ESPN Top 100
 

If already posted please delete.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...s-all-nos-25-1

100. Barry Larkin
99. Phil Niekro
98. Jim Thome
97. Adrian Beltre
96. Charlie Gehringer
95. Duke Snider
94. Bryce Harper
93. John Smoltz
92. Roy Halladay
91. Ryne Sandberg
90. Ivan Rodriguez
89. Shoeless Joe Jackson
88. Willie Stargell
87. Carlton Fisk
86. Roberto Alomar
85. Jim Palmer
84. Paul Molitor
83. Roy Campanella
82. Eddie Collins
81. Mike Piazza
80. Robin Yount
79. Hank Greenberg
78. Chipper Jones
77. Vladimir Guerrero
76. Cap Anson
75. Rod Carew
74. Juan Marichal
73. Willie McCovey
72. Justin Verlander
71. Al Kaline
70. Harmon Killebrew
69. Ozzie Smith
68. Manny Ramirez
67. Brooks Robinson
66. Cal Ripken Jr.
65. Max Scherzer
64. Eddie Mathews
63. David Ortiz
62. Mel Ott
61. Carl Yastrzemski
60. Whitey Ford
59. Miguel Cabrera
58. Steve Carlton
57. Pete Alexander
56. Dave Winfield
55. Reggie Jackson
54. Lefty Grove
53. Oscar Charleston
52. Clayton Kershaw
51. Ernie Banks
50. Bob Feller
49. Frank Thomas
48. Nap Lajoie
47. Warren Spahn
46. Ichiro Suzuki
45. Wade Boggs
44. Tony Gwynn
43. George Brett
42. Nolan Ryan
41. Satchel Paige
40. Jimmie Foxx
39. Yogi Berra
38. Jackie Robinson
37. Joe Morgan
36. Tris Speaker
35. Josh Gibson
34. Pete Rose
33. Bob Gibson
32. Sandy Koufax
31. Mariano Rivera
30. Albert Pujols
29. Johnny Bench
28. Derek Jeter
27. Roberto Clemente
26. Alex Rodriguez
25. Christy Mathewson
24. Randy Johnson
23. Rickey Henderson
22. Tom Seaver
21. Cy Young
20. Rogers Hornsby
19. Frank Robinson
18. Mike Schmidt
17. Roger Clemens
16. Joe DiMaggio
15. Mike Trout
14. Greg Maddux
13. Ken Griffey Jr.
12. Honus Wagner
11. Pedro Martinez
10. Stan Musial
9. Walter Johnson
8. Barry Bonds
7. Mickey Mantle
6. Lou Gehrig
5. Ted Williams
4. Ty Cobb
3. Hank Aaron
2. Willie Mays
1. Babe Ruth

Not a horrible list. Off hand the Yankee association really moved Jeter unreasonably far up that list, but I am sure someone will disagree. No list will keep everyone happy, but I have seen far worse. I am happy that the list writer added some history in there versus the usual of having a list of 90% players after 85'.

Too high:

Bonds
Seaver
Henderson (way too high)
Clemente

Too low:

Bench

Jeter at #28 is laughable (yes, I am a Met fan).

IMO Pedro, Jeter, Clemente, Rivera, Ortiz too high.

How did Pedro get #11?



.

Shoeless Joe Jackson is 89th out of 100? This was the biggest headscratcher for me.

Jeter > Foxx and Speaker? Ummm, no.

Finally! A list everybody can agree on!


































































:D

Where is Hyun-Jin Ryu?!

#101 Just missed the cut.

Yeah, head scratcher for me too... why was he even on the list? :p

Ha - could you imagine trying to get just a few people to agree on this list?

At least they probably have the #1 player selected correctly (well, at least for a third of the people that read the list...)

Lol.

+1 agree about Joe jackson

Do not understand Jeter being so high up and ahead of some greats

I am biased but find it disappointing that Sam Crawford didn't make this list....

Agreed, would like to see Heilmann make the list too.

I can’t understand why DiMaggio ranks so low. He had a shorter career than Mantle but his batting stats per season are better and there was no comparison in the field-DiMaggio was much better.

