whoknew
Footballguy
Another great blog post by Joe Posnanski
Best Players In Baseball
Posted: January 4th, 2010 | Filed under: Baseball | 23 Comments »
Well, my Hall of Fame ballot should be up at Sports Illustrated Tuesday … just in case you want to read 5,000 more words about the Hall of Fame from me.
In the meantime … this project was a lot of fun. I don’t know if it MEANS anything, but it was fun. I was doing my usual investigative mayhem to get a better feel for the Hall of Fame ballot, and I thought it would be worthwhile to come up with the best players in baseball since, say, 1970. I don’t mean the overall best players — I mean, who were the best players in baseball at any given time.
I think this should play a pretty big role in the Hall of Fame arguments. You will hear, quite often, something like this: “Well, Don Mattingly or Dale Murphy or Dave Parker or Andre Dawson or Jim Rice or Tim Raines may not have the career statistics or whatever, but for a time he was the best player in baseball.”
But is it true? Were these guys the best in baseball? Were they close to the best? Were they in the discussion?
So, here’s what I did: Using Bill James’ Win Shares — I suppose you could use some other statistic, if you like, but I like Win Shares — I added up the best players in baseball for every five year window from 1970 to now. Every window. That is, I added up from 1970-1974, from 1971-1975, from 1972-1976, etc. Why five years? Well, to be honest, it’s arbitrary. It could have been longer. If you want to do the same experiment for seven years or 10 years, you are welcome. I thought five was a pretty good number.
Generally, here is what I found (there will be plenty of specifics later, if you want them):
1. By Win Shares, there have been 11 players who qualify as the best players in baseball. Most of these will ring true to anyone — Bonds, Schmidt, Pujols, etc. — but there are a couple of surprises in the bag.
2. Beyond those 11, there are others players who I call “Close” or, in rare circumstances, “Very close.” These are players who were not the five-year Win Shares leader but were close enough to have a legitimate argument as the best player in baseball — after all, even Bill James doesn’t claim that Win Shares are ultra-precise. For instance, Alex Rodriguez never quite made it as the best player — thank you Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols — but he was close seven times. I think you could make a pretty strong argument that A-Rod was, at times, the best player in baseball.
You will notice that some years, nobody was close to the best player in baseball.
3. And beyond those who were close, I list off a bunch of players who did not lead in Win Shares and were not especially close. But I think they were “in the discussion.” That is: These were really good players who put up big Win Shares numbers. They might not be quite the best in baseball but they were good enough to spice up the conversation.
Fun, right? Here then, by my Win Shares calculations, were the best players in baseball the last 30 years … and the players who they beat out:
1970-74: Joe Morgan
Close: Pete Rose, Johnny Bench.
In the discussion: Bobby Murcer, Willie Stargell, Bobby Bonds.
Comment: You may ask yourself, how could the Cincinnati Reds have the three best players in baseball from 1970-74 and not win a World Series? Well, you know the answer to that: They did it so that this book could be written.
Notice Bobby Bonds on there — he was, by my calculations, close to the best player in the period just before I started this thing, from 1969-74. Pete Rose was the best player, Morgan second, Bonds third. So Bobby Bonds has a Hall of Fame peak case, I think. And his career case? I don’t know. He didn’t play 2,000 games and as such didn’t manage 2,000 hits.
But … you know Andre Dawson fans like to point out (as they should) that he is one of only three players to hit 400 homers and steal three bases — Dawson, Barry Bonds, Willie Mays. Well, Bobby Bonds is one of only TWO players to steal 400 bases and hit 300 homers — Bobby Bonds and Barry Bonds.
1971-75: Joe Morgan
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Rose, Stargell, Jackson, Bench, Murcer.
Comment: Even moderate Joe Morgan fans probably do not appreciate just how good he was from 1970-78. He was the best player in baseball all five periods, and nobody was especially most of those years. Notice Bobby Murcer is on the list again — he’s one of the more underrated players in baseball history.
1972-76: Joe Morgan
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Rose, Bench, Bobby Grich, Jackson, Rod Carew, Cesar Cedeno.
Comment: Morgan had 43 more Win Shares in those five years than anyone else in baseball — a truly stunning number. By Win Shares, Morgan from 1972-76 was better than anyone else the last 30 years … except Barry Bonds. You will, of course, notice Bobby Grich up there, speaking of underrated players.
1973-77: Joe Morgan
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Carew, Rose, Mike Schmidt, Jackson.
Comment: Schmidt makes his first appearance on the list — he’s will soon be dominating.
I was just curious — you probably know that Joe Morgan was elected to the Hall of Fame first ballot. You may not know (I didn’t) that he only got 80.8% of the vote. I mean, “only” is probably the wrong word — 81% of the Hall of Fame vote is a lot. But I do think that maybe Morgan was better than that. I think that’s probably why I think Morgan is underrated — everyone seems to know he was a great player. But he was more than a great player. He was a legendary player. Funny thing is: I’m not sure even Joe himself knows how good he really was.
1974-78: Joe Morgan
Close: Mike Schmidt, Carew.
In the discussion: Rose, Ken Singleton.
Comment: Well, we are, about to hit one of our first big surprises — just how good a player Ken Singleton really was. Shocked the heck out of me. I suspected he was wildly underrated. I know he walked a ton and hit for power. But, I never thought he was in the discussion for best player in baseball. And yet …
1975-79: Ken Singleton
Very Close: Schmidt, Dave Parker.
In the discussion: Morgan, George Brett, Rose.
Comment: There he is — Ken Singleton, best player in baseball. Wow. Now, to be fair, he’s only one WIn Share ahead of Schmidt and three ahead of Parker — so really it’s about a three way tie.
