Sandbox Dumbasses

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (22 of them)
Oh yeah def. Especially since Ichiro missed a lot of his prime playing top notch ball in Japan. But Ichiro also does more things better than Gwynn does and is totally comparable BA/OBP wise. Gwynn was basically as one-dimensional a ballplayer as McGwire or Dunn (although since technically drawing walks is a dimension, neither of those guys really was/is) for a lot of his career, the only difference is that his one dimension was making contact.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Saturday, 30 December 2006 02:28 (fifteen years ago) link

so many ways to argue your gwynn misunderestimation, how about this?
Tony Gwynn > Lou Brock (corner outfielder with one admittedly big advantage over gwynn)
Tony Gwynn > Al Kaline (corner outfielder with decent but not outstanding power)

bliss (blass), Saturday, 30 December 2006 02:36 (fifteen years ago) link

Lou Brock, definitely (but since when is a better corner outfielder than Lou Brock something to strive for?!??!) Kaline and Gwynn are pretty comparable (OPS+ are just about the same.) Kaline might have been a slightly better fielder, I guess. Not sure what you claim I am misunderestimating actually.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Saturday, 30 December 2006 02:50 (fifteen years ago) link

well, it's a little puzzling that you don't think he's a slamdunk first ballot h-o-f'er, obv. guy had "holes" in his game, but his accomplishments are well within the range of first ballot dudes.
no offense tho :/

bliss (blass), Saturday, 30 December 2006 02:55 (fifteen years ago) link

Tony Gwynn was a very very good ballplayer who had a number of really great years (including one historical one that was cut tragically short by the strike.) Was he one of the 20 best right fielders of all time? Probably not. Does he still deserve to be in the HOF? Yes. He was very good for a very long time and he was certainly better than Lou Brock!

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Saturday, 30 December 2006 02:56 (fifteen years ago) link

By slam dunk I mean those guys who everyone goes "OH YEAH that fucker was the best or one of the best players at his position when he played and for quite a while" and no one really disagrees. Guys like Mays or Reggie or Bonds (pre-roids) or Griffey (pre-breaking in half) and Pujols. I mean maybe people thought that about Gwynn, but mostly I just remember thinking "that guy can sure hit" and leaving it at that.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Saturday, 30 December 2006 03:02 (fifteen years ago) link

reggie had as many, if not more holes than gwynn, but we're getting into apples & oranges

bliss (blass), Saturday, 30 December 2006 03:11 (fifteen years ago) link

"Holes". Baseball is responsible for its own damages.

LynnK (klynn), Saturday, 30 December 2006 16:15 (fifteen years ago) link

I don't know where I came up with that list of players actually. I was just picking 'em at random.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Saturday, 30 December 2006 16:22 (fifteen years ago) link

When it comes to "TS: Tony Gwynn -- best pure batsman since Ted Williams or Ford-driving glorified singles hitter?", let's just state the obvious and admitt that he was a mixture of both.

You have to be careful with these singles vs walks arguments ... a guy with 100 singles and 50 walks is more valuable than a guy with 75 singles and 75 walks. Runners can't advance extra bases or score from second on a walk, plus, singles force the defense to actually do something.

A .500 SLG was considered to be a benchmark number for a slugger ... Gwynn's lifetime SLG was .459, which is damn good for a "singles" hitter. Some of his approximate contemporaries: Mattingly .471, Rice .502 (both of whom are borderline HOFers and respected sluggers in their day), Boggs .443 (renowned doubles hitter who played in the most extreme doubles park in baseball for most of his prime). Gwynn's lifetime SLG numbers were boosted a bit by playing in the hitting-happy mid-late '90's, but not to an extreme degree.

Gwynn was a very good basestealer early in his career.

No Time Before Time (Barry Barry), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:46 (fifteen years ago) link

"You have to be careful with these singles vs walks arguments ... a guy with 100 singles and 50 walks is more valuable than a guy with 75 singles and 75 walks."

Usually this is true, but it doesn't take into account factors like # of pitches seen per plate appearance which obv has value as well. But assuming everything else was equal yes 100/50 > 75/75.

"Gwynn was a very good basestealer early in his career."

He had a lot of years where he didn't break even early in his career too.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:28 (fifteen years ago) link

aspm

Hopper, Tuesday, 16 January 2007 14:37 (fifteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.