Per 162 game season

Runs-DiMaggio -130, Mantle-113
Doubles-DiMaggio-36, Mantle-23
Triples-DiMaggio-12, Mantle-5
Homers-DiMaggio-34, Mantle-36
RBIs-DiMaggio-143, Mantle-102
BA-DiMaggio-.325, Mantle-.298
OPS-DiMaggio-.977, Mantle-.977

I think Joe D was the greatest center fielder ever although I can see an argument for Mays.

Fabulous question, he's sooooooo much better than Warren Spahn, right? LOL

And yet, Mantle is comfortably ahead on WAR type stats. 4th among CF, DiMaggio is 7th. And not just longevity, Mantle is ahead in WAR7, 64 to 52. And his dWAR for whatever reason is MUCH better 9.6 to 3.2.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/l.../jaws_CF.shtml

And FWIW, Bill James rates Mantle 6th all time, DiMaggio 13th.

Pete Rose #34. Uhhhhh

Here's another one I think is a real head scratcher. They have Ichiro at only #46!!! :eek:

I don't know how ESPN made their decisions and selections, but to me this is a real travesty. Especially if they are only going by his MLB record and stats. Because if so, Ichiro is being placed in a similar situation as to what was done to the Negro League players before it was recently decided to count those leagues as equivalent to the rest of MLB. And not unlike the Negro players, Japanese players apparently faced their own discrimination and bias from being allowed to play in the major leagues. Why else would it take all the way till 2001 for Ichiro to become the very first ever Japanese born person to be signed to a MLB contract and actually play as an everyday position player for a major league team? Or are you going to tell me in the long history of the Japanese leagues there wasn't at least one other person before Ichiro that had the talent and ability to be an everyday position player on a major league team?

When Ichiro finally signed with the Mariners in 2001, it was after he had already played nine years in the Nipon Professional Baseball league, Japan's top professional baseball league. And yes, you read that correctly, NINE YEARS more he could have possibly been adding to his major league stats, records, and legacy. As it was, his very first year in MLB he won the AL-ROY and the AL-MVP awards, and led the majors in steals to boot. He also was elected to the All-Star team his first 10 years in the majors, during which time he also won 10 consecutive Gold Glove awards, received MVP votes in 9 of those years, and even grabbed three Silver Slugger awards. He also set the record during this time as the only player in MLB history to have 200 or more hits in a season for 10 consecutive seasons, and even set the MLB record for most hits in a single season during this run. And again, this was ALL AFTER HE SPENT THE FIRST 9 YEARS OF HIS CAREER PLAYING BASEBALL IN JAPAN!!!! Really let that sink in for a couple minutes!

Had he been signed to a MLB contract early on, they probably wouldn't still be talking about Pete Rose as the all-time major league hits king. If you were to add in his Japanese league stats, like was done with the Negro League players, his numbers are even more mind boggling. The only possible knock against him was he didn't swing for the fences, but came up near the end of the steroid/PED era when the fans were so enamored of the big guys belting all the homers. Seeing Ichiro get hits like no one ever had before just didn't seem to create the same excitement and fervor as the big boppers. Also, playing the bulk of his MLB career in Seattle, especially during his best years, didn't help boost his fame and popularity with the fan base as much as it would have had he originally signed with a team like the Yankees, and spent his most productive years with them.

Still, only #46, really?!?!?!

Jeter, Pedro and Bryce Harper are ranked way too high. And Bench, Speaker, Ott and Foxx are too low.

Maybe it's my eyes.... but I do not see George Sisler or Carl Hubbell anywhere on the list (I scanned it twice). If that's the case, those are two terrible omissions that compromise the credibility of the list.

list
 

Opinion time, I'm sure this will end well:)

1) Aroid is wrong and Bryce Harper is laughable

2) Roberto belongs

3) Actually a decent list for the most part

Fire the cannons! Trent King

Grove is way underrated in this list.

This list was discussed a bit in the "Who Are Your Inner Circle Hall of Famers?" thread but the full list wasn't posted. My initial surprise was seeing how high Pedro Martinez was ranked. He's kind of like the new Koufax in that he gets a lot of credit for his peak performance.

The thing Martinez has going for him is that more of the voters saw him pitch (to have seen Koufax we're talking about people at least in their early 60s) and he benefits from modern stats, which give him a lot of credit for pitching in a hitter's era and (at least when he was with the Red Sox) in a hitter's park. Whereas now people (some people) downplay Koufax because he pitched in a pitcher's era and park.