Still, he is ahead. He is our official best player in baseball. This is why I really believe it’s important, as baseball fans, to look back at players with a fresh eye and new approaches. Because Ken Singleton was wildly under-appreciated. He punched up a 152 OPS+ from 1975-79 — second only to George Foster. But he got about 200 more plate appearances than Foster, and his on-base percentage was about 50 points higher.
If you had told people in 1979 that Ken Singleton was better — markedly better in many cases — than Parker or Jim Rice or Dave Winfield or Steve Garvey, they would have called you nuts. Many of them still would call you nuts. But that doesn’t make it any less true. Ken Singleton played in a low-scoring era and in a bad hitters ballpark. And he did the things that win games — he got on base, which leads to scoring runs, which leads to winning games. It was that way 1912, and in 1958 and in 1979 and today.
1976-80: Mike Schmidt
Close: Brett
In the discussion: Singleton, Parker, Dave Winfield, George Foster.
Comment: The best two players in baseball — third basemen. That’s probably the only time that has happened in baseball history. But with Alex Rodriguez entrenched and Evan Longoria, Ryan Zimmerman, Pablo Sandoval and David Wright entering their primes, it will probably happen again.
1977-81: Mike Schmidt
Close: Singleton.
In the discussion: Brett, George Foster.
Comment: Singleton is still one of the best players in baseball — I do think about how long a player has to be either the best or in the discussion to be considered a Hall of Famer. I don’t know the answer … but Singleton has been at or near the top for eight seasons — 1974-81. I think that’s sort of a magic number — seven or eight years at or near the top, to me, makes for a compelling Hall of Fame argument.
1978-82: Mike Schmidt
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Brett, Eddie Murray, Gary Carter.
Comment: I have tried in the past as — as a loyal Kansas Citian and as someone who has spent a lot of time with George Brett — to make the argument that George Brett was better than Mike Schmidt. That argument is built around …
1. Brett consistent ability to rise to the occasion. We all know that the “ability” to hit in the clutch is a controversial topic, but it is simply fact that Brett, in his career: (A) Hit the three-run homer that tied the game in ‘76 — leading to Chris Chambliss’ theatrics; (B) Hit three homers in a playoff game; © Hit the massive home run off of Goose Gossage which sent the Royals to their first World Series; (D) Had one of the greatest playoff games in baseball history against Toronto in 1985 — four-for-four, two homers, double, remarkable defensive play; (E) Hit home run that gave Royals the lead against Toronto in decisive game; (F) Hit .375 and .370 in his two World Series. That’s pretty good.
2. Brett was the emotional leader of the Royals, everyone understood that. Schmidt was not an emotional leader.
3. Brett played in a crummy home run park so his numbers did not always pop like Schmidt’s did. But for a career, Brett hit 1,119 extra base hits to Schmidt’s 1,115. Brett was the most balanced hitter of his era, one of the most balanced of all time.
But I can see now … Schmidt was better. My arguments are mostly based on emotion. And, sure, emotion is a part of things. But Schmidt was the superior fielder, and he walked so much that he got on base more that Brett despite the difference in their batting averages. His consistency is staggering. And here’s the big difference: Schmidt just PLAYED a lot more than Brett. Schmidt played 150 games ten times in his career, and was close to 150 three other times. Brett played 150 only five times. He was constantly fighting injuries, especially in the later years of his career. At his best — in 1979, 1980, 1985 — I say he was Schmidt’s equal. But Schmidt was at his best more often.
1979-83: Mike Schmidt
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Brett, Murray, Andre Dawson, Robin Yount, Rickey Henderson.
Here is Andre Dawson’s one year in the best player in baseball discussion. In these five years, he twice finished second in the MVP voting, won Gold Gloves in center field four of the five years and hit .around .300 four of the five years as well. He really was some kind of player … one of his Hall of Fame issues for me is that he was not a great player after 1983. His knees gave out, and he was moved to right field. He more or less stopped stealing bases. His power numbers dwindled too until he resurged at Wrigley Field in 1987, led the league in homers and RBIs and won the MVP award. I don’t think he was a great player that year, though — he only had 20 Win Shares and did not get on base much. Anyway, I have a more in-depth Hall of Fame thought coming on Dawson …
1980-84: Mike Schmidt
Close: Henderson
In the discussion: Yount, Murray, Dale Murphy, Carter.
And Dale Murphy makes his first of four appearances on our list.
1981-85: Mike Schmidt
Very close: Rickey Henderson.
Close: Murray, Murphy.
In the discussion: Tim Raines, Yount, Carter, Pedro Guerrero.
Just three Win Shares separated Schmidt and Henderson.
1982-86: Mike Schmidt
Close: Henderson, Murphy, Raines
In the discussion: Cal Ripken, Wade Boggs.
Mike Schmidt had 155 Win Shares over those five years — and Henderson, Murphy and Raines all had 150. I think you could make a viable argument for any of the four as best player in baseball. I would make an argument for Dale Murphy as the best … more on that in the Hall of Fame story.
1983-87: Tim Raines
Very Close: Wade Boggs
Close: Murphy
In the discussion: Ripken, Schmidt, Henderson, Keith Hernandez.
One win share separated Raines from Boggs … Keith Hernandez was a great player in the mid-1980s.
1984-88: Wade Boggs
Close: Raines
In the discussion: Don Mattingly, Henderson, Tony Gwynn.
There’s Don Mattingly — lots of people remember Mattingly as the best player in baseball over that time period. He was great. But did you know that Darryl Strawberry had a better OPS+ during those five years? Sixteen players had a better on-base percentage. Mattingly was a stud … a high-average slugger who played a slick first base. I think he’s in the discussion for best player of the late 1980s, absolutely, but he didn’t walk and he did play the easiest defensive position on the field. I’ll just say, I think he was Top 5.
1985-89: Wade Boggs
Close: Raines.
In the discussion: Mattingly, Henderson, Puckett, Gwynn.
