MLB 2008 PT 2

[caliber66]

He is absolutely a first ballot hall of famer, I'm not arguing that. You can be one of the great players in baseball history and be overrated.

And you can also be a first ballot hall of famer not named Barry Bonds and not be overrated.

[bobbob1313]

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

I think he's overrated. That's pretty much it. Still an all time great, but probably not one of the 5 best CFers of all time, and certainly not the greatest player of the 90's. I also think even if he hadn't gotten injured, that probably wouldn't have changed my opinion.

[caliber66]

I'm not sure what your point is.

The point is, I don't know what Barry Bonds has to do with anything, least of all vis a vis Ken Griffey, Jr.'s 600th home run. You brought him up. One does not have to compare Ken Griffey, Jr. to Barry Bonds in order to determine whether or not one or the other is over- or underrated.

 

I think he's overrated. That's pretty much it. Still an all time great, but probably not one of the 5 best CFers of all time, and certainly not the greatest player of the 90's. I also think even if he hadn't gotten injured, that probably wouldn't have changed my opinion.

Cool. I don't see a lot of stuff that says Griffey is the best player of the 90s or one of the x best center fielders of all time, but I definitely don't read as much sports writing as you do. I certainly didn't hear crap about how great a player he was when he was playing 80 games a season - which, oddly enough, coincides with Barry Bonds's monster seasons. Probably there's more chatter lately since he's played almost a full season each of the last three years and averaged 30 home runs, but I'm not reading what you're reading if you're reading column after column declaring Junior the best player evar. Pretty much every sports writer with half a brain acknowledges him as a great player, but talk of him being the greatest ever ended a long time ago.

[jenbobblehead]

Even though he's probably the most overrated player of the last 15 years, he's still pretty damn good.

Did you really just say "overrated?"

 

 

Edit: this is Arod.

[bobbob1313]

The point is, I don't know what Barry Bonds has to do with anything, least of all vis a vis Ken Griffey, Jr.'s 600th home run. You brought him up. One does not have to compare Ken Griffey, Jr. to Barry Bonds in order to determine whether or not one or the other is over- or underrated.

 

I mean, if I had said A-Rod or Vlad Guerrero or any other contemporary of his would it have mattered? When discussing a player's place in history, it would seem natural to compare him to other players who played in the same era.

 

Maybe overrated is too strong a word? Maybe people dislike the connotations of it? All I know is that I don't think Griffey's nearly as good as everyone else seems to.

[MrRain422]

Not even nearly as good?

[bobbob1313]

Not really. Like I said, he's a likable player, and he's the type of player that is easy to love, so I understand why he is as well liked as he is.

 

He'd be a top 10, maybe 5 player of his era in my opinion. But that's a lot lower than most people's opinions, isn't it?

[Lammycat]

He'd be a top 10, maybe 5 player of his era in my opinion. But that's a lot lower than most people's opinions, isn't it?

So how is a top 5 player of an era overrrated?

 

Anyway...the BoSox never even considered getting Bonds with Ortiz out, because Bonds is currently an extremely one-dimentional player.

[bjorn_skurj]

I dunno, man. 600 HR is a plateau not many reach. Is he better than Bonds, overall, or The Rod? No, but I would say at least top five in terms of outfielders in the past 20 years, but I may be thinking more of his pre-f ton-of-injuries days when he was slated to hit 900 HR and be Strat-o-Matic's first "0"-rated outfielder.

[bobbob1313]

So how is a top 5 player of an era overrrated?

 

Anyway...the BoSox never even considered getting Bonds with Ortiz out, because Bonds is currently an extremely one-dimentional player.

 

If a borderline top 5 player is the unanimous choice for #1, I would argue he is at least slightly overrated.

[caliber66]

Where is Griffey the unanimous choice for #1 anything? People might have made that case when he was younger (and, as you say, they probably would have been wrong), but pretty much all anyone talks about these days is what could have been. And barring injury, Griffey would have put up some pretty special numbers. Hitting 600 home runs when 10 of your 20 seasons don't even come close to 160 games will make people speculate.

[MrRain422]

He's basically a more often injured, better fielding version of Frank Robinson. No one thinks he's the best ever, but he's unquestionably in the top tier, and worthy of being considered among the greatest.

