So who was better ( Kaline or Clemente) ?
 

Kaline Clemente

WAR 92.9 94.8
Hits 3007 3000
HR 399 240
Bave .297 .317
R 1622 1416
RBI 1582 1305
SB 137 83
OBP .376 .359
SLG .480 .475
OPS .855 .834
AB 10,116 9,454

Some stats may favor Kaline because he batted 662 more times. But they seem very close in WAR,OBP,SLG and OPS. Both were very great defensive players.
I'll take both on my team.

It's interesting that the common perception is that Clemente was significantly better. Ask most people, I think, where they rank both players and I bet on average you would get Clemente 40-50 (or even higher, a poster here had him on his all time starting team) and Kaline 90-100. But the numbers suggest much more of a dead heat.

I’d pick Kaline, by just a hair though. They are very close by any honest assessment.

Clemente was great, and greatly overrated. The emotional narrative is strong, and he fits into a contemporary narrative, as a victim of his times and a great humanitarian with a heroic death. It doesn’t change actual performance, where one may reasonably come down on either side.

What really surprised me is that their slugging is only .005 apart.

Even leaving aside his death, Clemente had a LOT of charisma and was really a presence at the plate, my brothers and I as kids saw him in the 71WS in Baltimore and we thought we were watching God. There is also something to the notion that Forbes Field kept his HR numbers down some. Also, I think a lot of people (not Topps) admired him for being the first truly great (all respect to Minoso) Latin ballplayer, if I can still use that term.

Not Topps? I was hoping to get a dozen posts in before it became about race, but when did Topps say or do anything negative about the man? He went by Bob a lot and was not offended by it, as I recall from other threads.

I think it’s more a case of Kaline being under-rated, rather than Clemente being over-rated.

I’d say Kaline was better, but we are splitting hairs. Their defense was similar with Clemente having a better dWAR.

Fun fact: kaline won the Roberto Clemente award in 1973

https://fourcrickets.wordpress.com/2...emente%20hated.

This Bob vs. Roberto thing was always a point of contention for Clemente, whose Major League debut was in 1955. As a black person whose first language was Spanish, he faced a double dose of discrimination. The media and, obviously, the baseball card company Americanized his given name, calling him “Bob” or “Bobby” or even “Robby,” nicknames that Clemente hated. He had the audacity to insist on being called by his given name, Roberto.

Does anyone have any kind of primary source? I’ve read it both ways now. This blog seems awfully odd (“The card company printed “Bob” but his autograph says “Roberto,” and he’s wearing a triumphant look, and I imagine it all as Roberto’s small act of defiance against the purveyors of cardboard gods and stale, lethally-sharp sticks of pink bubblegum. Right on, Roberto.”) with an agenda. It was commonplace to use “bob”, if Clemente minded and was offended and needed to defiantly resist Topps, why did he keep signing contracts with Topps? Is there any primary source for Topps alleged racism and slandering of him?

You are absolutely right. I was watching an MLB game the other day and they were talking about cards and they mentioned the "Bob" name (put up example pics of the cards during the telecast) and how Clemente was offended by it and both announcers called it disgraceful.

From the Hall of Fame website.

Another practice of the media also upset Clemente. It did not involve his teammates, but rather had to do with his heritage and ethnicity. A number of writers and broadcasters insisted on calling Clemente “Bob” or “Bobby,” instead of his given name of Roberto. Even Clemente’s baseball cards listed him as “Bob Clemente,” a practice that persisted through the 1969 Topps set. Clemente did not like this practice, an effort at Americanizing him. He felt that it was disrespectful to his Puerto Rican and Latino heritage. When members of the media interviewed him and called him Bob or Bobby directly, he would correct them. “My name is Roberto Clemente,” he said repeatedly. In spite of his complaints, the practice of referring to Clemente as Bob, especially in print, would continue throughout the 1960s.

https://baseballhall.org/discover/ba...o-superstardom

I think that's probably right, although Bill James makes an interesting case that Clemente was somewhat overrated.

I have never read that Roberto was okay with being called "Bob"
I'd be interested to see where that idea came from.

As for who was the better player--I think it is difficult to make the case that Kaline was a better all-around player. Clemente is arguably the greatest fielding right-fielder ever. Tim McCarver was right when he said about Clemente "some right fielders have rifles for arms, but he had a howitzer."

