Baseball Player Comparison

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

Player A has played 17 seasons and is known as a great defensive player. He has won 8 Gold Gloves and hit 387 HR. His career OBP is .376, OPS .903 and OPS+ 131.

Player B also played 17 seasons and was also known as a great defensive player. He won 10 Gold Gloves and hit 389 HR. His career OBP was .342, his OPS was .817 and his OPS+ was 126.

Which player has the better Hall of Fame credentials?

I know it is easy to figure out who each player is but please don't name them until people have had a chance to vote.

Thanks

 

[Flying Headbutt]

I think the greatest difference is the positions they played. And, as is more often than we prefer to admit, the quality of the teams they were on. The eras they played in, in terms of PEDs and stadiums, also play a factor.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Without giving away too much, positions matter. So does being a key member of the modern version of the '27 Yankees. MVP's matter, too. And All-Star Game selections.

I think the other guy might get in eventually, a la Jim Rice or Andre Dawson, but right now he seems to be one of those guys who had a long, productive career and falls just short.

I hate using this metric in most cases, but here it's semi-valid. Ask 100 casual sports fans on the street if they've heard of one of these guys and 99 will say yes. The other guy would run less than 1/3, I'm guessing, if that.

 

[RickStain]

Without knowing their positions, there's really no way to compare them. Both players have potential HOF numbers as a SS or CF. Neither do as a 1B.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

So you are saying those numbers are HoF worthy for a SS or CF?

 

[cyclingwriter]

I decided not to look up the players, but a lot would have to do with eras for me (along with positions). If player A put up those numbers as a first baseman in the 1990s, no, not a Hall guy . If he put them up in the 1960s, maybe. Also, would want to see what parks each played in.

However, since you want a straight answer, I would go with A because of the OBP pecentage is a lot higher, and his adjusted OPS is slightly better. I hope thise helps your experiment.

 

[heyabbott]

So you are saying those numbers are HoF worthy for a SS or CF?

catcher!!

 

[RickStain]

So you are saying those numbers are HoF worthy for a SS or CF?

Player A, almost certainly. Player B is borderline.

 

[Guy_Incognito]

Is either one Nava? Otherwise, I'm leaning no and no.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

Is either one Nava? Otherwise, I'm leaning no and no.

Neither is The Nava.

And no and no means you would be making a big mistake on at least one of the players.

 

[Guy_Incognito]

Is either one Nava? Otherwise, I'm leaning no and no.

Neither is The Nava.

And no and no means you would be making a big mistake on at least one of the players.

I was kidding, position and era are keys to the question, it's a pretty good statistical cherry-pick though.

 

[novelist_wannabe]

If you're going on just those numbers, A has the advantage in every category except homers. But this vote is in a vacuum; there are, as has been mentioned, too many caveats to base a HOF vote on these numbers alone.

 

[spnited]

If you check the FULL records of both players, not just Chris' selected stats, you'll know why one of these guys already is in the Hall, deservedly so, and the other will never make it.

 

[RickStain]

If you check the FULL records of both players, not just Chris' selected stats, you'll know why one of these guys already is in the Hall, deservedly so, and the other will never make it.

The one who is already deserves in because he played the least-offensive position for a long time. The other guy probably deserves in for playing almost as rare a position.

 

[Flying Headbutt]

I could at least consider Player A for the HOF. I'm not saying that right now I'd vote him in if I had a vote. But he merits consideration.

 

[spnited]

If you check the FULL records of both players, not just Chris' selected stats, you'll know why one of these guys already is in the Hall, deservedly so, and the other will never make it.

The one who is already deserves in because he played the least-offensive position for a long time. The other guy probably deserves in for playing almost as rare a position.

What is "rare" about the other guy's position?
He's a good player, never been considered a great player, never the best in his league at his position, never close to being MVP and his best power years have to be viewed as possibly PED aided.

 

[Stitch]

If you check the FULL records of both players, not just Chris' selected stats, you'll know why one of these guys already is in the Hall, deservedly so, and the other will never make it.

The one who is already deserves in because he played the least-offensive position for a long time. The other guy probably deserves in for playing almost as rare a position.

What is "rare" about the other guy's position?
He's a good player, never been considered a great player, never the best in his league at his position, never close to being MVP and his best power years have to be viewed as possibly PED aided.

It's great to put up stats in a vacuum, but let's get real here. Baseball is not just about stats. It's always been about context.

 

[RickStain]

What is "rare" about the other guy's position?

It's the second- or third-least offensive position in the league for most of baseball history.

He's a good player, never been considered a great player, never the best in his league at his position, never close to being MVP and his best power years have to be viewed as possibly PED aided.

MVP awards can be pretty subjective, and playing on a great team in the middle of a great lineup can help a player pad the stats that win MVP votes.

And if people didn't think Player A was the best in the league at his position for a few years, they weren't paying enough attention.

The PEDs are a fair point. Each voter can decide for themselves how much weight to give that.

 

[Smasher_Sloan]

Without giving away too much, positions matter. So does being a key member of the modern version of the '27 Yankees. MVP's matter, too. <b>And All-Star Game selections.</b>

Less than you think.

 

[cyclingwriter]

Neither of these guys is Jamie Moyer, so who the hell cares.