Of course it is impossible to have a list that everyone agrees on, but I would rank the next six pitchers (Maddux, Clemens, Young, Seaver, Randy Johnson, Mathewson) ahead of him as well Grove (54th!) and Alexander (57th!), which still makes him the tenth best pitcher (also being behind Walter Johnson who is on the list at 9) which is nothing to sneeze at. I am not sure how to weigh peak vs. career but all these guys had both great peaks and long careers.

There's an endless amount to discuss here but I will just add these observations:

Not sure how Lajoie is ranked 48th and Eddie Collins 82nd. Putting Lajoie where he is shows awareness of earlier players so I am unclear why Collins was ranked that low.

I am not a Bryce Harper hater but I disagree with having him on the list at all while leaving off Crawford, Waner, and Heilmann (as well as many other players I would choose over Harper, but I was focusing on right fielders).

All that being said, there isn't a list of 100 players any one of us could come up with that anyone else would agree with 100%. And I think this pays tribute to the history of the game while recognizing that some current or recent players are pretty good as well.

To me the list skews a little too modern but I would imagine my list (and possibly the list of others on this site) would skew a little older.

That is surely an indictment of WAR. Every person I have known who saw both play said DiMaggio was the better player. Mantle walked more but DiMaggio beat him by almost 60 total bases per 162 game season.

No George Sisler.

The plural of anecdote is not data, my friend. Not that he's infallible, but I have a lot of respect for Bill James. Obviously both are very very upper echelon all time greats we can agree on that.

Having a difficult time with a few of the selections:

Trout at # 15 - wow - that's a bit presumptuous - great player (no doubt). He's still playing. What happens if he plays 8 more years but with mere mortal numbers? Yes, top 100, but #15?

Harper at #94 - he's a .279 lifetime hitter. Yes, there's potential there, but really top 100?

Yes, more, but those two stand out to me.

I'm far from PC, and don't think the Negro Leagues were the equal of the major leagues, but I think the low rating for Negro League greats is ridiculous. Oscar Charleston 53rd? He should, at the very least, be in top 20, and there's a good argument for him being in the top 5. Josh Gibson behind Derek Jeter? Whaaaa??? :mad: :confused:

And I agree -- Bryce Harper is nowhere near the top 100. Needs three to five more great seasons.

WAR is not a perfect stat, but it works pretty well sometimes, and other times not at all.
47th Bob Gibson
48 George Brett
49 Tim Keefe
50 Robin Roberts
60 Nolan Ryan
65 Curt Shilling
66 Dimaggio

I don't think anyone thinks Schilling was a better baseball player than Dimaggio

Harper and Trout probably reflect who ESPN had on the panel. Still puzzling out Pedro, obviously a very great pitcher at his peak, but the career to me just doesn't add up to him ranking over Clemens, Young, Alexander, etc.

Yeah, I think Harper really stands out. I recall a book years ago of the 100 best players that had George Foster in it, I guess right after he had his monster years and before it was clear he was just going to be a very good player but not a great player. In retrospect, that was not a wise choice.

Ozzie Smith?...NO WAY....

ARod...love him or hate him...SS and OF #s...way too low IMO

Gets dicey towards the middle as far a placement...but good list overall

Well, I actually agree with the top 5….

After going over the list I can't believe George Brett is ahead of Wade Boggs and Eddie Mathews. On best ever 3rd baseman lists he is always below them and correctly so.

Rickey
 

I don't know on Henderson. I'm wondering if he's a few notches too low. He was terrifying because you knew if he got on -- and he did even more with that small strike zone -- it was like it was downhill the rest of the way to home plate. (Great if he's on your team, though.)

3,055 hits, 2,190 walks, and then 1,406 steals.

Boggs had not much power once batting practice ended and that hurt his legacy, along with his appearance of self-obsession. Mathews just never got his due, I don't know why.

In another thread, someone was naming their greatest pitchers and they went with the soccer-type, first name only, reference of "Pedro", and the first name I thought of was "Pedro Borbon". After about 30 seconds, I realized he was talking about Martinez. Martinez was good, and so were Roy Oswalt and Orel Hershiser.

Mariano on the list at all is terrible let alone the high ranking he got. Oooooooh, he was great for 65 innings a year. Whoopee.