Clemente led the league in assists by a right fielder five times (1958, 1960, 1961, 1966 & 1967, finishing in the top ten six more times), in putouts by a right fielder twice (1958 & 1961, finishing in the top ten 14 more times), double plays by a right fielder three times (1955, 1961 & 1967, finishing in the top ten 9 more times). Clemente won 12 gold gloves, the most of any RF ever, and tied with Willie Mays as the most by an Outfielder. He is also tied with Jesse Barfield with the highest dWar for a right-fielder with 12.2 (yes I know dWar is flawed, but still).

Clemente was a fantastic hitter, maybe just a hair below Kaline. As someone already pointed out, Clemente's career slugging was only 5 points below Kaline's (.480 to .475) and they were similarly close in OPS and OPS+. Although Kaline clearly had an edge on Clemente in power and walks (Clemente was a bad ball hitter), Clemente's lifetime batting average was 20 points higher than Kaline's.

Let's not discount Clemente having put the Pirates on his back and winning the World Series MVP in '71.

If baseball was only about hitting, Kaline would probably have the edge. But Clemente was a much better fielder than Kaline, and overall a better player.

As mentioned, I was at the WS games that were played in Baltimore in 1971. Obviously a small sample size, but his greatness was truly on display. My dad who had grown up a fan in New York and saw lots of DiMaggio and then Mantle was very enthusiastic about him.

A much better fielder ? Did you ever see Kaline play Right Field ? His arm was unbelievable, a line drive throw to Home Plate. Again I think they were both great outfielders. Clemente had 100's of outfield assists. I was surprised that Kaline had more SB's.

great thread and great conversation.

This thread has opened my eyes more about Kaline and everyone is right Clemente and his personality was larger than life.

It is real close but I would probably give it to Clemente.

Agreed. Al had 10 gold gloves and a great arm. I tend to like Kaline better simply because I grew up an American League guy. And yes Clemente had an awesome 1971 World Series, but don't forget that Kaline hit .379 with 2 HR and 8 RBI in his only World Series--in the last season of the higher mound during the year of the pitcher.

Clemente or Kaline?
 

Folks- my ID should give my vote away:) Truth is they are both incredible. Someone above said RC was “overrated”- right, good call (sarcasm font)…One additional Roberto stat that was true a decade ago, was that he is the only player to appear in at least 14 World Series games, and to hit safely in all of them. Don’t know if recent history has changed that. In other words, clutch…Roberto was great, absolutely NOT overrated, and same for Al Kaline. Trent King

One point that seems fairly obvious, but I don't know if it has been mentioned is Clemente's longevity.

Kaline played in 4 more seasons than Clemente, but was not a a very productive player after 1967. He never got above a WAR of 3 from 1968 through 1974, from age 33 through 39. In his final year, despite having over 600 plate appearances, Kaline slugged .389 and had a WAR of less than 1.

Clemente on the other hand had many of his best years from age 33 and onward. His average WAR from age 33 thru his last year at age 37 was 6.66.
If he could have just gotten over 4 for the next couple years, he would have ended up with a career war over 100, probably right behind Christy Mathewson with the 29th highest WAR ever.

Yes, Kaline was a more productive player than Clemente before age 25. But if Clemente hadn't passed away in 1972, his career stats could have been a lot stronger.

That someone was Bill James. I'll see if I can find his analysis. He rated Roberto somewhere in the 70s (as of 2003 so it would be lower now no doubt).

This may be hard to read given the format but this is James' general discussion of why he thinks people place too much importance on a right fielder's throwing arm.

https://books.google.com/books?id=3u...mente&f=falseI

Still looking for his Clemente specific thoughts.

That was me. He is. His reputation and fame and iconic player status are divorced from his actual performance. Which I called "great". Kaline is rated about right I think; Clemente is generally overrated. His actual production is not near his renown and reputation, where he's become probably a top 10 player. He has many fans, but fans are not the same as performance. I don't think a streak trivia stat is particularly relevant to honest analysis of career performance.

