Greatest of all time

[chipperhank44]

This was an interesting question for me. As far as batters are concerned, I had a pretty definitive list in my head. That said, I am also from the school of thought that OPS is the greatest indicator of a batter's value. So I looked up the career leaders in OPS and found an interesting top 5. (and yes I realize that defense and steals are not accounted for in OPS, but defense is hard as hell to quantify and I never saw any of these guys with my own eyes so the eyeball test is out the window, I will focus on hitting)

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx (skipped Bonds)
5. Greenberg


Now I am looking at a top 5 list and saying to myself, really, Greenberg and Foxx in my top 5? So I consider the following question, aren't hits and steals combined just as valuable as a double, if not more so? So I do the following:

Ty Cobb has 3053 total singles in his career and 897 total stolen bases. Why not subtract the total stolen bases from the number of singles and give those hits plus singles the value of a double in the slugging percentage equation. So I do this, and it works out as follows.

Ty Cobb

Total 1B - 2156 (singles minus stolen bases)
Total 2B - 1621 (doubles plus stolen bases)
Total 3B - 295
Total HR - 117
Total AB - 11434

With these numbers, Cobb's career SLG% is elevated from .512 to .590. When combined with his career OBP of .433 you get an OPS (adjusted for steals) of 1.023, which is good enough for 5th place (excluding Bonds) on the all time OPS list.

I know there all holes in this logic, like the fact that every SB is not combined with a hit, many are after walks or HBP, but this was just my attempt to make OPS fair to the base thief. The ability to turn a walk, HBP, or single into a runner in scoring position is invaluable, so I had to account for it somehow. I'm sure if I added Greenberg or Hornsby's steals to their slugging calculation, they might overtake Cobb on the OPS list, but Cobb belongs IMO and this is how I reconciled it.

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx
5. Cobb


Not sure if this is a novel idea or if someone is going to tell me OPS adjusted for steals is already a thing, but either way, I like it quite a lot.

[Joshchisox08]

Originally Posted by chipperhank44

This was an interesting question for me. As far as batters are concerned, I had a pretty definitive list in my head. That said, I am also from the school of thought that OPS is the greatest indicator of a batter's value. So I looked up the career leaders in OPS and found an interesting top 5. (and yes I realize that defense and steals are not accounted for in OPS, but defense is hard as hell to quantify and I never saw any of these guys with my own eyes so the eyeball test is out the window, I will focus on hitting)

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx (skipped Bonds)
5. Greenberg


Now I am looking at a top 5 list and saying to myself, really, Greenberg and Foxx in my top 5? So I consider the following question, aren't hits and steals combined just as valuable as a double, if not more so? So I do the following:

Ty Cobb has 3053 total singles in his career and 897 total stolen bases. Why not subtract the total stolen bases from the number of singles and give those hits plus singles the value of a double in the slugging percentage equation. So I do this, and it works out as follows.

Ty Cobb

Total 1B - 2156 (singles minus stolen bases)
Total 2B - 1621 (doubles plus stolen bases)
Total 3B - 295
Total HR - 117
Total AB - 11434

With these numbers, Cobb's career SLG% is elevated from .512 to .590. When combined with his career OBP of .433 you get an OPS (adjusted for steals) of 1.023, which is good enough for 5th place (excluding Bonds) on the all time OPS list.

I know there all holes in this logic, like the fact that every SB is not combined with a hit, many are after walks or HBP, but this was just my attempt to make OPS fair to the base thief. The ability to turn a walk, HBP, or single into a runner in scoring position is invaluable, so I had to account for it somehow. I'm sure if I added Greenberg or Hornsby's steals to their slugging calculation, they might overtake Cobb on the OPS list, but Cobb belongs IMO and this is how I reconciled it.

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx
5. Cobb


Not sure if this is a novel idea or if someone is going to tell me OPS adjusted for steals is already a thing, but either way, I like it quite a lot.

Interesting way of looking at his singles to Stolen Bases. Though I'm sure a lot of Stolen Bases were to Third After a Double too or to Home after a Triple.

I like your interpretation of converting his stolen bases into doubles just not where you placed Cobb

[chipperhank44]

Originally Posted by Joshchisox08

Interesting way of looking at his singles to Stolen Bases. Though I'm sure a lot of Stolen Bases were to Third After a Double too or to Home after a Triple.

I like your interpretation of converting his stolen bases into doubles just not where you placed Cobb

Oh trust me, I think Cobb belongs at the top of the list, but was trying a purely statistical way of ranking hitters. I would have also had Aaron in my top 5. Tough to keep the HR champ and RBI champ off the list, but "greatest" can be based on a number of things, longevity vs dominance is a tough argument.

[Greg Sonk]

Ruth

Bonds
Cobb
Mays
Walter Johnson

I am so happy to see a lack of unobjective Jeteresque occurrences in these lists.