I definitely don't agree with Maddux ahead of Clemens. Clemens has a case for greatest pitcher ever. Maddux does not.

But but but but but those were all NINTH innings when it mattered more!!! SARCASM I'm of the all runs count the same school.

"I don't think anyone thinks Schilling was a better baseball player than Dimaggio"

Nobody thinks he was, and WAR doesn't say that he was. WAR is a measure of value, not ability. If you want to measure ability you'll need something like WAR/PA or something like that. (Tricky here, since Schilling was a pitcher and DiMaggio was a position player.)

Anyway, by WAR they're tied in total career value. (The difference is less than one WAR, which is totally meaningless over the course of a player's career.) And the only reason that DiMaggio isn't ahead of Schilling is that his career was so short. He only played 13 years - or really only 12.5 since he missed half of 1949. If you want to give him any credit for the years he missed during the war, he'd pull way ahead.

The Trout rating is obviously based on some expectations of what he'll do in the future. I think it's pretty likely that he ends up being a top-20 player, although obviously he isn't there yet.

As for the rest of the list: it's so bad I'm just going to ignore it. Half of it looks like click-bait, and the other half looks like whoever put it together didn't bother to check the players' records (for example, check out how much daylight they put between Matty and Pete).

I stand corrected, nat. I'm not familiar with war/pa, I'll have to check it out. I don't care for this espn list either, but it makes for fun conversation. I could argue Trout has only been the 2nd best player on a losing team his whole career. Pujols, Ohtani.

42 Nolan Ryan should be higher up towards the top for me

These three should be much lower towards bottom
11 Pedro Martinez
15 Mike Trout
28 Derek Jeter

No way am I putting these three ahead of some of the greats on this list

94 Bryce Harper doesn't make the cut for me

There is no way on earth Pujols on the Angels was remotely close to Trout. No one seriously disputes Trout has been the best player in baseball since he came up in 2011.

It seems reasonable to me. Total WAR is a counting stat that rewards longevity - Dimaggio's career is very short, only 13 seasons and not all of them complete seasons. For a guy who played like 1,736 games in the OF, 79.2 WAR is incredible. If you factor in this longevity factor, Dimaggio's WAR relative to time played moves him way, way up the list.

Clemente 27th
Kaline 71st

WAR gives Clemente 94.8, Kaline 92.8. Their merits can be debated, but same position at the exact same time and very close statistically overall, with each a bit better in certain areas.

There are a number of players on this list rated on their popularity.

Where is Harry Heilmann ? He batted .390+ ( 4 times ) !! Only others to do that were Cobb and Hornsby. My Uncle saw Heilmann play and he use to say "he never seen anyone hit the ball harder then Harry ".

Peter I said I could make a case, not that I would win. What do y'all think about Robin Roberts as the 50th "most valuable" of all-time by WAR? I did not see him play, but heard he had a good fastball early in his career. I picked up a nice 1956 Topps that I should be getting soon.

Greg, to me as a baseball card collector, I never saw Clemente or Kaline, but I consider them both all-time greats. I don't consider Bryce Harper an all-time great.

I'm curious about these two opinions. Based on what are you saying these guys should be moved?

For all his strikeouts and no-hitters, Ryan still finished his career with a 112 ERA+. He had an ERA+ under 100 nine different times in his career. Pedro, on the other hand, had an ERA+ of 154 and had an ERA+ under 100 just two times in his career. Besides those two, his next lowest for a season was 117. That's right - his third-worst ERA+ season was 5 points higher than Ryan's career total. Pedro won 3 Cy Youngs and was runner-up twice - Ryan was a runner-up once with no wins. Pedro once had an ERA - in a hitters' park in a steroid era - that was 3.17 runs below the league average.

So, again, what's the case for Ryan needing to be higher up to the top and, thus, many, many spots ahead of Pedro who should be "towards the bottom"?

Chris, I agree, I have Martinez ahead of Ryan, but neither is in my top 50. To me, I saw Ryan many times and he was like Dave Kingman, he could have the best game you ever saw, or a really bad game.

I couldn't agree more. Harper may end up there, but he's been far too inconsistent to appear on this list right now.

My favorite Pedro stat is that in 2000, he led the AL with an ERA of 1.74. The second lowest ERA in the entire American League was posted by Roger Clemens at.... 3.70. 1.96 full runs below Pedro. Pedro was twice as effective at not giving up runs as the second best pitcher.