James rated Clemente 74th of all time in 2003. 20 years later, I imagine he would rate him 10 places lower. I wish I could find what he said, I don't have the book any longer. We could then have a meaningful discussion beyond the outraged declarations of how great he was. I am surprised no one has attempted a new take on James' 2003 book in the intervening years.

James 2003 book was what got me into the statistical side of baseball. I don’t agree with everything, but he is always insightful and unique in the approach. The amount of amusing trivia and anecdote in that volume is at least as good as the math.

Yes, for sure his views are just one more data point, although a pretty informed one.

I LOVED his explanation of why he was confident rating Josh Gibson so high despite the relative lack of reliable stats. It basically came down to, who in history has ever LOOKED more like a hitter. Brilliant, and probably true. Check out some of those great photos of Gibson in his flannels and it's hard to disagree.

In the Bill James book you linked to, Bill James ranks Clemente as the 8th best Righfielder of all-time. He ranks Al Kaline as 11th, so not quite in the top 10.

It is very difficult to find a source that ranks Kaline ahead of Clemente (other than this thread).

The Athletic top 100: Clemente at 40, Kaline at 51

Baseball Egg Top 100: Clemente 32, Kaline 42

ESPN Top 100: Clemente at 27, Kaline at 71 (the gap clearly shouldn't be that big, but I do think you can make a case for Clemente in the top 30).

SABR (from 1999) has Clemente 20, Kaline 59.

The Sporting News Top 100 (from 1998) has Clemente at 20, Kaline at 71

The one source I did find was this Bill James article from 2000 which ranks Kaline as 9 and Clemente as 11 for right-fielders. The fact that it lists Paul Waner ahead of both them though is a bit troubling.

One could say that top 100 lists are typically popularity contests, and to a certain extent they may be. But the Baseball Egg article follows a more quantitative formula. Note that Dan Holmes, the guy that runs the Baseball Egg site mentioned that he is going to be re-ranking the top 100 soon though, so the current ranking of Clemente at 32 and Kaline at 42 could change. I personally would rank them with Clemente around 35 and Kaline around 40.

I need to check Hall of Stats. Hmmmm, Clemente 35 Kaline 39.

I think, and it's merely conjecture, that Kaline having his career year at age 20 and then never quite sustaining that level of greatness, where Clemente scuffled a little his first few years and then became a model of consistency even into, what are for many players, his twilight years.

It just leaves you with a different feeling. Kaline was, for all intents and purposes done at 38. Nothing to be ashamed about, but those two last years tarnish how people remember him. Clemente died after his age 37 season hitting .312.

If Kaline had died after his age 37 Season, in which he hit .313, the "what ifs" would've been a huge part of our memory of him. Instead we know what happened. He got old.

Man that is close. I never saw either. Looking at stats I'd give the very slight edge to Clemente.

If you compare both from about age 32 on Clemente was still going strong Kaline best years were behind him.

Clemente - Kaline
AGE BA BA
32 .357 .308
33 .291 .287
34 .345 .272
35 .352 .278
36 .341 .294
37 .312 .313

Not that Kaline's BA is bad, he right around .300 for the most part......but Clemente at 32 and older puts up those All Time Greats (Williams, Cobb, Ruth) BA's .357, .345, .352, .341. Not once but 4 times.

To me that gives the edge to Clemente, as they were both great in their 20's.

I now see the Hall of Stats website with Clemente as 34 and Kaline as 38.

Sounds about right to me

Hey, not get all racist on everyone, but Clemente was Puerto Rican, and was aging like a fine wine, much like Jennifer Lopez.

Was I on an archived version? Odd. Not making it up.

I think the difference is your list has Pujols at 31, and the list I saw doesn't have any active players.

By the way, Hall of Stats ranks Clemente as the 5th best RF ever and Kaline just behind at 6:
http://hallofstats.com/position/rf

In other news, regarding another recent discussion about best catcher ever, Hall of Stats' top 20: 1) Bench 2) Carter 3) Fisk 4) I Rod 5) Piazza 6) Berra 7) Dickey 8) Hartnett 9) Buck Ewing 10) Mauer 11) Ted Simmons 12) Torre 13) Cochrane 14) Campanella 15) G. Tenance 16) Wally Schang 17) Posey 18) Charlie Bennet? 19) Munson 20) Bresnahan (Note that they rank Negro League catchers separately)

They were very even in the World Series also:

Kaline HR - 2, RBI -8, Bave . 379 OPS 1.055 In 7 games.