What was Wade Boggs greatest season? Was it the year he hit .368 and led the league with 240 hits? Was it the year he hit .363 and led the league in OPS+? Was it the year he hit .366 and led the league in runs scored? Was it the year he hit .357 and also led the league in walks? Hard to pick.
Interesting tidbit: Boggs in his career hit .354 at home … .302 on the road.
1986-90: Wade Boggs
Close: Will Clark, Henderson.
In the discussion: Kirby Puckett, Yount.
We’re about to enter our second surprise … or anyway a surprise to me. Was Will Clark the best player in baseball?
1987-91: Will Clark
Close: Barry Bonds.
In the discussion: Henderson, Boggs, Ryne Sandberg.
The thing I like about OPS+ is that, at a glance, it gives you a little perspective about the time and place of the player. For instance — pick an OPS. Any OPS. How about .793?
OK, Pete Rose had a .793 OPS in 1971. George Brett had a .793 OPS in 1989. Curt Flood had the .793 OPS in 1967, Al Kaline in 1969, Homer Summa in 1923, Jermaine Dye in 2004 and again in 2009, Juan Pierre in 2001, Cleon Jones in 1968, Charlie Grimm, 1925. Were these seasons the same? Of course not. Were these seasons SIMILAR? Of course not.
Cleon Jones, 1968: 136 OPS+
Pete Rose, 1971: 130 OPS+
Curt Flood, 1967: 128 OPS+
Al Kaline, 1969: 116 OPS+
Homer Summa, 1923: 108 OPS+
Jermaine Dye, 2004: 105 OPS+
Jermaine Dye, 2009: 103 OPS+
Charlie Grimm, 1925: 100 OPS+
Juan Pierre, 2001: 89 OPS+
So Cleon Jones in ‘68 had a huge year. Juan Pierre in 2001 was well below average. Curt Flood was an MVP candidate in 1967, Jermaine Dye was just about league average. OPS+ has its flaws, of course — several flaws — but if you just want to tell how good a season someone had based on a quick glance, it is pretty effective I think.
What does this have to do with Will Clark? Well, here are Will Clark’s traditional numbers from 1987-91:
1987: .308, 35 HRs, 91 RBIs, 89 runs.
1988: .282, 29, 109 RBIs, 102 runs
1989: .333, 23, 111 RBIs, 104 runs
1990: .295, 19, 95 RBIs, 91 runs
1991: .301, 29, 116 RBIs, 84 runs
So what do you think? Good numbers, right? I mean, they don’t pop your eyes out or anything — if you were judging Clark’s Hall of Fame case, those numbers would probably register as being good but nothing historically special.
So how is it that those numbers made Clark the best player in baseball for those five years? Well, for one thing, he played half his games in awful hitting Candlestick Park. For another, it was a low-scoring time — those 109 RBIs in 1988 led the league as did those 104 runs he scored in 1989.
Then, you add that he did a lot of things that are not reflected in the traditional stats. He walked quite often — led the league in walks in 1988. Twice in the five-year stretch, he led the league in times on base and in runs created. He led the league in equivalent average in 1988, was second in 1989 and third in 1991. He was an above average defensive first baseman.
People often talk about how it can be unfair to judge previous players by today’s standards. But I think it’s unfair that some of the players who did the things that helped teams win baseball games were so under-appreciated. Will Clark had baseball’s best OPS+ from 1987-91 too.
1988-92: Will Clark
Close: Barry Bonds
In the discussion: Sandberg, Henderson
One more year on top for Clark … four Win Shares ahead of Barry. But Barry will dominate the next decade and a half.
1989-93: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Clark, Sandberg, Henderson.
Young Barry was 40 Win Shares better than any player in baseball.
1990-94: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Frank Thomas, Ken Griffey Jr.
And Young Barry was 50 Win Shares better that anyone … it’s funny because I distinctly remember that at the time most people would have said that Ken Griffey was the best player in baseball. In retrospect, Griffey was obviously a great player — and he played center field. But Bonds did everything a little bit better (except throw).
1991-95: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Thomas, Craig Biggio, Greg Maddux.
Pitchers are rarely in the discussion for best player in baseball simply because they just don’t get the innings. Even Pedro Martinez, who was as dominant as any pitcher ever, did not get the innings to get a lot of Win Shares. Now, Old Hoss Radbourn — he got the innings. In 1884, he put up 89 Win Shares. Just that one year. That will happen when you throw 678 innings.
1992-96: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Thomas, Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell, Greg Maddux.
All Barry, all the time.
You know, I guess I never really considered that Houston from 1991 to 2000 had two of the four or five best players in baseball — the only two players, as you will see, who take the top spot away from Barry Bonds — and yet the Astros never even made it to the NLCS. And the Astros had good pitching much of the decade.
1993-97: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Thomas, Biggio, Mike Piazza, Bagwell, Maddux, Albert Belle.
Every so often I hear someone ask: “Is Frank Thomas a Hall of Famer?” Are you kidding? Frank Thomas’ first full seven years — .330/.452/.604 with OPS+ of 182. I want to repeat that — an OPS+ of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY TWO. Just as an example …
First seven full years:
Frank Thomas: 182
Mickey Mantle: 181
Albert Pujols: 167
Willie Mays: 164
Barry Bonds: 160
Joe DiMaggio: 159
To give you an idea, Roberto Clemente, Al Kaline, Hank Greenberg, and a 100 other Hall of Famers never ONCE had an OPS+ of 182 in a season. Frank Thomas is one of the best hitters in baseball history.
1994-98: Barry Bonds
Close: Biggio
In the discussion: Piazza, Bagwell, Thomas, Belle.
It’s interesting watching Bonds career — he was very clearly the best player in baseball in the ten year period from 1989-98. I mean if you are being realistic, nobody was even close. And then, right around this time, things shifted. McGwire and Sosa had their home run race. And players like Biggio and Bagwell and Piazza were closing in on Barry’s dominance.