Personally I don't Martinez hurled enough innings to rank #11 among players at all positions, but he was one dominating pitcher

Thank you, Rich. The fact that he and Crawford aren't even on the list is shocking to me and, at the very least, shows a lack of appreciation or research on the greats of the first quarter of the 20th century by ESPN.

Roberts pitched on mostly lousy teams but still seemed to have very impressive stats. That said, 50 feels a little high to me, just subjectively.

Bryce Harper over Eddie Murray, Lou Brock & Jeff Bagwell?? Eh

I won't argue Murray or Bagwell but Bryce is a LOT better player than Brock. Brock was a guy with a little power whose job was to get on base. Except he wasn't all that good at that (.343 OBP). Harper, meanwhile, gets on base a LOT more (.392 OBP) while slugging much higher (.524 vs .410). Defensively, they're probably a wash with neither being great (though Harper's dWAR is better). Harper also has 2 MVPs.

There's literally no argument for Brock over Harper unless you think stealing a ton of bases at the not-great rate of 75% success is more valuable than it is.

Foxx and Trout should switch places.

Trout and Harper are undoubtedly getting some credit for the projected rest of their careers. But they are the two most talented hitters of this generation and I think this forum for the most part has a huge nostalgia bias in favor of vintage players.

Pete, can you please post Trout's Playoffs & World Series numbers during his 11 year career?

Sure, when you post Ted Williams' and Ernie Banks'.:eek: Oh and Ty Cobb's too please -- .262 was it?

I agree Trout was better on the Angels. Life time it will be Pujols and the numbers really won't be that close. In my opinion anyway.

Pujols on St. Louis was MASSIVE. A phenomenon. The second half of his career he was average to mediocre and hitting behind Trout pumped up his counting numbers.

Not sure I understand the people saying Pedro Martinez is way too high.

He was the most dominant pitcher of his era. From '97-03, the peak of the steroid era, he went 118-36, with a 2.20 ERA, 0.94 WHIP, 213 ERA+, and 5.59 K/BB ratio. I mean, those numbers are outrageous.

He ended up with 3,000+ strikeouts despite throwing only 2800 career innings. Injuries limited him after age 32, and he retired younger than some guys will now. But his numbers are absurd, in maybe the most offensively dominated era of baseball history.

I place more value on peak/performance than I do on counting stats, though some can argue that longevity is a skill. 10th best winning percentage ever, 8th best WHIP ever, 13th in H/9, 11th in K/9, 12th in K/BB, and 6th in ERA+

The game has changed recently and tilted back toward pitchers to some degree, which might make his accomplishments seem not as great, but I think when you adjust for era/context, hes arguably the most dominant pitcher ever, maybe behind only WaJo. But then you get into trying to compare their eras, which is really a fool's errand.

No doubt he had that amazing dominant period, although interestingly, in WAR7, he ranks … wait for it.... 21st. 5th though in adjusted WAR7 which I think doesn't require consecutive seasons. To me, you have to take the whole career into consideration too, and I just can't see putting him above Young, Alexander, Mathewson, Grove, Seaver, etc.

1st, Trout won't even sniff many of Williams and Cobbs accomplishments.

Hits - Cobb - 4189 - Trout - 1419

Steals - Cobb - 897 - Trout - 203

Home Runs:
Williams - 521 (and missed 3 prime years at a real WAR) - Trout - 310

Batting Average - Williams .344 - Cobb .366 - Trout .305

2nd, these 2 played in an era where there were no playoffs so asking to show their playoff numbers, really? c'mon you have at least average intelligence I'm gonna to assume. Nowadays what 5 teams from each league make the playoffs every year and there are 3 rounds before you even get to the World Series. And that wuss can't even get his team into the playoffs. Kinda like when Harper left the Nats, then the Nats won the Series. Trout is a cancer, like Harper, pretty boys who will never play in a WS, and never come close to the careers of Williams and Cobb.

3rd, you're just wrong, and I just proved it.

Don't ever mention Mike Trout with Williams and Cobb again. Mention him with Koufax if you like, or other players who had a nice shorter peak.

Now get the f--k off my lawn!

They have Pedro as the highest rated pitcher. Does by one really believe he was the best pitcher ever?