Clemente HR - 2, RBI - 7 ,Bave .362 OPS .918 In 14 games.

They played chess against each other 8 times and each won 4.

Dont know if I could choose between them both of them were loaded with class.
_

I think Clemente is the most obvious example of pure stats not showing everything...in his case not nearly everything.


The big difference, IMO, between Kaline's power numbers and Clemente's can be attributed to Clemente playing in Forbes Field for so long. If I'm remembering correctly (and that's a coin flip these days), Roberto was a line-drive, spray hitter and left-center and right-center in Forbes would be quite a poke!


I'll take Clemente eight-days-a-week and thrice on Sunday!



.

Loving the Hall of Stats love (my brother runs that site).

Also, a Clemente:

https://baseball-trivia-game.com/images/73_clemente.jpg

Very cool! Great website! And great card.

Thanks! Most people are shocked to find out that I'm only the SECOND biggest baseball geek in my family. :D

They were born in the same year, so about the same age throughout their careers. What I remember is that when the Tigers finally got into the World Series in 1968, Kaline wasn't even going to get regular playing time. He'd hit just .287 during the season, playing in 102 games (he never played in more than 133 games, from 1967 to 1973.) Manager Smith had to take the extraordinary gamble of moving his centerfielder, Mickey Stanley, to play shortstop, to manufacture a spot in the outfield for Al.

Meanwhile, Clemente, in the 1971 Series, hammered out 12 hits, batted over .400, and was the Series MVP.

I'll take Clemente.

By the way, despite his objections, he did sign his name "Bob" for Topps, at least once:

Roberto or Al?
 

To G1911-

Your entire reply to my comment is circular. How can a "great" player be
overrated? Ummm..he can't. And his "actual production" is a large part of
his HOF status- FOUR National League Batting Titles, .317 lifetime average,
defensive prowess, on and on (even the "trivia" about that little thing
called excellence in the World Series). When a player is being ranked by
various entities as somewhere between the 35th and 70th best players of
all time(!), out of a 5 figure pool of players, his "actual production"
MUST be incredible- we aren't discussing E sports heroes here.The renown
and reputation are just icing on a magnificent cake. Nice try, but you're
cornered by your own post. A player simply cannot be "great" with HOF
numbers, and somehow be "overrated". Trent King

PS- And Al Kaline was a bad man as well, no doubt.

Roberto or Al??
 

Almost forgot Mark17- I'm with you all the way! Trent King

This is false. It appears you are looking for "contradictory" (that claims are in complete discord) more than "circular" (that the argument leads into itself), which would be the case if I said "great" and "not great". A player can obviously be great, and overrated. There are levels to it. Babe Ruth is great, Frank Thomas is great. That does not make them the same, it does not mean that a player cannot be under or over rated. Everyone in the top 100 is great; they are not the same.

Obviously. That's why I called him great.

For the "actual production", yes. That's why I said he was great. Obviously. I do not subscribe to appeals to authority, something is not true or false because an authority says so. Otherwise, we would just take 1 of these rankings and nobody could disagree with it. This fallacy is not compelling.

What are you even talking about?

You are surely capable of being aware that this is not true. A player can be great and overrated. Like Jeter. Like Ryan. Like Clemente. His level of fame is not in acclaim with the math. It doesn't mean he wasn't a great player, but he's not at the very tip top as his popularity would suggest.

What are you even talking about?



People really need to grow up and stop getting upset and making absurd claims anytime they encounter an opinion that does not worship their idol. I love Gaylord Perry, he's probably my favorite of the 60's. That doesn't mean I have to overrate him and pretend he was the best in a matchup with another. That I like him doesn't stop me from being cognizant of the math and reality. I am confident others are capable of this simplistic realization.

Of course a great player can be overrated. I am not arguing Clemente is, just pointing out some have made that claim. If the objective evidence points to a player ranking (hypothetically) 50-60, yet public perception is 20-30, that great player is clearly overrated by many. I don't see any circular argument here. And yeah, I don't get the emotional defense either, nobody is insulting Roberto for god's sake, we're just trying to look at his career objectively and to contextualize it.