Decisions are always more complicated than we tend to make them, but you could certainly understand Barry right around this time going: “OK, this is ridiculous. I am the best player in baseball. And if people don’t believe me … well, I’ll give them a show they’ll never forget.” And, like him or not, he definitely did that.
1995-99: Craig Biggio
Very Close: Bonds
Close: Bagwell, Piazza, Mark McGwire.
In the discussion: Belle, Bernie Williams, Thomas.
I’ve mentioned this before: I love Biggio’s 1997 season. He played every game. He hit .309. He walked 84 times. He led the league in getting hit by pitch (34 times!). He stole 47 bases. He slugged .500. He led the league in times on base and runs scored. And he did not hit into a single double play.
1996-00: Jeff Bagwell
Close: Bonds, Piazza, Griffey Jr.
In the discussion: Biggio, Alex Rodriguez, McGwire, Thomas, Sheffield.
For six straight years, Jeff Bagwell walked 100 times, scored 100 runs, drove in 100 RBIs and had 300 total bases. Nobody else ever did that — except Ted Williams, if you count as consecutive the years before and after his service in World War II. And you should count those … so Williams and Bagwell are the only two to ever pull that off six straight years.
1997-01: Barry Bonds
Close: Bagwell
In the discussion: A-Rod, Jason Giambi, Sammy Sosa, Piazza, Biggio, Chipper Jones.
A-Rod will be either close to the best or in the discussion every single year until the present. But he will never quite make it to the top.
1998-02: Barry Bonds
Close: Giambi, A-Rod, Sosa.
In the discussion: Chipper, Bagwell, Sheffield, Manny Ramirez, Bernie Williams, Jeff Kent, Derek Jeter.
You know, Jason Giambi did not seem to show great plate discipline when he was a young player. He walked a fair amount in the minors, but in his first three years he walked only 134 times in 336 games — which was nothing special. But in 1998, he started to walk and his on-base percentage jumped up 20 points, and apparently he liked it. From 1999-2005, he averaged 107 walks per year — led the league four times — and his on-base percentage was .436.
1999-03: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Jason Giambi, Alex Rodriguez, Sosa, Sheffield, Chipper.
Barry Bonds in those five years: .322/.497/.748 with a 223 OPS+.
2000-04: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: A-Rod.
Even A-Rod is only barely in the discussion. Barry Bonds for these five years: .339/.535/.781 with a 241 OPS+ and 306 intentional walks.
2001-2005: Albert Pujols
Close: Barry Bonds, A-Rod.
In the discussion: Sheffield, Todd Helton, Bobby Abreu, MannyBManny.
Bonds only played 14 games in 2005 and he STILL was the clear winner in total Win Shares. But the idea is to get the best player over the five years, and that was Pujols by a length over A-Rod. Pujols takes over now as the best player in baseball.
2002-06: Albert Pujols
Close: Bonds, A-Rod.
In the discussion: MannyBManny, Abreu, Helton, Lance Berkman.
Bill James said 30 Win Shares makes for an MVP type season — Pujols has had more than 30 Win Shares every single season from 2002 to present.
2003-2007: Albert Pujols
Close: A-Rod.
In the discussion: Carlos Beltran, Bonds, Helton, Abreu.
The most underrated player of our era is, of course, Bobby Abreu. He’s underrated for many of the same reasons that players like Ken Singleton are underrated. He does underrated things. Abreu’s batting averages are good — he has hit .299 for his career — but his on-base percentages are off the charts because he walks 100 times every year. He doesn’t hit a lot of home runs — between 20 and 30 in his prime, less the last few years — but he hits a lot of doubles and led the league in triples one year. He has a reputation as a guy who is afraid of the wall — and he is not an especially good outfielder — but he is the only player in baseball to play 150 or more games every single year since 1998. Attendance is underrated.
He has never put up a huge RBI season, but has put up between 100 and 110 eight times. He has never led the league in runs scored, but he has scored 100 eight times. He is an intensely boring player to watch — foul ball, take a pitch outside, take a pitch inside, foul ball, foul ball — but he’s brutally effective.
2004-2008: Albert Pujols
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: A-Rod, Berkman, Beltran, Miggy Cabrera, Mark Teixeira.
Not that this is too important but it’s something I didn’t know it: Lance Berkman has hit more home runs on the road than he has at home. That’s interesting. Of course, it’s interesting how Enron/Minute Maid Field has gone from an extreme hitters park to a neutral park to even something of a pitchers park over the last decade or so.
2005-2009: Albert Pujols
Close: A-Rod, Chase Utley.
In the discussion: David Wright, Cabrera, Joe Mauer.
And that brings us up to the present day. Pujols is still very clearly the best player in the game, I think. But Utley and Mauer are definite candidates over the next couple of years, and so is a guy not quite on this list: Hanley Ramirez. In fact, here is the projection for the best player in baseball after the 2010 season.
2006-2010 (Projected): Albert Pujols.
Close: Hanley Ramirez, Chase Utley, Joe Mauer.
In the discussion: Prince Fielder, Lance Berkman, Adrian Gonzalez, Cabrera, Ichiro Suzuki, A-Rod, Wright, Ryan Howard.
Best Players In Baseball
Posted: January 4th, 2010 | Filed under: Baseball | 23 Comments »
Well, my Hall of Fame ballot should be up at Sports Illustrated Tuesday … just in case you want to read 5,000 more words about the Hall of Fame from me.
In the meantime … this project was a lot of fun. I don’t know if it MEANS anything, but it was fun. I was doing my usual investigative mayhem to get a better feel for the Hall of Fame ballot, and I thought it would be worthwhile to come up with the best players in baseball since, say, 1970. I don’t mean the overall best players — I mean, who were the best players in baseball at any given time.
