Poll: Best Shortstop Evah Topic

Posted by burnsy483 on 6/15/2012 6:32:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/14/2012 4:04:00 PM (view original):
You can call him whatever you want.    But I think most people remember him with the Expos.
I would guess most people don't (yes, I'm biased) but regardless, can the same people who consider Carter an Expo also consider him to be one of the best Mets of all-time?
Absolutely.  I know I do.  A legacy with one team does not negate the possibility of building a legacy with another team also.  Carter is a prime example of that.
6/15/2012 9:02 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/15/2012 8:05:00 AM (view original):
If they consider him an Expo, it seems that they wouldn't.

The vast majority would.  Most intelligent baseball people (not saying you aren't) would consider Carter a top-10 Met of all-time, some top-5.  By your logic, Keith Hernandez isn't an all-time Met, but instead a Cardinal, despite the fact there are many people who believe his number should be retired by the Mets.

I know I spent most of my thoughts in this thread arguing whether A-Rod should be considered a SS or 3B by your definition, but it shouldn't matter.  What A-Rod did as a SS was incredible, and the stats he put up were among the all-time greats at that position.  For that reason, he should be considered one of the best SS of all-time, just like Carter and Hernandez are considered all-time Mets.

6/15/2012 9:24 AM
Hernandez is probably a poor example for me.    I'd forgotten he was a Cardinal.   I guess, when I start listing "All-time", I don't think a guy can be two things.  Babe Ruth was a really good pitcher for the Red Sox.   He won almost 100 games in over 1200 innings with an ERA just over 2.   Is he remembered, at all, as a pitcher or a Red Sox?
6/15/2012 10:48 AM
Carter's Mets legacy rests entirely on his first two seasons there, particularly his contributions to the 1986 championship team. As for the other three ...

1242 PA, 1131 AB. 33 HR, 144 RBI, 108 R. .231/.288/.363, 83 OPS+, 0.4 WAR. His total of 10.3 WAR with the Mets ranks him 24th among position players. Can you guess who's first? If you can't guess who the top pitcher is, slap yourself several times.

I admit I was surprised to see those numbers. I'm young enough to remember Carter as a Met rather than an Expo, and I considered him a Met for most of my life. But his stats were nothing special there.
6/15/2012 11:13 AM
The causal fan? Maybe not.  People who know baseball know he was an outstanding pitcher.  But his insane hitting ability overshadows his pitching career.  I'm not sure A-Rod's Yankee career at 3B overshadows what he did at SS.
6/15/2012 11:17 AM
I think I could argue that Ruth was as effective as a pitcher as Koufax(other notable "short" pitching career).    And he pitched more innings than Sutter(I'd argue Ruth was more valuable as a pitcher than Sutter) but there's no way he makes the HOF as a pitcher based on what he did.    When A-Rod retires, his accomplishments with the Yankees will be remembered.    What he did in SEA/TEX will not. 
6/15/2012 12:33 PM

If you split A-Rod's career into SEA/TEX and NYY, A-Rod would be more likely to make the HOF for what he did in SEA/TEX than NYY.  His Yankee years will remembered more by YOU, but his pre-Yankee career will be more impressive.

6/15/2012 1:02 PM
Ruth wouldn't be considered one of the best pitchers of all-time.  A-Rod would be considered one of the best SS of all-time.
6/15/2012 1:03 PM
Maybe he would have been had his full career been on the mound.   You know, like A-Rod switching positions. 
6/15/2012 1:32 PM
But he didn't, so he isn't.  A-Rod did more than enough at SS to be considered.  He hasn't, and will not, at 3B.

Also, to compare Ruth and Koufax isn't fair.  Similar stats over a handful of years, but in Ruth's era, those weren't incredibly uncommon.  Koufax dominated the NL for 4-5 years.
6/15/2012 1:48 PM
EDIT: Maybe he would at 3b.  But he's still more likely at SS in SEA/TEX.
6/15/2012 1:52 PM

ERA+ was very similar between Koufax and Ruth.    I don't think you realize how good Ruth was as a pitcher. 

6/15/2012 2:38 PM
I'm definitely aware.  He was very good, but no Koufax.  Ruth's career ERA+ is 122.  Koufax's is 131.  And that includes Koufax's years as an average pitcher.  Koufax last 5 years - 143, 159, 186, 160, 190.  Ruth's best 2 years - 158, 128.
6/15/2012 3:14 PM
Can you really argue that they were about equal? Koufax's ERA+ was 9 points higher in more than 1,100 more innings, and his peak was noticeably better. Ruth also had better defensive backing. Koufax has a clear edge.
6/15/2012 3:15 PM
I assume you know Ruth had a better defense behind him from all the games you watched in 1916?   Did you happen to notice the gloves they wore?

I don't care about innings or "average" years.    9 points isn't that much for ERA+.  

The point is that Ruth is not remembered for his pitching years despite being a very good pitcher.  What he did as a hitter greatly overshadows that.   A-Rod will not be remembered for his SEA years, it will be his Yankee years.   Or maybe just the general craziness that surrounded him during his Yankee years.   In 20 years, people will say the same thing I said about Hernandez and Carter "I forgot he played for them." 
6/15/2012 3:23 PM
◂ Prev 1...8|9|10|11|12...26 Next ▸
Poll: Best Shortstop Evah Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.