Roberto and Al
 

G1911- since you brought up the word “simplistic” and the notion of acting grown up, I’ll point out that you’ve provided your own shovel and dug the hole you are standing in. You’ve also (figuratively) provided a mirror to gaze into, when making snide comments about other people needing to grow up…people like you work hard to make distinctions without differences, parse words, and otherwise strain like mad to extricate themselves from foolish comments they made in a silly effort to appear erudite. In short, there’s a fair chance you’re not as clever as you believe you are. (By the way, the “E sports” comment was about gamers. You know, guys who are great at Madden but can’t actually throw a football. It meant that your commentary was an exercise in mental self gratification rather than legitimate reasoning. I’m stunned someone of your brilliance missed the reference). Trent King

I was always wondering how to compare these outfielders, because I could never figure out who the hell was better: (not listed in any particular order)

Frank Robinson
Roberto Clemente
Al Kaline
Carl Yastrzemski
Lou Brock
Hank Aaron

How much better was Aaron than Frank ? How much better was Frank than Kaline or Clemente ?

I think Brock and then Yaz bring up the rear there. I would rank Aaron very comfortably in first but no question Frank Robinson was a very great player, I would call him a tier ahead of Clemente and Kaline.

Roberto or Al
 

Peter Spaeth- I must point out, a bit tongue in cheek, that your defense of
G1911 is essentially a point in my favor. A couple pesky facts:

1) The original post was "Clemente vs Kaline", a compelling question.
G1911 went the "overrated" route, which was NOT the debate. I'm sure
one of you will provide superficial circumlocution to explain it away, of
course. The fact remains HE strayed, and I corrected him.

2) You won't get away with explaining away my reaction as "emotional". I
don't have a nurse handy, so I guess you'll have to decide whether to
believe me when I say my blood pressure hasn't risen one point during
this ridiculous exchange. For Roberto (and Al), the stats and facts speak
for themselves. Their career achievements are stupendous by any
measure.

And one observation:

I've noticed a cadre of folks on this site who really lack perspective on
player "greatness". If the rest of us mere mortals accepted their divine
logic, I'm fairly certain only Babe Ruth would be "rated" properly. Shleps
like Aaron and Mays should just be forgotten, they aren't number one.
Nolan Ryan? His trillion strikeouts and 7 no-nos are trifles, he isn't
actually "great". Rod Carew certainly can't be great, right? I mean, he
did get those SEVEN batting titles with a lifetime .328 average and 3000+
hits, but gosh darn it he never appeared in a Series. He MUST be overrated.

And a conclusion:

Maybe guys who wear tube socks up to their knees and couldn't hit a
pitched beach ball with a wash board, should save the sermons about
"overrated" Hall of Fame players for table talk during fantasy drafts.

Too mean? Who cares.

Trent King

ranking players
 

Jewish Collector- also an intriguing debate! I'd have to put Hank on top, he
was a production beast. One thing is sure though- I won't call any of them
"overrated" (yep, that was the hoop and the harm!). Trent King

Actually, if you read MY post #2, I was the first one who suggested the common perception of Roberto might be a bit higher than deserved. I don't see why this concept of a player possibly being overrated is so difficult for you. Or why you need to go on a sarcastic rant when nobody has suggested any of the players you named were not great. Anyhow, I don't need the aggravation, let me know if you want to discuss statistics in a dispassionate and objective way, otherwise have a nice evening.

You don't even know what circular means (it is "parsing words" to be familiar with the dictionary, apparently), yet it is "mental self gratification" for me to be literate and know basic words. That isn't brilliance, it's a bare minimum. You're upset about a post that says Clemente is great and that it's a toss-up pick. Nobody is dogging on Clemente at all. Obviously "Great" and "overrated" are not a contradictory scale. I am aware what e-sports is, but there is no relevance to the subject.

I swear almost every thread has some dipshit just finding the stupidest hot take that can be made and doubling down on it. Like this clown who doesn't even know what a contradiction or circular logic is trying to correct an opinion statement that is neither. Could have said "I disagree" and made a rational case, but of course that's not what happens.

At least figure out how to use the Quote button before embarrassing yourself further.

Kaline...close...but not that close to be honest.