[Twisted Acres]

When I saw him playing in the early '90s, I considered him to be probably the great player I'll ever see in my lifetime. I think ARod has overtaken that, but Junior in those days was jaw-dropping good... and the joy with which he played took it up a notch for me. I don't agree with over-rated, but I can see why some might think he might be.

[Guest Jules]

When I saw him playing in the early '90s, I considered him to be probably the great player I'll ever see in my lifetime. I think ARod has overtaken that, but Junior in those days was jaw-dropping good... and the joy with which he played took it up a notch for me. I don't agree with over-rated, but I can see why some might think he might be.

Agreed. No offense to Chompsky, but you were, what, 5 years old at the most when Griffey was doing these things?

[Moltisanti]

Griffey was constantly called the best player in baseball at a time when Bonds was clearly better than him. I never got it then, and I sure as hell don't get it now.

 

Junior's a great player, his legacy should be as a hall-of-famer, but to put him in the same category as Barry Bonds is just nuts.

[Twisted Acres]

The pre-steroids Bonds was a magnificent player, and certainly one of the greatest of all-time had he stopped playing at the point that he started taking steroids... shame he completely tainted his legacy by choosing to follow in McGwire/Sosa's footsteps. Bonds was always a marvelously consistent producer, and it's easy to forget how solid his defense once was.

 

That said, he never seemed to take my breath away the way that Junior did, be it on defense or offense.

[bobbob1313]

Agreed. No offense to Chompsky, but you were, what, 5 years old at the most when Griffey was doing these things?

 

I mean, I guess that's a fair argument to make. Age is always a good place to go in internet discussions.

 

The pre-steroids Bonds was a magnificent player, and certainly one of the greatest of all-time had he stopped playing at the point that he started taking steroids... shame he completely tainted his legacy by choosing to follow in McGwire/Sosa's footsteps. Bonds was always a marvelously consistent producer, and it's easy to forget how solid his defense once was.

 

That said, he never seemed to take my breath away the way that Junior did, be it on defense or offense.

 

I would argue that Bonds was probably the superior defensive player, relative to the position he played. In his prime, Barry might have been the best defensive left fielder of all time. And you could argue his best seasons might have been pre-steroids, and if not, they were damn close.

[Twisted Acres]

Baseball-Statistics.com's Greatest Left Fielders of all time

[bobbob1313]

I pretty much agree with that list.

[MattZ]

Bonds is overrated. Everyone says he's the best of all-time and he's not even the best left fielder of all time.

[MrRain422]

Though it's overrating Jim Rice big time. I don't see how Rice gets an honorable mention but no mention of Manny, Tim Raines, Lou Brock, Willie Stargell, Gary Sheffield, Billy Williams, Joe Medwick, maybe even Minnie Minoso or Ralph Kiner. I was gonna say Pete Rose too, but he apparently didn't play LF quite as much as I'd thought.

[bobbob1313]

I know it's sarcasm, but I'll bite.

 

Williams was probably the superior hitter (to anyone in baseball history), but Bonds is probably the better all around player. Bonds played in an inflated offensive environment, but he was the superiors defensive player and base stealer. Does that make up the difference? I'm not sure. If it doesn't, it's damn close. They are 2a and 2b in baseball history after Ruth.

 

I'd rank position players in major league history something like this:

 

1. Ruth

2. Williams

3. Bonds

4. Mantle

5. Cobb

 

And yeah, I don't think Rice deserves an honorable mention, but I'm not even sure how I feel about Yaz being 5th. It appears that list is a few years old.

 

And as for Manny, that is a guy who I think is never going to get the credit he deserves for how good he really is. It almost seems silly to list him among the 5 best LFers of all time, but he'll probably be there.

[MattZ]

4. Mantle

 

over Mays?

[bobbob1313]

I think so. Mays was a tremendous center fielder, but Mantle was quite a bit more valuable as a hitter. Mays has more steals, but Mantle stole bases at a much better rate, so I'd actually give him the edge there. Mickey wasn't a terrible center fielder either, so it's not like we're talking about a huge gap there. I think given Mantle's edge with the bat, he's the better player.

 

If I continued my list, it would probably have Mays somewhere around 6th, I would guess. Maybe 7th,

[Lammycat]

I'd go Mays and probably even Cobb before Mantle, overall.