This guy needs to do a little more research...

[austro]

In this article, the author argues that The Big Hurt might be the best hitter ever.  One of his arguments is Thomas's 1994 season:

Quote:
If you concede nothing else to Frank, you need to give him 1994. In the modern, integrated era, it's the greatest 500-plus plate appearance season anyone's had.

Of course, someone else had an equally great season in that very same year.  With the exception of walks, Bagwell's numbers were at least the equivalent of Thomas's.  I suppose that you can argue that Bagwell didn't have 500 PAs (400 AB +  65 BB + ? sacs + at least one HPB), or that because he broke his hand he wouldn't have kept it up had the strike been averted.  But it's annoying that he's not even acknowledged.

Thomas had 44 more walks in that season, and that's probably enough to tilt the scales in Thomas's favor.  But even with those walks he only scored two more runs.  I don't remember old Comiskey as particularly hitter-friendly, but I doubt that it had near the effect on Thomas's numbers that the Dome had on Bagwell's.

Must stop grinding teeth now...

[Limey]

I cannot forget an interview (or BBTN piece) from a few years back in which Gammons referred to Thomas as a lock for the Hall, and not quite in the same breath said that Bagwell probably hadn't done enough.

And this twat has a vote!

[toddthebod]

Unfortunately, Bagwell is done and Thomas should win the comeback player of the year and will receive some consideration for MVP.  If the HOF is going to weigh the merits of these two players (and select only one), Thomas is going to have the better career numbers.

[Bench]

Quote:
If the HOF is going to weigh the merits of these two players (and select only one), Thomas is going to have the better career numbers.

Isn't that the opposite of the argument supporting Kirby Puckett being in the hall and Dale Murphy on the outside looking in? The fact that Puckett's career was cut short boosted his campaign, if I recall correctly.

[mihoba]

Quote:
Unfortunately, Bagwell is done and Thomas should win the comeback player of the year and will receive some consideration for MVP.  If the HOF is going to weigh the merits of these two players (and select only one), Thomas is going to have the better career numbers.

 Hitting numbers. I hope the HOF voters take into consideration baserunning and defense. Bags was miles ahead of Frank in that.

Bags will be eligible first, too.

[Limey]

Quote:
Unfortunately, Bagwell is done and Thomas should win the comeback player of the year and will receive some consideration for MVP.  If the HOF is going to weigh the merits of these two players (and select only one), Thomas is going to have the better career numbers.

In the back of my brain, I have a memory of someone doing a stats-combo which got down to a short list of maybe 3 players when you looked at a broad series of offensive stats - two of the three were Bagwell and DiMaggio.

Anyone got any ideas if this is right or if I'm smoking something?

[toddthebod]

I'm not sure that the analogy is right.  

What did Murphy do with his extended career?  He sucked balls.  Thomas on the other hand put up some great numbers this season (38 HRs, 108 RBI) and now seems a lock to get to the 500 HR milestone that Jeff will never reach.

Look, I think that Bagwell is a hall of famer.  My concern is that if the HOF voters are only going to induct one of the great first basemen from the era, they are going to choose Thomas and not Bagwell.

[Limey]

Quote:
Look, I think that Bagwell is a hall of famer.  My concern is that if the HOF voters are only going to induct one of the great first basemen from the era, they are going to choose Thomas and not Bagwell.

Don't the players now get one last vote on this?  I can't see them shutting out Bagwell.

[mihoba]

It will be interesting to see how the voters react when Edgar Martinez becomes eligible, who was primarily a DH. Frank has played about 50% of his games at DH also, IIRC.

Bagwell  should be a lock. He was a much better overall player than Frank. Period.

[BUWebguy]

Quote:
It will be interesting to see how the voters react when Edgar Martinez becomes eligible, who was primarily a DH. Frank has played about 50% of his games at DH also, IIRC.

Good call. Entering 2006, Thomas had 971 games at 1B and 960 at DH. In fact, looking at his year by year breakdown, he only played more than 100 games at 1B three times (1992, 1993, 1996).