I think this should play a pretty big role in the Hall of Fame arguments. You will hear, quite often, something like this: “Well, Don Mattingly or Dale Murphy or Dave Parker or Andre Dawson or Jim Rice or Tim Raines may not have the career statistics or whatever, but for a time he was the best player in baseball.”
But is it true? Were these guys the best in baseball? Were they close to the best? Were they in the discussion?
So, here’s what I did: Using Bill James’ Win Shares — I suppose you could use some other statistic, if you like, but I like Win Shares — I added up the best players in baseball for every five year window from 1970 to now. Every window. That is, I added up from 1970-1974, from 1971-1975, from 1972-1976, etc. Why five years? Well, to be honest, it’s arbitrary. It could have been longer. If you want to do the same experiment for seven years or 10 years, you are welcome. I thought five was a pretty good number.
Generally, here is what I found (there will be plenty of specifics later, if you want them):
1. By Win Shares, there have been 11 players who qualify as the best players in baseball. Most of these will ring true to anyone — Bonds, Schmidt, Pujols, etc. — but there are a couple of surprises in the bag.
2. Beyond those 11, there are others players who I call “Close” or, in rare circumstances, “Very close.” These are players who were not the five-year Win Shares leader but were close enough to have a legitimate argument as the best player in baseball — after all, even Bill James doesn’t claim that Win Shares are ultra-precise. For instance, Alex Rodriguez never quite made it as the best player — thank you Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols — but he was close seven times. I think you could make a pretty strong argument that A-Rod was, at times, the best player in baseball.
You will notice that some years, nobody was close to the best player in baseball.
3. And beyond those who were close, I list off a bunch of players who did not lead in Win Shares and were not especially close. But I think they were “in the discussion.” That is: These were really good players who put up big Win Shares numbers. They might not be quite the best in baseball but they were good enough to spice up the conversation.
Fun, right? Here then, by my Win Shares calculations, were the best players in baseball the last 30 years … and the players who they beat out:
1970-74: Joe Morgan
Close: Pete Rose, Johnny Bench.
In the discussion: Bobby Murcer, Willie Stargell, Bobby Bonds.
Comment: You may ask yourself, how could the Cincinnati Reds have the three best players in baseball from 1970-74 and not win a World Series? Well, you know the answer to that: They did it so that this book could be written.
Notice Bobby Bonds on there — he was, by my calculations, close to the best player in the period just before I started this thing, from 1969-74. Pete Rose was the best player, Morgan second, Bonds third. So Bobby Bonds has a Hall of Fame peak case, I think. And his career case? I don’t know. He didn’t play 2,000 games and as such didn’t manage 2,000 hits.
But … you know Andre Dawson fans like to point out (as they should) that he is one of only three players to hit 400 homers and steal three bases — Dawson, Barry Bonds, Willie Mays. Well, Bobby Bonds is one of only TWO players to steal 400 bases and hit 300 homers — Bobby Bonds and Barry Bonds.
1971-75: Joe Morgan
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Rose, Stargell, Jackson, Bench, Murcer.
Comment: Even moderate Joe Morgan fans probably do not appreciate just how good he was from 1970-78. He was the best player in baseball all five periods, and nobody was especially most of those years. Notice Bobby Murcer is on the list again — he’s one of the more underrated players in baseball history.
1972-76: Joe Morgan
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Rose, Bench, Bobby Grich, Jackson, Rod Carew, Cesar Cedeno.
Comment: Morgan had 43 more Win Shares in those five years than anyone else in baseball — a truly stunning number. By Win Shares, Morgan from 1972-76 was better than anyone else the last 30 years … except Barry Bonds. You will, of course, notice Bobby Grich up there, speaking of underrated players.
1973-77: Joe Morgan
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Carew, Rose, Mike Schmidt, Jackson.
Comment: Schmidt makes his first appearance on the list — he’s will soon be dominating.
I was just curious — you probably know that Joe Morgan was elected to the Hall of Fame first ballot. You may not know (I didn’t) that he only got 80.8% of the vote. I mean, “only” is probably the wrong word — 81% of the Hall of Fame vote is a lot. But I do think that maybe Morgan was better than that. I think that’s probably why I think Morgan is underrated — everyone seems to know he was a great player. But he was more than a great player. He was a legendary player. Funny thing is: I’m not sure even Joe himself knows how good he really was.
1974-78: Joe Morgan
Close: Mike Schmidt, Carew.
In the discussion: Rose, Ken Singleton.
Comment: Well, we are, about to hit one of our first big surprises — just how good a player Ken Singleton really was. Shocked the heck out of me. I suspected he was wildly underrated. I know he walked a ton and hit for power. But, I never thought he was in the discussion for best player in baseball. And yet …
1975-79: Ken Singleton
Very Close: Schmidt, Dave Parker.
In the discussion: Morgan, George Brett, Rose.
Comment: There he is — Ken Singleton, best player in baseball. Wow. Now, to be fair, he’s only one WIn Share ahead of Schmidt and three ahead of Parker — so really it’s about a three way tie.
Still, he is ahead. He is our official best player in baseball. This is why I really believe it’s important, as baseball fans, to look back at players with a fresh eye and new approaches. Because Ken Singleton was wildly under-appreciated. He punched up a 152 OPS+ from 1975-79 — second only to George Foster. But he got about 200 more plate appearances than Foster, and his on-base percentage was about 50 points higher.
If you had told people in 1979 that Ken Singleton was better — markedly better in many cases — than Parker or Jim Rice or Dave Winfield or Steve Garvey, they would have called you nuts. Many of them still would call you nuts. But that doesn’t make it any less true. Ken Singleton played in a low-scoring era and in a bad hitters ballpark. And he did the things that win games — he got on base, which leads to scoring runs, which leads to winning games. It was that way 1912, and in 1958 and in 1979 and today.
