What, no Shelley Duncan?

Man I thought for sure 1997 Tino Martinez would be on there.

Tino’s ‘97 clocks in at #24.  1967 Mickey Mantle, 1956 Moose Skowron, and 1968 Mantle come in at 21-23 respectively.  Tino’s season looks better on a raw stats basis, but once you adjust for context he drops a little.

I don’t know about this rating method. If Tino’s 97 can’t be worth more than Mantle’s 1968 something is wrong. Tino’s 01 season belongs in there as well. Mantle’s last two seasons were substandard -save for a lot of walks. He was still one of the few dangerous hitters on the team in terms of power so they pitched around him consistently.

Also Mattingly’s 87 was better than Skowron’s 1960 season in all categories. Doesn’t make any sense.

Looking at Giambi’s best seasons is reminder of how much more potent this offense is/was when he is/was a productive hitter.

If Tino’s 97 can’t be worth more than Mantle’s 1968 something is wrong.

Context, context, context.

In 1968, the average AL hitter hit .230/.298/.339. In 1997 the average AL hitter hit .271/.340/.428. Think about that for a minute. 

Also Mattingly’s 87 was better than Skowron’s 1960 season in all categories.

Again, context matters. The average AL hitter hit .255/.328/.388 in 1960, and in 1987 they hit .265/.333/.425.

That Lou Gehrig fellow seems like quite a ball-player. 

Quick question, I know that OPS+ and the BRAA are adjusted for era, but are the linear weights that are used to calculate the batting runs adjusted?  I know a single is worth more or less depending on the run-environment of the times.

And that 212 psOPS+ is just awesome.

It’s weird seeing Jason Giambi up there, but his first season in pinstripes really was quite good.

People are quick to blame Cashman for Giambi being on the roster as dead weight, but as you pointed out, he had several seasons where he was a monster at the plate.

Why did Gehrig ever steal?  His SB/CS is awful.

Quick question, I know that OPS+ and the BRAA are adjusted for era, but are the linear weights that are used to calculate the batting runs adjusted?

My understanding is that you can handle the varying values of the different events fairly well across eras by adjusting the value of an out, so that’s what I did.  It’s probably the lazy way out, but I think it’s close enough for this.

Again, this isn’t meant to be a definitive list, just a starting point for discussion.

That’s perfectly fine.  I was just curious.  Those batting lines for Gehrig are ridiculous given any era.

Also, forget Yankee 1B seasons… has anyone ever had a higher psOPS+ than Gehrig’s 212 in 1927?

It’s a vastly different era with a far more level playing field today… I can’t imagine there have been many psOPS+ seasons above 200 lately. Bonds in 2001, maybe?

has anyone ever had a higher psOPS+ than Gehrig’s 212 in 1927?

No one on the Yankees has had a higher one.  I’m thinking Bonds 2001-2002 may be close.

Wow, that’s pretty awesome then. I would have guessed also some of Babe Ruth’s years, when he had higher OPS+ (relative to the whole league) than Gehrig’s 1927 (which is still the 17th best OPS+ season of all time). But, in that case, I’m guessing it’s because there were better hitters in the Outfield in the 1920s than at first base. The presence of other great hitters at a position at the same time will impact the psOPS+ score as well, right?

I think Fred Dunlap’s ‘84 season for the St. Louis Maroons might take the cake.  OPS+ of 258 as a second baseman.  He also had a save that year.  1884, sheesh.  I love how old baseball statistics are.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/d/dunlafr01.shtml

He was born before the civil war started.

Bonds 2002 = 260 psOPS+.  2001 = 258 psOPS+.  2004 = 247 psOPS+.  Damn.

The presence of other great hitters at a position at the same time will impact the psOPS+ score as well, right?

Right.  From what I’ve read, first base defense was considered more important than offense in the early years of baseball, so there weren’t as many good hitters at the position.

Mantle’s last two seasons were substandard -save for a lot of walks.

Substandard for Mantle, sure.  But he was top ten in raw OPS both years.  Yes, a lot of his value was in walks, but his 22 HR in 1967 tied for 8th in the AL.  Only two players in all of MLB (Killebrew and Yastrzemski) hit 40 that year.  And of course, 1968 was the year of the pitcher—McLain won 31 games, and Gibson had an ERA of 1.12.  Only one player (Frank Howard) hit 40 home runs that year.  Yastrzemski hit .301, and won the batting title.  It’s pretty hard to wrap your brain around some of those numbers, even for those of us who saw it.