Sometimes I think they plant a few head scratchers on lists like this in order to get people talking about it.

Am I the only one who counted how many of this top 100 I have in my own card collection?

Probably unimpressive compared to most of you… but I am 93 yup, 7 not yet.

In response to some earlier posts:

Martinez is ranked as the second best pitcher behind Walter Johnson. Which is still high for me, but he wasn't ranked first.

Below are the explanations for WAR7 and WAR7Adj.

Do I detect false modesty? Haha. How can 93 out of 100 NOT be good? I probably own 50 if I'm lucky.

That did sound tool-ish, didn’t it? 😂.

I’ll bet there are plenty here that run the table with all 100!

Did Trout retire? I missed the memo. He's 30. And missed most of two years. Your comparisons are meaningless. Here's something meaningful.
Offensive WAR
2012 AL 8.7 (1st)
2013 AL 10.1 (1st)
2014 AL 8.8 (1st)
2015 AL 8.8 (1st)
2016 AL 9.9 (1st)
2018 AL 9.2 (1st)
2019 AL 8.1 (1st)

Adjusted OPS+
2012 AL 168 (1st)
2015 AL 176 (1st)
2016 AL 173 (1st)
2017 AL 186 (1st)
2018 AL 198 (1st)
2019 AL 182 (1st)
Active 176 (1st)

Oh, and 3 MVPs and 4 2nds.

But hey, live in the past, it's cool. I probably have some of that nostalgia bias myself.

99, if you count a Laughlin's Josh Gibson. No Oscar Charleston unfortunately.

That is an AMAZING stat.

Pedro was damn good. Definitely a top 100 in my book, #11? Maybe not in my book, but he was definitely a dominant pitcher during the PEDs era.

The one stat I liked about Pedro up until 2009 was that he was only the second pitcher to have over 200W's and less than 100L's. His 5-1 record in his last season pushed him to 100L (exactly). Ok, whose the only pitcher with over 200W's and less than 100L's (without Googling)?

Top 100 thoughts -

The one thing most people ignore in baseball stats is defense. Defense is a tough sell in a game where offensive stats are what people want to hear about. Looking at the list, you can tell where some players had their defense considered to be included in the top 100. Ozzie Smith at 69 tells you how good people considered his defense.

Spahn is the big omission for me of course. Not many baseball players with a career war over 100 and he’s on that list while giving up some prime years to WWII. Feels like he gets knocked for longevity sometimes. Easy to forget he led the league in WHIP a lot and threw two no-nos. Dominant.

Isn't Spahn #47 on the ESPN top 100?

I think what it comes down to is that it's a bad list, and we could point out absurdities for months.

David Ortiz is #63, Carl Yastrzemski is #61. I love Big Papi, but he's nowhere close to Carl.

Satchel Paige, who has a case for greatest pitcher of all-time, is just one spot ahead of Nolan Ryan, who had a .526 winning percentage and 112 ERA+.

Lefty Grove, who also has a case for greatest pitcher of all-time, is #54.

How did Ryne Sandberg get in the top 100? Same with Jim Palmer.

As a Yankees fan, I love Whitey Ford, but there's no way he's #60.

And am I the only one who thinks their rating of Negro League players is ridiculously low? Take Oscar Charleston, for instance. They have him rated #53. He had a career OPS+ of 184. Even if you multiply that by .9, that's still 166. In his prime years, 1920-27, he had an OPS+ of 206. Even if you account for the Negro Leagues probably not being as good as the major leagues, that's amazing.

Same with Josh Gibson.

The other aspect of that is that only three predominantly or exclusively Negro League players are even on the list. Maybe ESPN had an explanation but in this day and age especially, the list is surprising in this respect. Bill James btw had Charleson 4 Gibson 9 and Paige 17. Stearnes at 25. Lloyd at 27. Suttles at 43. And several others in the back 50.

I think you misread me...when I said towards the bottom that was a direction not saying he should be at the bottom.
To me both pitchers are top 30 MLB all time for sure and I have cards of both

Pedro is not top 20 for me at all...I would move Rickey Henderson (my favorite ballplayer) into top 20 before Pedro

Ryan I believe still holds over 50 MLB records that is a big reason why I move him up...in addition he has over 100 wins and over 2500 strikeouts more than Pedro