1976-80: Mike Schmidt
Close: Brett
In the discussion: Singleton, Parker, Dave Winfield, George Foster.
Comment: The best two players in baseball — third basemen. That’s probably the only time that has happened in baseball history. But with Alex Rodriguez entrenched and Evan Longoria, Ryan Zimmerman, Pablo Sandoval and David Wright entering their primes, it will probably happen again.
1977-81: Mike Schmidt
Close: Singleton.
In the discussion: Brett, George Foster.
Comment: Singleton is still one of the best players in baseball — I do think about how long a player has to be either the best or in the discussion to be considered a Hall of Famer. I don’t know the answer … but Singleton has been at or near the top for eight seasons — 1974-81. I think that’s sort of a magic number — seven or eight years at or near the top, to me, makes for a compelling Hall of Fame argument.
1978-82: Mike Schmidt
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Brett, Eddie Murray, Gary Carter.
Comment: I have tried in the past as — as a loyal Kansas Citian and as someone who has spent a lot of time with George Brett — to make the argument that George Brett was better than Mike Schmidt. That argument is built around …
1. Brett consistent ability to rise to the occasion. We all know that the “ability” to hit in the clutch is a controversial topic, but it is simply fact that Brett, in his career: (A) Hit the three-run homer that tied the game in ‘76 — leading to Chris Chambliss’ theatrics; (B) Hit three homers in a playoff game; © Hit the massive home run off of Goose Gossage which sent the Royals to their first World Series; (D) Had one of the greatest playoff games in baseball history against Toronto in 1985 — four-for-four, two homers, double, remarkable defensive play; (E) Hit home run that gave Royals the lead against Toronto in decisive game; (F) Hit .375 and .370 in his two World Series. That’s pretty good.
2. Brett was the emotional leader of the Royals, everyone understood that. Schmidt was not an emotional leader.
3. Brett played in a crummy home run park so his numbers did not always pop like Schmidt’s did. But for a career, Brett hit 1,119 extra base hits to Schmidt’s 1,115. Brett was the most balanced hitter of his era, one of the most balanced of all time.
But I can see now … Schmidt was better. My arguments are mostly based on emotion. And, sure, emotion is a part of things. But Schmidt was the superior fielder, and he walked so much that he got on base more that Brett despite the difference in their batting averages. His consistency is staggering. And here’s the big difference: Schmidt just PLAYED a lot more than Brett. Schmidt played 150 games ten times in his career, and was close to 150 three other times. Brett played 150 only five times. He was constantly fighting injuries, especially in the later years of his career. At his best — in 1979, 1980, 1985 — I say he was Schmidt’s equal. But Schmidt was at his best more often.
1979-83: Mike Schmidt
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Brett, Murray, Andre Dawson, Robin Yount, Rickey Henderson.
Here is Andre Dawson’s one year in the best player in baseball discussion. In these five years, he twice finished second in the MVP voting, won Gold Gloves in center field four of the five years and hit .around .300 four of the five years as well. He really was some kind of player … one of his Hall of Fame issues for me is that he was not a great player after 1983. His knees gave out, and he was moved to right field. He more or less stopped stealing bases. His power numbers dwindled too until he resurged at Wrigley Field in 1987, led the league in homers and RBIs and won the MVP award. I don’t think he was a great player that year, though — he only had 20 Win Shares and did not get on base much. Anyway, I have a more in-depth Hall of Fame thought coming on Dawson …
1980-84: Mike Schmidt
Close: Henderson
In the discussion: Yount, Murray, Dale Murphy, Carter.
And Dale Murphy makes his first of four appearances on our list.
1981-85: Mike Schmidt
Very close: Rickey Henderson.
Close: Murray, Murphy.
In the discussion: Tim Raines, Yount, Carter, Pedro Guerrero.
Just three Win Shares separated Schmidt and Henderson.
1982-86: Mike Schmidt
Close: Henderson, Murphy, Raines
In the discussion: Cal Ripken, Wade Boggs.
Mike Schmidt had 155 Win Shares over those five years — and Henderson, Murphy and Raines all had 150. I think you could make a viable argument for any of the four as best player in baseball. I would make an argument for Dale Murphy as the best … more on that in the Hall of Fame story.
1983-87: Tim Raines
Very Close: Wade Boggs
Close: Murphy
In the discussion: Ripken, Schmidt, Henderson, Keith Hernandez.
One win share separated Raines from Boggs … Keith Hernandez was a great player in the mid-1980s.
1984-88: Wade Boggs
Close: Raines
In the discussion: Don Mattingly, Henderson, Tony Gwynn.
There’s Don Mattingly — lots of people remember Mattingly as the best player in baseball over that time period. He was great. But did you know that Darryl Strawberry had a better OPS+ during those five years? Sixteen players had a better on-base percentage. Mattingly was a stud … a high-average slugger who played a slick first base. I think he’s in the discussion for best player of the late 1980s, absolutely, but he didn’t walk and he did play the easiest defensive position on the field. I’ll just say, I think he was Top 5.
1985-89: Wade Boggs
Close: Raines.
In the discussion: Mattingly, Henderson, Puckett, Gwynn.
What was Wade Boggs greatest season? Was it the year he hit .368 and led the league with 240 hits? Was it the year he hit .363 and led the league in OPS+? Was it the year he hit .366 and led the league in runs scored? Was it the year he hit .357 and also led the league in walks? Hard to pick.
Interesting tidbit: Boggs in his career hit .354 at home … .302 on the road.
1986-90: Wade Boggs
Close: Will Clark, Henderson.
In the discussion: Kirby Puckett, Yount.
We’re about to enter our second surprise … or anyway a surprise to me. Was Will Clark the best player in baseball?
1987-91: Will Clark
Close: Barry Bonds.
In the discussion: Henderson, Boggs, Ryne Sandberg.