You can say Clemente played his home games where he lost some HR...but not that much...Kaline was clearly ahead in R, RBI, HR & SB...not to mention his significant ailments.

Both had cannons...

If Kaline had died on the field...like he almost did... (Thank you Willie Horton)..I think you have the Munson/Clemente effect X2...

Roberto vs Al
 

Isiahfan- you are clearly entitled to an opinion on Robert vs Al. You chose
the wrong player, but that's not the point:)

If you are suggesting that Roberto Clemente and Thurman Munson basically
draw some sort of "collective sympathy" due to untimely deaths, you'd do
well to look at the numbers. Munson was on the path of a HOF career, while
Roberto had clearly completed one. Roberto was likely 1st ballot HOF material
absent the circumstances of his death, Munson was not. It's apples and
oranges. Trent King

Roberto vs. Al
 

Whoops, typo above due to early morning- "Roberto" not "Robert".
I am clearly an "overrated" typist, I made a mistake. Trent King

Roberto vs Al
 

G1911- ah, grammatical comments. If ever there was a sign that some
desperate asshat was losing an argument, that's it. Keep winning the internet,
1911, one keystroke at a time. Trent King

By the way, it didn't take long for you to lose that veneer of civility, did it?

Roberto vs Al
 

PeterSpaeth- you don't "need the aggravation"? Really? Looks like you
thrive on it. (Now THERE is an observation that isn't overrated). Trent King

PS- the notion of meaningful debate suggest I believe there is a topic worth
debating with you. I'm quite secure in my reasoning, thank you for the offer
though.

Trent King

Imagine if any of these guys played for the Yankees their entire careers... Robinson and Kaline would be looked at quite differently by collectors, for sure. And Aaron breaking the HR record of a former Yankee legend? It would've been nuts. Kind of fun to envision.

Does anyone know if Clemente ever commented on when he would retire? He was certainly going strong in his later years, way more than Kaline was. He only played 102 games in 1972. Was he becoming injury prone?

It certainly appears from his stats that Clemente could have easily played another 4 or 5 years, which would have put him at about 5th all-time in hits upon retirement in, say, 1977.

Those extra years would have caught him up to Kaline in plate appearances, and at that point would have likely put him at over 500 doubles and 3400 hits.

IMO

Hank was a higher level than the others, Brock a lower level than the others.

I would rank them this way:

Aaron


Clemente
F.Robinson
Yastrzemski

Kaline


Brock


.

Clemente stats of the day: 16 HR/162 games. Only 41 BB/162 games, with an OBP of only .359 despite the high BA. Joe Morgan's OBP, for example, was 33 points higher than Clemente's. I think this is where he suffers a bit in some of the analyses.

I never saw Clemente play but my dad's always described him as a kind of elite intangible player. He just did good things on the diamond that you had to see to know what they were.

In my lifetime, I think a player like Vlad might be a similar comparison. Vlad's career may not scream HOF or all time presence on the diamond, but when I saw him play I felt like he was the best player on the field.

I remember reading a fascinating column years ago about which players had "duende" (a Spanish word but the discussion was not at all specific to Latin players) and which did not. No doubt Roberto had it. I suppose one could endlessly discuss whether it's important or not.

I have a friend who's really into hockey and he says Gretzky was the same way. I know in Gretzky's case the intangibles show up in stats like goals and assists. But the point my friend likes to make about Gretzky is that he wasn't a physically gifted person. He was not fast. He was not big. He had nothing the other elite players did. What made him great was his ability to know what was going to happen before it did and to be in the right place at the right time, or be able to put the puck in the right place at the right time. But he always says nothing about Gretzky's body made him a good hockey player. There was something else there that other people don't have.

Clemente. Much cooler rookie card too.

It’s not grammatical. I ignored the poor grammar. You don’t know what key words you were trying to spin into an attack even mean, or the barest bones of basic logic. That’s not grammar.

You did not even start out civil, I hardly see how I owe that to every moron making absurd claims and getting outraged if their guy isn’t out on top. If you want civility, don’t make nutball replies. There is a full transcript in order. Go figure out how to click the “quote” button, it isn’t hard.