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
Isn't that the opposite of the argument supporting Kirby Puckett being in the hall and Dale Murphy on the outside looking in? The fact that Puckett's career was cut short boosted his campaign, if I recall correctly.

The better comparison is Puckett and Mattingly, whose career numbers are extremely similar. The differences are (1) Puckett was a Gold Glove center fielder, while Mattingly was a Gold Glove first baseman, (2) Puckett was on two world champions, while Mattingly didn't make the playoffs until late in his career and (3) Puckett's injury was all-of-a-sudden and considered more tragic, while Mattingly's back slowly eroded his performance.

Whether the voters perceive of Bagwell's shoulder more like Puckett's injury or Mattingly's injury remains to be seen. It may not matter in any event, since Bagwell has better numbers than either of them, even adjusting for the different offensive contexts of the '80s and the '90s.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
In this article, the author argues that The Big Hurt might be the best hitter ever.  One of his arguments is Thomas's 1994 season:

Quote:
If you concede nothing else to Frank, you need to give him 1994. In the modern, integrated era, it's the greatest 500-plus plate appearance season anyone's had.

Of course, someone else had an equally great season in that very same year.  With the exception of walks, Bagwell's numbers were at least the equivalent of Thomas's.  I suppose that you can argue that Bagwell didn't have 500 PAs (400 AB +  65 BB + ? sacs + at least one HPB), or that because he broke his hand he wouldn't have kept it up had the strike been averted.  But it's annoying that he's not even acknowledged.

Thomas had 44 more walks in that season, and that's probably enough to tilt the scales in Thomas's favor.  But even with those walks he only scored two more runs.  I don't remember old Comiskey as particularly hitter-friendly, but I doubt that it had near the effect on Thomas's numbers that the Dome had on Bagwell's.

Must stop grinding teeth now...

Thomas was an even better hitter than Bagwell at their peaks, although Bagwell was 98% as good. Bagwell has Thomas lapped on the basepaths and in the field. Due to his injury, Thomas is going to have better career numbers. But both should unqestionably go into the Hall of Fame.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
Look, I think that Bagwell is a hall of famer.  My concern is that if the HOF voters are only going to induct one of the great first basemen from the era, they are going to choose Thomas and not Bagwell.

I don't see why they'd limit themselves like that, though. The '90s had the best crop of first basemen since the '30s. There's no historical pattern to indicate that they'll only vote in one at a position for each era.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

The better comparison is Puckett and Mattingly, whose career numbers are extremely similar. The differences are (1) Puckett was a Gold Glove center fielder, while Mattingly was a Gold Glove first baseman, (2) Puckett was on two world champions, while Mattingly didn't make the playoffs until late in his career and (3) Puckett's injury was all-of-a-sudden and considered more tragic, while Mattingly's back slowly eroded his performance.

There's also the issue of consistency.  Mattingly was great for 4 seasons, then fell off a cliff.  Puckett produced 10 very good seasons.  Using HRs as an example, it's more impressive to hit 20 HRs eery year for 15 years than to hit 40 for 5 years and then 5 for 12 years.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:

Quote:

The better comparison is Puckett and Mattingly, whose career numbers are extremely similar. The differences are (1) Puckett was a Gold Glove center fielder, while Mattingly was a Gold Glove first baseman, (2) Puckett was on two world champions, while Mattingly didn't make the playoffs until late in his career and (3) Puckett's injury was all-of-a-sudden and considered more tragic, while Mattingly's back slowly eroded his performance.

There's also the issue of consistency.  Mattingly was great for 4 seasons, then fell off a cliff.  Puckett produced 10 very good seasons.  Using HRs as an example, it's more impressive to hit 20 HRs eery year for 15 years than to hit 40 for 5 years and then 5 for 12 years.

Very very true.

Bagwell has been one of the most consistently excellent players in the history of baseball.

[Arky Vaughan]

I was just looking at Bagwell's career stats.

In 1999-2000, he scored 295 runs.
In 1999-2001, he scored 421 runs.
In 1998-2001, he scored 545 runs.