Originally Posted by chipperhank44

This was an interesting question for me. As far as batters are concerned, I had a pretty definitive list in my head. That said, I am also from the school of thought that OPS is the greatest indicator of a batter's value. So I looked up the career leaders in OPS and found an interesting top 5. (and yes I realize that defense and steals are not accounted for in OPS, but defense is hard as hell to quantify and I never saw any of these guys with my own eyes so the eyeball test is out the window, I will focus on hitting)

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx (skipped Bonds)
5. Greenberg


Now I am looking at a top 5 list and saying to myself, really, Greenberg and Foxx in my top 5? So I consider the following question, aren't hits and steals combined just as valuable as a double, if not more so? So I do the following:

Ty Cobb has 3053 total singles in his career and 897 total stolen bases. Why not subtract the total stolen bases from the number of singles and give those hits plus singles the value of a double in the slugging percentage equation. So I do this, and it works out as follows.

Ty Cobb

Total 1B - 2156 (singles minus stolen bases)
Total 2B - 1621 (doubles plus stolen bases)
Total 3B - 295
Total HR - 117
Total AB - 11434

With these numbers, Cobb's career SLG% is elevated from .512 to .590. When combined with his career OBP of .433 you get an OPS (adjusted for steals) of 1.023, which is good enough for 5th place (excluding Bonds) on the all time OPS list.

I know there all holes in this logic, like the fact that every SB is not combined with a hit, many are after walks or HBP, but this was just my attempt to make OPS fair to the base thief. The ability to turn a walk, HBP, or single into a runner in scoring position is invaluable, so I had to account for it somehow. I'm sure if I added Greenberg or Hornsby's steals to their slugging calculation, they might overtake Cobb on the OPS list, but Cobb belongs IMO and this is how I reconciled it.

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx
5. Cobb


Not sure if this is a novel idea or if someone is going to tell me OPS adjusted for steals is already a thing, but either way, I like it quite a lot.

I like this post so much and I don't even agree with some of the logic.

Sabermetrics are not a boogeyman come to carelessly toss away the history of the game, they are simply attempts to more accurately quantify performance. You had the logical thought that a weakness with OPS is its ignoracne of speed and set out to fix it.

For the record, if you're looking for something that accounts for speed in a similar way, check out wOBA. It's an excellent attempt to iron out the combined flaws of OPS, SLG, and AVG.

[howard38]

Originally Posted by chipperhank44

This was an interesting question for me. As far as batters are concerned, I had a pretty definitive list in my head. That said, I am also from the school of thought that OPS is the greatest indicator of a batter's value. So I looked up the career leaders in OPS and found an interesting top 5. (and yes I realize that defense and steals are not accounted for in OPS, but defense is hard as hell to quantify and I never saw any of these guys with my own eyes so the eyeball test is out the window, I will focus on hitting)

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx (skipped Bonds)
5. Greenberg


Now I am looking at a top 5 list and saying to myself, really, Greenberg and Foxx in my top 5? So I consider the following question, aren't hits and steals combined just as valuable as a double, if not more so? So I do the following:

Ty Cobb has 3053 total singles in his career and 897 total stolen bases. Why not subtract the total stolen bases from the number of singles and give those hits plus singles the value of a double in the slugging percentage equation. So I do this, and it works out as follows.

Ty Cobb

Total 1B - 2156 (singles minus stolen bases)
Total 2B - 1621 (doubles plus stolen bases)
Total 3B - 295
Total HR - 117
Total AB - 11434

With these numbers, Cobb's career SLG% is elevated from .512 to .590. When combined with his career OBP of .433 you get an OPS (adjusted for steals) of 1.023, which is good enough for 5th place (excluding Bonds) on the all time OPS list.

I know there all holes in this logic, like the fact that every SB is not combined with a hit, many are after walks or HBP, but this was just my attempt to make OPS fair to the base thief. The ability to turn a walk, HBP, or single into a runner in scoring position is invaluable, so I had to account for it somehow. I'm sure if I added Greenberg or Hornsby's steals to their slugging calculation, they might overtake Cobb on the OPS list, but Cobb belongs IMO and this is how I reconciled it.

1. Ruth
2. Williams
3. Gehrig
4. Foxx
5. Cobb


Not sure if this is a novel idea or if someone is going to tell me OPS adjusted for steals is already a thing, but either way, I like it quite a lot.

If you count a single followed by a stolen base as a double then you should also count a single followed by a caught stealing as an out instead of a hit. In Cobb's case that would probably be in the neighborhood of 400 fewer hits.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by chipperhank44

This was an interesting question for me. As far as batters are concerned, I had a pretty definitive list in my head. That said, I am also from the school of thought that OPS is the greatest indicator of a batter's value. So I looked up the career leaders in OPS and found an interesting top 5. (and yes I realize that defense and steals are not accounted for in OPS, but defense is hard as hell to quantify and I never saw any of these guys with my own eyes so the eyeball test is out the window, I will focus on hitting)



1. Ruth

2. Williams

3. Gehrig

4. Foxx (skipped Bonds)

5. Greenberg





Now I am looking at a top 5 list and saying to myself, really, Greenberg and Foxx in my top 5? So I consider the following question, aren't hits and steals combined just as valuable as a double, if not more so? So I do the following:



Ty Cobb has 3053 total singles in his career and 897 total stolen bases. Why not subtract the total stolen bases from the number of singles and give those hits plus singles the value of a double in the slugging percentage equation. So I do this, and it works out as follows.