How about an auto to go with the thread:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...ac4877d1c5.jpg

Duende is an interesting word whether one considers the Iberian or Philippine origin and meaning. My research (Google plus a finger) has disclosed the images of two duendes:

Attachment 534465 Attachment 534466

Obviously Kaline and Clemente, but which is whom?:confused::confused:

1911- “physician, heal thyself”
 

Okay genius, here we go. I’m typing from my phone and have limited time, so factor that into your red pen on the homework tendencies: 1) you are ignoring the glaring reality that you couldn’t keep your butt cheeks together (and big mouth shut), and stay on the actual topic of the thread. You thought readers would benefit from your searing intellect and you whiffed. 2) my “guy” doesn’t always have to come out on top. I was utterly deferential to Kaline in the thread. It would not even cross my mind to demean his career. 3) you missed on the circular argument thing, partner. When your claim is “RC is overrated because I declare it”- while refusing to acknowledge any data or evaluations which call your conclusion into question!- you have drawn yourself a nice little circle and put yourself in it. It’s an extremely primitive and misguided one, but you did it-while unprovoked, actually. “My comment is correct because I am always correct” is a non starter. We don’t get to declare ourselves the all time winner, then tell others “I said it so it must be correct”. 4) I hope you retain a full time psychiatrist, you are a sad mix of bizarre and twisted behavior. In the event you don’t, I’ll recommend coming out of the basement at least once a day. It wouldn’t hurt to at least ponder the possibility that you’re not an omniscient final authority, as well. Small steps, 1911, small steps…. Trent King

It is the topic, Kaline vs. Clemente and their performance and ranking. You still don't even understand what was written or key terms (you chose to try to make it a logic debate) even mean. I have not made any appeal to authority, though you explicitly did. Can you even read the transcript, or is that as difficult as the Quote button? You can do nothing but screech complete falsehoods. Save yourself some dignity.

Roberto vs Al
 

Cool duendes, Frankbmd! New to me. Trent King

I think Bird is somewhat the same, what distinguished him was uncanny court sense and vision.

I am not stating that their unfortunate deaths increased their abilities....but it 100% added to their collectability...if you disagree with that not sure what else to say. If they had both been injured or retired instead of dying...on the same days....the interest/intrigue/collectability would maybe be high...not as high thouhg.

Roberto vs Al
 

Isiahfan- well, my remark about you siding with Kaline was just a joke, a friendly jab. Regarding your comment about the collectibility of their cards/etc, that’s from left field as none of the comments mentioned it. Roberto is clearly a high priority get for many vintage collectors, no doubt. I thought you meant that both Munson and Roberto’s manners of death were somehow related to their on field results, which I found strange. Debate doesn’t have to be contentious, right? Trent King

Yes, and it will send shivers up your spine. He said, in June of 1970, that he wanted to play until he got 3,000 hits.

Hear it in his own words:

http://vendiamo.com/Miley/Clemente.wav

As we know, he died with exactly 3,000 base hits.

Maybe an alternate take on things but I actually think Clemente's death hurt his overall collectability more than it enhanced it. Had Clemente lived, he would have seen the landscape of baseball change completely. Hispanic players are now a dominant force in Major League Baseball, particularly players from Puerto Rico and other surrounding islands.

It's my opinion and speculative (obviously) but I believe if Clemente had lived, his influence on today's game would be felt more and he would be closer to the make up of the league than he ended up being as a tragic hero.

I think he would be a Jackie Robinson-like figure if he had lived a full life and had enough time to comment on his experiences as the pioneer he was.

It is weird to think of certain players not having died young. Ruth easily could have lived well into the 1970s, and Gehrig well into the 1980s, for example. I mean, imagine Ruth being in the press box commenting on the 1975 WS, or Gehrig on the 1986 WS?

Was Clemente a guy who would have stayed involved with baseball, or would he have gone back home and lived an insular life?

It truly is a shame. So many of the hurdles have been removed that a guy like Clemente, had he lived, would have really been able to tell his story. The language barrier is almost non-existent now. Spanish is a colloquial language in America today and has been for quite a while.

He would have been far less of an enigma had he lived another few decades. Not just because he would been alive, but also because the landscape of America has changed so much.

I've read interesting stories about Vic Power, who I guess was roughly a contemporary of Clemente and Puerto Rican, apparently as a very young man he was considered a prospective superstar but the Yankees wanted no part of him because he dated white women.