back to the original topic. Clemente was a great player and I enjoyed watching him as a player, possibly a bit of a hypochondriac, but had all the tools. The only problem I have is that Clemente keeps getting better, and better, and even better as a ball player over the years. While great players, like Kaline (who was mentioned in this thread), becomes a player in history that was half way decent in the minds of baseball fans. The main reason, in my opinion, is because Clemente has a STORY. It’s a very good story, BUT Clemente hasn’t gotten any better since he played the game.

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

For the most part I would agree, but in baseball particularly we have somewhat refined our perspective on what makes players great, for example we realize now the importance of drawing walks in a way that perhaps was less appreciated in bygone times. So to that extent, it's possible to legitimately reassess players in light of new norms.

Now that said, Clemente did not walk much, so a reassessment really is not favorable to him. Whereas it helps Mantle a great deal.

[mckinneyj]

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

What do you think the reaction would have been had the Pirates Joe Brown approached the GMs of Yankees, Giants, or Braves suggesting an equal swap for Mantle, Mays, or Aaron? What if he offered to throw in Maz? How about Maz and Skinner or Groat? I doubt any of that gets a deal done (the opinion of one who's youth was spent idolizing these guys... fwiw).

[rats60]

Originally Posted by mckinneyj

What do you think the reaction would have been had the Pirates Joe Brown approached the GMs of Yankees, Giants, or Braves suggesting an equal swap for Mantle, Mays, or Aaron? What if he offered to throw in Maz? How about Maz and Skinner or Groat? I doubt any of that gets a deal done (the opinion of one who's youth was spent idolizing these guys... fwiw).

Probably the same thing that happened when the Red Sox and Yankees agreed to trade Ted williams and Joe DiMaggio. Willie Mays has said that Clemente was the best player (other than himself) that he saw play. Orlando Cepeda, who was a teammate of Aaron and Mays, said Clemente was better. In the mid- sixties there was definitely a big 3 of Aaron, Clemente and Mays and it was debated who was the best.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by rats60

Probably the same thing that happened when the Red Sox and Yankees agreed to trade Ted williams and Joe DiMaggio. Willie Mays has said that Clemente was the best player (other than himself) that he saw play. Orlando Cepeda, who was a teammate of Aaron and Mays, said Clemente was better. In the mid- sixties there was definitely a big 3 of Aaron, Clemente and Mays and it was debated who was the best.

Clemente is not and has never really been considered the “big 3” with Mays and Aaron. If anything someone like Frank Robinson would be more the person that should be in that conversation, and even he doesn’t measure up to those two (but does have superior statistics than Clemente). I like Clemente but he was no Mays or Aaron.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Clemente is not and has never really been considered the “big 3” with Mays and Aaron. If anything someone like Frank Robinson would be more the person that should be in that conversation, and even he doesn’t measure up to those two (but does have superior statistics than Clemente). I like Clemente but he was no Mays or Aaron.

Clemente had higher WAR per game played. I think Clemente measures up quite favorably to Frank Robinson when his whole game is considered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Clemente had higher WAR per game played. I think Clemente measures up quite favorably to Frank Robinson when his whole game is considered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t really disagree that Clemente and Frank Robinson are fairly similar in value to their team. I personally would have much rather had Robinson on my team but my point was Clemente was a completely different type of player than Mays and Aaron, Robinson was more similar to them just without the overall statistics to measure up.

I like Clemente a lot but he was not Mays or Aaron and very few people in their time thought he was in that conversation. He was a great person and worthy of his fame, but like some other people in other walks of like the fact that he was taken before his time makes him feel more legendary than he perhaps was.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

I don’t really disagree that Clemente and Frank Robinson are fairly similar in value to their team. I personally would have much rather had Robinson on my team but my point was Clemente was a completely different type of player than Mays and Aaron, Robinson was more similar to them just without the overall statistics to measure up.

I like Clemente a lot but he was not Mays or Aaron and very few people in their time thought he was in that conversation. He was a great person and worthy of his fame, but like some other people in other walks of like the fact that he was taken before his time makes him feel more legendary than he perhaps was.

I think the reason he may have been mentioned in the same breath was his being the "third" outfielder of the 1960's in the National League. When you look at all star game starters (a good "old school" metric to see where people ranked "back in the day") during the 1960's, Mays started eight times, Aaron seven, and Clemente five. The only other NL outfielder with multiple appearances as a starter was Tommy Davis with two.

So I think that is the reason he would be mentioned with those two.

[obcbobd]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Clemente had higher WAR per game played. I think Clemente measures up quite favorably to Frank Robinson when his whole game is considered.

Yes, but Clemente played a lot less games per year. Robinson should get credit for taking the field more often.

That said as a nine year old baseball fan in 1971, what Clemente did in the 1971 WS (hitting, running, fielding and of course his arm) and how he did it (duende) was simply amazing. After that he was one of my favorites

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

I really don’t understand the stats guys who rank players with all these advanced metrics, and believe they can define the play of players decades ago, both hitting and fielding, and be positive who was the better player UNTIL the metric is “updated” and a new list is now generated.

That is certainly your prerogative. Sometimes the more time that elapses, the more we understand certain things better. Your line of thinking would preclude you from having a fundamental understanding given all known relevant data of a subject, be it sports or politics or science or any sort of historical context. The more we learn about a subject, the better understanding about that subject. Thus the possibility for change through new valid inputs.

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Back to the original topic. Clemente was a great player and I enjoyed watching him as a player, possibly a bit of a hypochondriac, but had all the tools. The only problem I have is that Clemente keeps getting better, and better, and even better as a ball player over the years. While great players, like Kaline (who was mentioned in this thread), becomes a player in history that was half way decent in the minds of baseball fans. The main reason, in my opinion, is because Clemente has a STORY. It’s a very good story, BUT Clemente hasn’t gotten any better since he played the game.

I would largely agree. Kaline did not have the sustained high peak that Clemente had, but Kaline was a very good player for a long time. Clemente wasn't nearly as good as Kaline untile he reached age 25. And from that point until the end of his life, Clemente was largely better than Kaline. Clemente is a legend due to his actions as a person, which gives him the iconic status he deserves. Kaline has only his very very good stats to fall back on. Thus Clemente seems to get more and more "relevant" as the years go on, and as social consciousness becomes more and more important to more and more people. That is not a knock against Kaline. Just a fact in favor of Clemente. Statistically they were very close. If I had to choose one or the other for my team for the entire length of that player's career, I would likely take Kaline.

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Don’t you think the people who actually watched these guys play the game day in and day out would know who the best players were?

No. Not in the least. People who watched these players brought their biases of "how the game should be played" and what was important statistically "back in the day" as a means to understand a player's perceived value. These are biases that tilt someone one way or another based on things we understand today to be largely irrelevant.