The thing I like about OPS+ is that, at a glance, it gives you a little perspective about the time and place of the player. For instance — pick an OPS. Any OPS. How about .793?
OK, Pete Rose had a .793 OPS in 1971. George Brett had a .793 OPS in 1989. Curt Flood had the .793 OPS in 1967, Al Kaline in 1969, Homer Summa in 1923, Jermaine Dye in 2004 and again in 2009, Juan Pierre in 2001, Cleon Jones in 1968, Charlie Grimm, 1925. Were these seasons the same? Of course not. Were these seasons SIMILAR? Of course not.
Cleon Jones, 1968: 136 OPS+
Pete Rose, 1971: 130 OPS+
Curt Flood, 1967: 128 OPS+
Al Kaline, 1969: 116 OPS+
Homer Summa, 1923: 108 OPS+
Jermaine Dye, 2004: 105 OPS+
Jermaine Dye, 2009: 103 OPS+
Charlie Grimm, 1925: 100 OPS+
Juan Pierre, 2001: 89 OPS+
So Cleon Jones in ‘68 had a huge year. Juan Pierre in 2001 was well below average. Curt Flood was an MVP candidate in 1967, Jermaine Dye was just about league average. OPS+ has its flaws, of course — several flaws — but if you just want to tell how good a season someone had based on a quick glance, it is pretty effective I think.
What does this have to do with Will Clark? Well, here are Will Clark’s traditional numbers from 1987-91:
1987: .308, 35 HRs, 91 RBIs, 89 runs.
1988: .282, 29, 109 RBIs, 102 runs
1989: .333, 23, 111 RBIs, 104 runs
1990: .295, 19, 95 RBIs, 91 runs
1991: .301, 29, 116 RBIs, 84 runs
So what do you think? Good numbers, right? I mean, they don’t pop your eyes out or anything — if you were judging Clark’s Hall of Fame case, those numbers would probably register as being good but nothing historically special.
So how is it that those numbers made Clark the best player in baseball for those five years? Well, for one thing, he played half his games in awful hitting Candlestick Park. For another, it was a low-scoring time — those 109 RBIs in 1988 led the league as did those 104 runs he scored in 1989.
Then, you add that he did a lot of things that are not reflected in the traditional stats. He walked quite often — led the league in walks in 1988. Twice in the five-year stretch, he led the league in times on base and in runs created. He led the league in equivalent average in 1988, was second in 1989 and third in 1991. He was an above average defensive first baseman.
People often talk about how it can be unfair to judge previous players by today’s standards. But I think it’s unfair that some of the players who did the things that helped teams win baseball games were so under-appreciated. Will Clark had baseball’s best OPS+ from 1987-91 too.
1988-92: Will Clark
Close: Barry Bonds
In the discussion: Sandberg, Henderson
One more year on top for Clark … four Win Shares ahead of Barry. But Barry will dominate the next decade and a half.
1989-93: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Clark, Sandberg, Henderson.
Young Barry was 40 Win Shares better than any player in baseball.
1990-94: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Frank Thomas, Ken Griffey Jr.
And Young Barry was 50 Win Shares better that anyone … it’s funny because I distinctly remember that at the time most people would have said that Ken Griffey was the best player in baseball. In retrospect, Griffey was obviously a great player — and he played center field. But Bonds did everything a little bit better (except throw).
1991-95: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Thomas, Craig Biggio, Greg Maddux.
Pitchers are rarely in the discussion for best player in baseball simply because they just don’t get the innings. Even Pedro Martinez, who was as dominant as any pitcher ever, did not get the innings to get a lot of Win Shares. Now, Old Hoss Radbourn — he got the innings. In 1884, he put up 89 Win Shares. Just that one year. That will happen when you throw 678 innings.
1992-96: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Thomas, Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell, Greg Maddux.
All Barry, all the time.
You know, I guess I never really considered that Houston from 1991 to 2000 had two of the four or five best players in baseball — the only two players, as you will see, who take the top spot away from Barry Bonds — and yet the Astros never even made it to the NLCS. And the Astros had good pitching much of the decade.
1993-97: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Thomas, Biggio, Mike Piazza, Bagwell, Maddux, Albert Belle.
Every so often I hear someone ask: “Is Frank Thomas a Hall of Famer?” Are you kidding? Frank Thomas’ first full seven years — .330/.452/.604 with OPS+ of 182. I want to repeat that — an OPS+ of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY TWO. Just as an example …
First seven full years:
Frank Thomas: 182
Mickey Mantle: 181
Albert Pujols: 167
Willie Mays: 164
Barry Bonds: 160
Joe DiMaggio: 159
To give you an idea, Roberto Clemente, Al Kaline, Hank Greenberg, and a 100 other Hall of Famers never ONCE had an OPS+ of 182 in a season. Frank Thomas is one of the best hitters in baseball history.
1994-98: Barry Bonds
Close: Biggio
In the discussion: Piazza, Bagwell, Thomas, Belle.
It’s interesting watching Bonds career — he was very clearly the best player in baseball in the ten year period from 1989-98. I mean if you are being realistic, nobody was even close. And then, right around this time, things shifted. McGwire and Sosa had their home run race. And players like Biggio and Bagwell and Piazza were closing in on Barry’s dominance.
Decisions are always more complicated than we tend to make them, but you could certainly understand Barry right around this time going: “OK, this is ridiculous. I am the best player in baseball. And if people don’t believe me … well, I’ll give them a show they’ll never forget.” And, like him or not, he definitely did that.
1995-99: Craig Biggio
Very Close: Bonds
Close: Bagwell, Piazza, Mark McGwire.
In the discussion: Belle, Bernie Williams, Thomas.
I’ve mentioned this before: I love Biggio’s 1997 season. He played every game. He hit .309. He walked 84 times. He led the league in getting hit by pitch (34 times!). He stole 47 bases. He slugged .500. He led the league in times on base and runs scored. And he did not hit into a single double play.
