1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How Good Was Pete Rose, really?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Ilmago, Sep 22, 2010.

  1. Ilmago

    Ilmago Guest

    Since 1950, I group players in general categores.

    In my top group, Superstars, I put Mays, Mantle, Aaron, Frank Robinson, Clemente, Schmidt, Bonds, A-Rod, Puljols. I call them great

    In my next category down, I call them excellent/superb baseball players. Rose, Ichiro, Gwynn, Yaz, Billy Williams, Kaline, Boggs, Brett.

    I call Rose, Ichiro and Gwynn no power, hit machines.

    I would never place Pete Rose in my Top 20 Players, and I have mixed, conflicted feelings about calling him a great player. A very, very good player? Certainly. An excellent, superb player? Absolutely. But I would never pick him over Clemente for my team. Never. I rank Pete with Ichiro and Gwynn. All hit machines with amazing consistency. But I reserve the adjective 'great' for my top-level, most elite guys.

    What are your thoughts?
     
  2. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    If you don't have George Brett in your top group, I don't know what to tell you. The guy is one of the three best third basemen of all-time. In think he's better than Schmidt, although I understand many would disagree. I would have Yaz in the top group as well. The guy won a Triple Crown for Christ's sake.

    Rose is an all-timer. He was one of those guys who was just amazing to watch. He played harder than anybody I've ever seen. If you're coaching youth baseball, you want to show them tapes of Rose and say, "Play like him."

    I think his scandals have made people forget just what an amazing player he was. He also played longer than he should have and that diminishes some people's memory of him.
     
  3. Huggy

    Huggy Well-Known Member

    I'll agree with Mizzou on Brett. I was a huge fan despite the fact that my Jays could never deal with him.

    As for the others, I'd have Ichiro in the superstar group. In his prime, he was a fucking machine, there was nothing he couldn't do. I'd pay to watch him over ARod and Pujols any day.
     
  4. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Rose also belongs in the top group for his versatility. If I'm not mistaken, he played second, third, first and the outfield and made the All-Star game at every position.

    I'd rather watch Brett, Rose or Carew play than anybody who is playing today.
     
  5. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    if you are looking for the quintessesntial top of the order (1 or 2) hitter the list is Ricky Henderson and Peter Rose. From '63-80 he average 725+ plate appearances. Hit for high average and OBP. With the Reds he also averaged over 200 hits and 100 runs scored a season with close to 40 doubles a year. Well above average defensively at 1st 2nd 3rd and OF.

    He should be in the big room at the HOF

    I'm with Brett as being in the Hall of Fame of HOF. Musial was as great a player as there was and he played throughout the 50's
     
  6. Steak Snabler

    Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

    This.

    He also deserves credit for his longevity. It wasn't just luck that he avoided injuries. He worked his ass off to stay in shape and had the obsessive determination (which some would selfishness, I guess) to keep playing long after many guys would have hung it up.

    I don't think he's one of the Top 20 players ever, either. Not enough power and wasn't a great base stealer for a leadoff man (though he was a very good baserunner). But he'd have been a lock, no doubt, first-ballot Hall of Famer were he eligible, and justifiably so.

    And since it's a Pete Rose thread, I have to, HAVE TO, post this picture:

    [​IMG]
     
  7. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    Rose was a really good player for a really long time at a lot of different positions. In terms of sheer value to his teams, no, he wasn't a top-20 player. But if you are giving credit for longevity and versatility, he's one of the most interesting players in history.
     
  8. Fly

    Fly Well-Known Member

    Did more with less than just about anyone in baseball history. Below average athletic ability mixed with bulldog determination (and a world-class prick attitude to boot, which served him well on the field, not so much off of it).
     
  9. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    If you wanted to win, having Rose on your team was a must. Sociopath and compulsive gambler he was and is, but the guy could win a game in more ways than just about any of his peers. Anyone who doesn't think Rose was a great player is either too young to have seen him play or their understanding of baseball is deeply flawed.
     
  10. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    Watching him as a kid I always thought he was a phony, especially with all of that sprinting to first after a walk crap. In retrospect, I was right.
     
  11. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    There's no shame in not being among the top 20 players all time.

    But Rose is still one of the all-time greats.
     
  12. Azrael

    Azrael Active Member

    Top-100 player.

    Top-5 jackass.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page