Ty Cobb



Total 1B - 2156 (singles minus stolen bases)

Total 2B - 1621 (doubles plus stolen bases)

Total 3B - 295

Total HR - 117

Total AB - 11434



With these numbers, Cobb's career SLG% is elevated from .512 to .590. When combined with his career OBP of .433 you get an OPS (adjusted for steals) of 1.023, which is good enough for 5th place (excluding Bonds) on the all time OPS list.



I know there all holes in this logic, like the fact that every SB is not combined with a hit, many are after walks or HBP, but this was just my attempt to make OPS fair to the base thief. The ability to turn a walk, HBP, or single into a runner in scoring position is invaluable, so I had to account for it somehow. I'm sure if I added Greenberg or Hornsby's steals to their slugging calculation, they might overtake Cobb on the OPS list, but Cobb belongs IMO and this is how I reconciled it.



1. Ruth

2. Williams

3. Gehrig

4. Foxx

5. Cobb





Not sure if this is a novel idea or if someone is going to tell me OPS adjusted for steals is already a thing, but either way, I like it quite a lot.

Quit pretending like Bonds never played, geez.

He's a part of the games history, grow up and deal with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chipperhank44]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

Quit pretending like Bonds never played, geez.

He's a part of the games history, grow up and deal with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quit being ignorant and calling Bonds the greatest of all time and I'll consider it.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by chipperhank44

Quit being ignorant and calling Bonds the greatest of all time and I'll consider it.

Barry Bonds was better at baseball than any human being in the history of the sport.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Barry Bonds was better at baseball than any human being in the history of the sport.

Hard to argue against that. I personally would go with Mr Ted Williams as the best ever.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Ruth, but yeah if you are willing to count his years on juice Bonds has to be part of the discussion and is certainly up there in the top five and maybe as high as second.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by chipperhank44

Quit being ignorant and calling Bonds the greatest of all time and I'll consider it.

How is it ignorant? It's my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rats60]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

How is it ignorant? It's my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If he was any good, he wouldn't have needed to dope. He was ok with Pitt, but he went to SF and felt he needed to start doping in 1993 to be better. Clean it was questionable if he would have even made the HOF, like Roger Maris or Dale Murphy.

[obcbobd]

Originally Posted by rats60

If he was any good, he wouldn't have needed to dope. He was ok with Pitt, but he went to SF and felt he needed to start doping in 1993 to be better. Clean it was questionable if he would have even made the HOF, like Roger Maris or Dale Murphy.

He'd won two straight MVPs in Pittsburgh and led the league in OPS three straight years and was considered perhaps the best defensive LF ever. He was quite a bit more than OK.

Also, I thought the allegations are that he used steroids after the 1998 season.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by obcbobd

He'd won two straight MVPs in Pittsburgh and led the league in OPS three straight years and was considered perhaps the best defensive LF ever. He was quite a bit more than OK.

Also, I thought the allegations are that he used steroids after the 1998 season.

My information is that he began using after 1998 also. He was the only hitter I ever saw who made major league pitching look like slow-pitch softball--one broadcaster recently commented that he could never remember Barry even swinging and missing at a pitch! Too bad he was such an incredible jerk, though--he was the very last guy who could even hope to get away with using. I still don't know how to mentally compartmentalize these guys: Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, etc.--they were the very best of their era, with tons of guys doing the same thing--do you put them in the HOF???

What I'd like to see done will never happen: polygraph testing re whether or not they used PED's, which would be a prerequisite for getting on the HOF ballot. PED use would neither disqualify them from the ballot or admission, but if voted in, they would go in with the appropriate asterisk/notation on their plaques.

Just my two cents,

Larry

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by obcbobd

He'd won two straight MVPs in Pittsburgh and led the league in OPS three straight years and was considered perhaps the best defensive LF ever. He was quite a bit more than OK.

Best defensive LF means nothing. LF is where you put outfielders not good enough to play center or right. And Barry's noodle arm keeps him out of any "best defensive" anything discussion.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by obcbobd

He'd won two straight MVPs in Pittsburgh and led the league in OPS three straight years and was considered perhaps the best defensive LF ever. He was quite a bit more than OK.

Also, I thought the allegations are that he used steroids after the 1998 season.

Maris and Murphy won two straight MVPs, Bonds didn't. Leading in OPS is worth less when you stink in the post season .191/.329/.390 3rbi in 20 games. Bonds is probably the worst post season player ever. 6 of 7 times in the post season, his team lost the first series and Bonds was terrible. Even in 2002 doped up, he had a good postseason at the plate, but misplayed a Troy Glaus fly ball into a game winning double in game 7 of the WS.

As far as defense, no he wasn't that good. He is remembered for his poor throw that allowed Sid Bream to score the winning run in the 92 playoffs and his misplay in the 2002 WS. Like Derek Jeter, he won gold gloves because of his name.

Bonds claim is that he started using in 98, but it is obvious he started in 93. He hooked up with Greg Anderson and Balco after 98 season.