I would have guessed also some of Babe Ruth’s years, when he had higher OPS+ (relative to the whole league) than Gehrig’s 1927 (which is still the 17th best OPS+ season of all time).

Actually, you’re right mehmattski.  I didn’t check Ruth’s LF seasons in 1921 and 1926 (psOPS+ of 218 and 213 respectively).

I can’t believe he only struck out 31 times (walked 109) in 579 ABs in 1934.  Absurd

Why did Gehrig ever steal?  His SB/CS is awful.

Again this is context.  I think a lot of teams still played dead-ball style back then, and EVERYONE ran, a lot.  I think today if he had those kinds of numbers managers would be putting a brake on him, but back then it was how the game was played.  Also, I have no idea if managers back then had “green light” rules for players, or if they always called steals.

im curious as to where gehrig stacks up among all first basemen in the history of the game. In the general baseball community it seems to me that he is consistently overlooked as one of the greatest to ever play the game. If it wasn’t for that candy bar guy maybe lou would get the recognition he deserved. (One of my favorite Yankeeographies)

im curious as to where gehrig stacks up among all first basemen in the history of the game

I’d say he’s pretty much at the top of the list.  I don’t get this idea that he’s overlooked.  He was on the all-century team.  I’m pretty sure he was in the top ten in the baseball survivor project.  If you’re just talking about hitters, he moves up even higher.  I’ve never heard anyone try to argue that he’s not a slam-dunk inner circle Hall of Famer, and one of the very very best to ever play the game.  How much more recognition does he deserve?

he should have a candy bar.

“How much more recognition does he deserve? “

Ask most any baseball fan (of course not you gentlemen because you know your stuff) to name the top 10 hitters of all time…I doubt you get Gehrig as an answer.

I dont want the writers editors and whoever else to recognize his greatness. I want the entire baseball fan community to recognize.

That is what he deserves.

I dont want the writers editors and whoever else to recognize his greatness. I want the entire baseball fan community to recognize.

Why would you want to beat your head against that wall? Everybody has an opinion; “greatest hitter” is almost undefinable; and almost nobody alive saw him play. Why do you expect fans everywhere to care about him?

That said, his numbers are un-freaking-believable. Don’t get me wrong, there’s probably a good case that he’s in the top 10 all time. Maybe I’ll dig out my Bill James Historical Abstract and see what it is. I seem to recall he was the #1 1B’er, but it’s been a while.

Lou was Bill’s top 1B, I think he was in the 20’s for his all time 100 list.

Facing Ruth-Gehrig back to back must have cause a lot of psychological damage to pitchers.

I dont want the writers editors and whoever else to recognize his greatness. I want the entire baseball fan community to recognize.

The All-Century team was fan voting.  Gehrig won at first base.  He out-polled Mark McGwire, who was coming off of “70!” by a final tally of 1,207,992 votes to 517,181.  In fact, Gehrig got the most votes of any player, including Ruth.  Do you think everybody has forgotten all about him since 1999?

i suppose i did not appreciate the 1999 all century team seeing as how I was 10 at the time. That is remarkable that he was the top vote getter.

But still among my generation I think we can agree that the Iron Man is not held as highly as he should be.

I read the latest biography of Lou Gehrig a year or so ago and what stuck with me was on the back jacket as a testimonial to the book and the man.  I’ll paraphrase..

Seldom does it occur that the closer you examine a hero that the individual’s appeal and luster not diminish as you find out more about him. I had to agree after reading it.  Gehrig is one of the true heroes of all time on and off the field.  I’m sorry that I can’t even give the title or the author but the book is still readily available.
Perhaps someone else remembers.

I’ve got it. Entitled “Luckiest Man” by Jonathan Eig

There’s also a video of Gehrig somewhere on YouTube which shows him hitting BP with his shirt off. He’s frickin built like a Kentucky derby winning horse, and he did it on his mothers bratwurst and mashed potatoes.

I think this is the video, with some other good stills and video shots as well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Akxduexqug

The soundtrack is a little depressing.. I’m going to mute it and go with “Hot For Teacher”

But still among my generation I think we can agree that the Iron Man is not held as highly as he should be.

Have fun with that. My generation is still trying to remember why people were afraid of Jim Rice.