1996-00: Jeff Bagwell
Close: Bonds, Piazza, Griffey Jr.
In the discussion: Biggio, Alex Rodriguez, McGwire, Thomas, Sheffield.
For six straight years, Jeff Bagwell walked 100 times, scored 100 runs, drove in 100 RBIs and had 300 total bases. Nobody else ever did that — except Ted Williams, if you count as consecutive the years before and after his service in World War II. And you should count those … so Williams and Bagwell are the only two to ever pull that off six straight years.
1997-01: Barry Bonds
Close: Bagwell
In the discussion: A-Rod, Jason Giambi, Sammy Sosa, Piazza, Biggio, Chipper Jones.
A-Rod will be either close to the best or in the discussion every single year until the present. But he will never quite make it to the top.
1998-02: Barry Bonds
Close: Giambi, A-Rod, Sosa.
In the discussion: Chipper, Bagwell, Sheffield, Manny Ramirez, Bernie Williams, Jeff Kent, Derek Jeter.
You know, Jason Giambi did not seem to show great plate discipline when he was a young player. He walked a fair amount in the minors, but in his first three years he walked only 134 times in 336 games — which was nothing special. But in 1998, he started to walk and his on-base percentage jumped up 20 points, and apparently he liked it. From 1999-2005, he averaged 107 walks per year — led the league four times — and his on-base percentage was .436.
1999-03: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: Jason Giambi, Alex Rodriguez, Sosa, Sheffield, Chipper.
Barry Bonds in those five years: .322/.497/.748 with a 223 OPS+.
2000-04: Barry Bonds
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: A-Rod.
Even A-Rod is only barely in the discussion. Barry Bonds for these five years: .339/.535/.781 with a 241 OPS+ and 306 intentional walks.
2001-2005: Albert Pujols
Close: Barry Bonds, A-Rod.
In the discussion: Sheffield, Todd Helton, Bobby Abreu, MannyBManny.
Bonds only played 14 games in 2005 and he STILL was the clear winner in total Win Shares. But the idea is to get the best player over the five years, and that was Pujols by a length over A-Rod. Pujols takes over now as the best player in baseball.
2002-06: Albert Pujols
Close: Bonds, A-Rod.
In the discussion: MannyBManny, Abreu, Helton, Lance Berkman.
Bill James said 30 Win Shares makes for an MVP type season — Pujols has had more than 30 Win Shares every single season from 2002 to present.
2003-2007: Albert Pujols
Close: A-Rod.
In the discussion: Carlos Beltran, Bonds, Helton, Abreu.
The most underrated player of our era is, of course, Bobby Abreu. He’s underrated for many of the same reasons that players like Ken Singleton are underrated. He does underrated things. Abreu’s batting averages are good — he has hit .299 for his career — but his on-base percentages are off the charts because he walks 100 times every year. He doesn’t hit a lot of home runs — between 20 and 30 in his prime, less the last few years — but he hits a lot of doubles and led the league in triples one year. He has a reputation as a guy who is afraid of the wall — and he is not an especially good outfielder — but he is the only player in baseball to play 150 or more games every single year since 1998. Attendance is underrated.
He has never put up a huge RBI season, but has put up between 100 and 110 eight times. He has never led the league in runs scored, but he has scored 100 eight times. He is an intensely boring player to watch — foul ball, take a pitch outside, take a pitch inside, foul ball, foul ball — but he’s brutally effective.
2004-2008: Albert Pujols
Close: Nobody
In the discussion: A-Rod, Berkman, Beltran, Miggy Cabrera, Mark Teixeira.
Not that this is too important but it’s something I didn’t know it: Lance Berkman has hit more home runs on the road than he has at home. That’s interesting. Of course, it’s interesting how Enron/Minute Maid Field has gone from an extreme hitters park to a neutral park to even something of a pitchers park over the last decade or so.
2005-2009: Albert Pujols
Close: A-Rod, Chase Utley.
In the discussion: David Wright, Cabrera, Joe Mauer.
And that brings us up to the present day. Pujols is still very clearly the best player in the game, I think. But Utley and Mauer are definite candidates over the next couple of years, and so is a guy not quite on this list: Hanley Ramirez. In fact, here is the projection for the best player in baseball after the 2010 season.
2006-2010 (Projected): Albert Pujols.
Close: Hanley Ramirez, Chase Utley, Joe Mauer.
In the discussion: Prince Fielder, Lance Berkman, Adrian Gonzalez, Cabrera, Ichiro Suzuki, A-Rod, Wright, Ryan Howard.
Last edited by a moderator:
for Mark Grace in that series.Grace was just as good as Clark in the series. In 21 plate appearances, he had 11 hits, 4 walks, 3 2bs, 1 3b, 1 hr, and 8 rbi. His 647-682-1118 avg-slg-obp line was one of the many examples that he was the best player in the league in regards to rising his talent in clutch situations. Now, I don't really believe in clutch but BP's study of whether it existed listed Grace as the best clutch batter when comparing to their normal batting. I know that Grace was no where near the players in the article. But he lost the respect he could have earned in that series due to the performance of Will Clark and the loss.
for Mark Grace in that series.Grace was just as good as Clark in the series. In 21 plate appearances, he had 11 hits, 4 walks, 3 2bs, 1 3b, 1 hr, and 8 rbi. His 647-682-1118 avg-slg-obp line was one of the many examples that he was the best player in the league in regards to rising his talent in clutch situations. Now, I don't really believe in clutch but BP's study of whether it existed listed Grace as the best clutch batter when comparing to their normal batting.
writers certainly do that, to justify support for their favorite guys. but this was a case where the writer set up a reasonable analytical framework, and let the data tell him what it told him. he didn't cherry pick stats until he found one that favored Singleton.
