ESPN Top 100

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Kidnapped18

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

These three should be much lower towards bottom
11 Pedro Martinez

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"?

[RCMcKenzie]

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.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Tabe

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"?

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

[Fred]

Originally Posted by G1911

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

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.

[Robextend]

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

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Robextend

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.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by Tabe

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.

Good point on Brock, and I know if we are picking a team - we all want Bryce over Brock, but the career numbers do matter a bit. Those were three players that came to mind right away, probably could think of more I would want over Bryce.

[shagrotn77]

Foxx and Trout should switch places.

[Peter_Spaeth]

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.

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

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?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

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'. Oh and Ty Cobb's too please -- .262 was it?

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

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

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!

[felada]

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

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

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!

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.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by shoeless moe

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!

Best post in this thread by far....

[Belfast1933]

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.

[molenick]

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.

[luciobar1980]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

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.

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

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

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!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

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.

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

[Carter08]

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.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Carter08

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?

[John1941]

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.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by John1941

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.

[icollectDCsports]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

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.

How about Buck Leonard?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by icollectDCsports

How about Buck Leonard?

65 on James' list.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

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

My faith in humanity is restored and my reading comprehension is in question. I’m a Spahn defender but not sure I’d have him quite that high - I’ll take it!

[Misunderestimated]

Even when you have "experts" the players that People like and have the compelling narratives still over-perform.
Too high:
Pedro Martinez
Derek jeter
Mickey Mantle
Mariano Rivera
Pete Rose
Ernie Banks
David Ortiz
Joe Jackson (unless you credit him with years he didn't play after 1920)
Bryce Harper (not yet -- and Mookie Betts is better anyway)

Too Low:
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Cy Young
Oscar Charleston
Ivan Rodriguez
Tris Speaker
Eddie Collins

Omissions:
Bullet Rogan
Ed Delahanty
Mickey Cochrane
Smokey Joe Williams

[Kidnapped18]

Originally Posted by Tabe

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"?

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

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Kidnapped18

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

But, at the end of the day, do strikeouts matter all that much? Isn't the goal to not give up runs? Pedro was A LOT better than Ryan at that.

How can you ignore Pedro actually winning Cy Young Awards and Ryan not?

As for wins, I'll play along and ignore that they're an awful way to judge pitchers (as Ryan's 1987 season shows): Yes, Ryan has 105 more wins. He's also 87 fewer games over .500, with 173 more losses than Pedro. Martinez would have to go 105-173 - 68 games under .500, a winning percentage of .378 - to tie Ryan. So, if you take Pedro's career and add 12 years of 9-15 onto it, you get Nolan Ryan.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tabe

But, at the end of the day, do strikeouts matter all that much? Isn't the goal to not give up runs? Pedro was A LOT better than Ryan at that.

How can you ignore Pedro actually winning Cy Young Awards and Ryan not?

As for wins, I'll play along and ignore that they're an awful way to judge pitchers (as Ryan's 1987 season shows): Yes, Ryan has 105 more wins. He's also 87 fewer games over .500, with 173 more losses than Pedro. Martinez would have to go 105-173 - 68 games under .500, a winning percentage of .378 - to tie Ryan. So, if you take Pedro's career and add 12 years of 9-15 onto it, you get Nolan Ryan.

For all his records, Ryan ranks only 29th by JAWS. Petey is 12th. For all his longevity, Ryan is only 24th in WAR.

[Peter_Spaeth]

My more in depth disagreement list in addition to omission of Negro League players. Only noted serious disagreements.

89. Shoeless Joe Jackson TOO LOW
82. Eddie Collins TOO LOW
63. David Ortiz TOO HIGH
57. Pete Alexander TOO LOW
54. Lefty Grove TOO LOW
53. Oscar Charleston TOO LOW
46. Ichiro Suzuki TOO HIGH
41. Satchel Paige TOO LOW
36. Tris Speaker TOO LOW
35. Josh Gibson TOO LOW
32. Sandy Koufax TOO HIGH
31. Mariano Rivera TOO HIGH
28. Derek Jeter TOO HIGH
27. Roberto Clemente TOO HIGH
26. Alex Rodriguez TOO LOW
17. Roger Clemens TOO LOW
12. Honus Wagner TOO LOW
11. Pedro Martinez TOO HIGH

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

My more in depth disagreement list in addition to omission of Negro League players. Only noted serious disagreements.