SSF: Rice was a lot better than his peers. He gets no love and I’m not sure why. Of course his numbers don’t add up. Its like the Dale Murphy syndrome.
SG: Dude you must have done some crazy stuff to keep the great Snuffy Stirnweiss off of the list. Do I snuff an agenda? How does Jim Spencer and Maas not make it. Davey Collins? All of them were faster than this Lou guy.

How does how do. Me Ma teached me Gaelic not this cumbersome tongue.

My generation is trying to figure out why people were ever afraid of Jim Rice, and how Jim Rice got introduced into a conversation about Lou Gehrig.

you know what? i have an authentic jersey with nothing on the back that I was going to have embroidered with 62….this thread has inspired me to get the “4” on it instead.

“SSF: Rice was a lot better than his peers”

Rice wasn’t as good as the guy across the outfield.

I didn’ say he was a HOF’er. He was better than his mid 70’s to early 80’s left fielding peers. I’ll be sure to send a private E-mail the next time I say something nice about an opposing player that didn’t suck.

i have an authentic jersey with nothing on the back that I was going to have embroidered with 62….this thread has inspired me to get the “4” on it instead

I’d definitely hold off on 62.  Or 65.  Those guys are likely to get lower numbers this season, and you don’t want to be wearing a jersey that’s just a trivia question in four or five years.

A non-jersey wearer myself (I usually show up to the Stadium in a giant hot dog outfit), I always wonder: isn’t there something cool about wearing the number the guy came up with, years later.

Wow Frog. I think I may have bitten your bun after a Claudell Washington 3 run homer in 88.

Last year I was torn between getting a Joba or Ruth jersey.  I couldn’t handle the pressure of worrying about Joba changing his number, so I went with Ruth.  I’m pretty confident he’s sticking with 3.

I remember that.  Wayne Tolleson and Don Slaught scored.  Won the game for Hipolito Pena.  My bun still bears the teethmarks.  I could make you your dentures some day.

Meh, this is like doing the top 10 season of a Yankee LF/SS I wonder who they’ll come up with ?

the top 10 season of a Yankee LF/SS

Yeah, SS is pretty much going to be Jeter and Scooter’s 1950 season.  LF might not be quite as straight-forward as you might think.  I’m pretty sure that Ruth played a number of seasons in RF for the Yanks…baseball-reference just lists OF.

I’ve read that Ruth played a lot of RF at home and a lot of LF on the road.  Given the size of LF at the Stadium and the sun, this makes a lot of sense.

SS should might also include Gil McDougald, Roy Smalley (it might seem like I’m kidding but I’m not) and the decentest year by Frank Crosetti.  LF should have Bob Meusel in there and either Henrich or Keller—I think it was Henrich. 

CF will be the real fun one, as we see how many times Bernie can make it into the top 20 to compete with DiMag and the Mick—and, of course, the fantastic 1985 Rickey.

Smalley only played one full season with the Yanks, and while he hit well, he only played 91 games at SS.  Crosetti’d decentest year is roughly comparable to Jeter’s first two, but not his last ten.  McDougald’s best hitting does happen to be in the years that he was the primary SS, but he still played a fair bit at other positions, and the offense doesn’t seem to quite reach Jeter-ian levels.

Keller’s best years blow Henrich and Meusel out of the water.  And of course, if Ruth was bouncing back and forth between LF and RF, then Meusel must have been doing the same (or the opposite, I guess).  How different are the baselines for LF and RF, anyway?  Maybe it would be better to lump all the corner OFers together and do twice as long a list.

Yeah, before I wrote about “Jeter and Scooter’s 1950 season”, I thought to look up specifically Crosetti and McDougald.  According to BBRef’s Batting Runs - which I believe are positionally adjusted - Crosetti really wasn’t a good offensive player, other than a couple of years where he was worth about a win above average.  McDougald’s rookie season was his best, but I don’t think he’s listed for any games at SS that year (mostly 2B, with some 3B).  His SS years as MC noted he played other positions as well, and even if he only played SS I don’t think would crack the top 10 - though he might crack the top 20.

I haven’t looked at every Yankee SS season, but if I had to guess I’d say the top 10 would be almost entirely Jeter, Rizzutto’s 1950, and…well, I really don’t know what else.

There are four different SS in the top 10 list.  Jeter, Rizzuto, _____ and ______.

Bobby Meacham and Alvaro Espinosa.  Although Andy Stankiewicz might sneak in there.