I'm guessing those have to be in the top five two-year, three-year and four-year totals in the post-war era.

[Lefty]

Damn.  

The first handful of names I thought to check - Ricky, Biggio, Bonds, Helton, Catpiss, Jeter, ManRam, Belle, Alomar, Griffey, ARod, Sosa, Rose - didn't get all that close over any period.

[mihoba]

I did a trivia question about this awhile back.

Bagwell's 152 runs scored in 2000 was the most by a player in 64 years. Lou Gehrig scored 167 in 1936.

[strosrays]

Quote:
Hitting numbers. I hope the HOF voters take into consideration baserunning and defense. Bags was miles ahead of Frank in that.

Bags will be eligible first, too.

What is sad is, in a generation no one who didn't actually see him play will even know what a terrifically well-rounded player he was, especially compared to Thomas, or that he played the first nine years of his career in the hitter-unfriendly 'Dome, or that once he got that hand pad thing, he was a very durable player, or that the majority of his teammates over the years admired him and looked to him for guidance, instead of exchanging insults with him in the press.

They'll just look it up in BBref and think, 'Yeah, Thomas was the better player.'

[strosrays]

Quote:
In this article, the author argues that The Big Hurt might be the best hitter ever.  One of his arguments is Thomas's 1994 season:

Quote:
If you concede nothing else to Frank, you need to give him 1994. In the modern, integrated era, it's the greatest 500-plus plate appearance season anyone's had.

Of course, someone else had an equally great season in that very same year.  With the exception of walks, Bagwell's numbers were at least the equivalent of Thomas's.  I suppose that you can argue that Bagwell didn't have 500 PAs (400 AB +  65 BB + ? sacs + at least one HPB), or that because he broke his hand he wouldn't have kept it up had the strike been averted.  But it's annoying that he's not even acknowledged.

Thomas had 44 more walks in that season, and that's probably enough to tilt the scales in Thomas's favor.  But even with those walks he only scored two more runs.  I don't remember old Comiskey as particularly hitter-friendly, but I doubt that it had near the effect on Thomas's numbers that the Dome had on Bagwell's.

Must stop grinding teeth now...

One thing to remember is, strike or no strike, Bagwell's season was done.  Thomas would've put up monster numbers in the full 162.

Matt Williams, of all people, was on a pace to break Maris' record that year, too.  Lest we forget.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
Damn.  

The first handful of names I thought to check - Ricky, Biggio, Bonds, Helton, Catpiss, Jeter, ManRam, Belle, Alomar, Griffey, ARod, Sosa, Rose - didn't get all that close over any period.

Set your sights a little higher. The two-year and three-year are better than anything Ted Williams ever did. Williams nudges Bagwell on the four-year. Winning the triple crown a couple of times will do that for you. But then that's not post-war.

Aaron, Mays, Musial, etc. are not close.

[Limey]

Quote:
What is sad is, in a generation no one who didn't actually see him play will even know what a terrifically well-rounded player he was

The play where he instantly figured out the focre-out/tag-out against the Brewers (the same play the Brewers fucked up against the Astros just recently) should be a "You make the call" game for the rest of time.  Pure genius.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
I did a trivia question about this awhile back.

Bagwell's 152 runs scored in 2000 was the most by a player in 64 years. Lou Gehrig scored 167 in 1936.

That's a lot of runs scored. That always reminds me of an old Bill James point in one of the Baseball Books in the early '90s. He quoted Lou Pinella or somebody saying that David Justice looked like a young Ted Williams.

To which James pointed out that nobody looks like a young Ted Williams. Williams, when he was 20 years old as a rookie, scored 131 and drove in 145 runs.

Pujols got close as a 21-year-old rookie, scoring 112 and driving in 130.

[Lefty]

Quote:
Set your sights a little higher.

Only reason I stuck more with recent guys is the increase in offense.  Didn't really expect to find many/any that did better in the 50's - 80's, but looked at Musial, Hank, Mays & a few other guys in that level.

Was surprised to see Yaz only scored 100 runs twice in his career.