89. Shoeless Joe Jackson TOO LOW
82. Eddie Collins TOO LOW
63. David Ortiz TOO HIGH
57. Pete Alexander TOO LOW
54. Lefty Grove TOO LOW
53. Oscar Charleston TOO LOW
46. Ichiro Suzuki TOO HIGH
41. Satchel Paige TOO LOW
36. Tris Speaker TOO LOW
35. Josh Gibson TOO LOW
32. Sandy Koufax TOO HIGH
31. Mariano Rivera TOO HIGH
28. Derek Jeter TOO HIGH
27. Roberto Clemente TOO HIGH
26. Alex Rodriguez TOO LOW
17. Roger Clemens TOO LOW
12. Honus Wagner TOO LOW
11. Pedro Martinez TOO HIGH

With that caveat that I'm unsure how to judge the Negro League guys, you and I are on the same page on all of the other guys you listed.

As mentioned above, ARod being just 2 spots higher than Derek Jeter is laughable. You could split ARod's career into two pieces by position and both careers would be top 30 - and still higher than Jeter.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tabe

With that caveat that I'm unsure how to judge the Negro League guys, you and I are on the same page on all of the other guys you listed.

As mentioned above, ARod being just 2 spots higher than Derek Jeter is laughable. You could split ARod's career into two pieces by position and both careers would be top 30 - and still higher than Jeter.

I guess I judge them based on received wisdom, a certain amount of statistical corroboration, and a baseline assumption of racial equality. Not as good as full stats I know.

[egri]

I don't like it when these sorts of lists are compiled with active players. The book on them is still being written, and all it takes is an injury or sudden drop-off to make the writer look foolish. If this was the early 1980s, the list would have Dale Murphy and Steve Garvey on there, and that would be a mistake.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by egri

I don't like it when these sorts of lists are compiled with active players. The book on them is still being written, and all it takes is an injury or sudden drop-off to make the writer look foolish. If this was the early 1980s, the list would have Dale Murphy and Steve Garvey on there, and that would be a mistake.

If a FB list had come out a month ago would you have objected to Tom Brady being on it?

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Tabe

If he didn't get hurt in 2017, he absolutely would have won the MVP that year as well.

Absolutely? Really? Would his .306 BA caught MVP Altuve's .346? Was he going to get that hot? Must be nice being psychic. Was he also going to hit 20 HRs in 40 games to catch 2nd place finisher Judge?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

Absolutely? Really? Would his .306 BA caught MVP Altuve's .346? Was he going to get that hot? Must be nice being psychic. Was he also going to hit 20 HRs in 40 games to catch 2nd place finisher Judge?

You do understand there are other metrics beside the counting numbers?

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You do understand there are other metrics beside the counting numbers?

Hey Cliff Clavin, wasn't talking to you.

Do you realize you don't have to make 20-30 posts on here per day.

Talk about counting numbers. Take a day off.


EDITED TO ADD: Baseball is ALL about the numbers. When Aaron was sitting on 714, did you happen to see the crowd? Or Maris when he hit 61. Or Ricky when he broke the all time steals record. I don't think you are going to see anyone in the stands on the last day of the season watching the WAR numbers. I watch and see baseball with my eyes, not a calculator!

Not to mention most of Trout numbers are done in meaningless games. Arn't you the same guy who criticized Kershaw's post season numbers. At least he's been in more than 3 playoffs losses Mr Wonderful has been. Hopefully now that he is the 2nd best player on his team the Angels could have their 2nd meaningful September in the last 20 years, so we can see what he can do when the pressure is on. If he's not on DL, yet again.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

Absolutely? Really? Would his .306 BA caught MVP Altuve's .346? Was he going to get that hot? Must be nice being psychic. Was he also going to hit 20 HRs in 40 games to catch 2nd place finisher Judge?

He was far and away the frontrunner for the award when he got hurt. He had a 7.2 WAR in barely 2/3 of a season. He led the league in OBP, SLG, OPS and OPS+. If he plays the full season, he likely ends up at 45 homers, maybe more, with a WAR of around 10.2 or so. Aaron Judge led the league that year with an 8.0.

So, yeah, absolutely he would have won it.

[luciobar1980]

Here are a few not on the list to at least discuss:

Mark McGwire (I know, I know)

Eddie Matthews (this one surprises me) whoops, never mind, he's there. One "T" Mathews !