MLB playoffs 2017

RS12

Well-Known Member
Messages
31,975
Reaction score
27,952
This is Bill James' list of greatest players of all-time using his win-shares statistic:

1. Babe Ruth- With 758 Win Shares, Ruth comes out as the best ever.

2. Ted Williams- Williams had 558 actual win shares. Extrapolating for the years he missed he ends up with 728 projected win shares. Of all the players on the list, Williams is by far the most affected by the extrapolation technique, ending up with an additional 170 win shares. How I arrived at this figure must therefore be explained. Williams missed three years due to World War Two, 1943-45. His win shares for the two years before were 42 and 46. For the two years after, 50 and 44. I assigned Williams 40 for each year for a total of 120. This is clearly a low figure, based on his performance both before and after. Williams also missed most of 1952 and 53 due to the Korean War. He had 34 win shares in 1951 and 29 in 1954. I assigned him 29 win shares on top of the one he had in 1952, and 20 on top of the 10 in 1953. None of these estimates seems improbable to me. In fact, they seem quite likely. Adding it all up, he is second only to Ruth.

3. Ty Cobb/Willie Mays- Cobb had 726 total win shares and Mays had 642 total win shares, but missed most of 1952 and all of 1953 in the service. In 1951, his first year he had 19 win shares, and upon returning had 40 in both 1954 and '55. Assigning Mays shares of 30 and 35 for the years he missed seems reasonable, bringing his total to 701. Mays finished 25 shares behind Cobb, and adjusting for the time line, these two seem about even, leaving open the question about who was the greatest all-around player ever

5. Hank Aaron- Aaron had 643 win shares, and did not miss any time. He made the most of his career, and is the all-time leader in Total Bases, Home Runs, and Runs Batted In.

6. Honus Wagner- The Dutchman finished with 655 total win shares, but the time line favors Aaron. James rates him higher than Cobb because his peak years were better, but 70 career win shares is a big difference.

7. Stan Musial- Stan the Man finished with 604 win shares. He missed one year to World War Two, but his stats the previous two years were helped by weak competition, with many of the best players off to war. I'd adjust Musials overall totals slightly giving him 16 extra career win shares, finishing with 620.

8. Barry Bonds-Bonds has 611 career win shares. His 2001 campaign is now recognized as the greatest offensive season of all time, and garnered him 54 total win shares. He followed up with a stellar 2002 season, gaining 49 win shares, and 39 in '03. The real question is where this man will end up. He could finish his career even higher than Hank Aaron, and challenge his godfather, Willie Mays, for the title of best all-around player. But during the 2003 off season, allegations of steroid use have dogged Bonds, and could affect our perception of him.

9. Tris Speaker- Perhaps the most underrated player of all time, he collected 633 win shares but was overshadowed by Cobb and Ruth. A whopping 118 of his total win shares comes from fielding, further hiding his true value. Speaker played center field very shallow so that no balls would fall in front of him, but was able to catch those behind him through his excellent speed, much like Andruw Jones would many years later. The time line favors Musial and Bonds over him.

10. Mickey Mantle- Mantle finished with 565 win shares. James rates him higher than me since his prime years were so good. Mantle was the best player in the league every year from 1954-64 except for 1963. When he retired at age 36 he was still posting good numbers.

If Bill James says you're the greatest.

Then accept the trophy.


Because you are. :D
Sounds about right but I thought the concensus of most BB historians was Bonds #3 roids and all. Also Teddy Ball Game would have put up some huge numbers in those 5 missed years he spent in the wars IMO, those were prime years physically.
 

LittleBoyBlue

Redvolution
Messages
35,766
Reaction score
8,411
Yanks are

only giving them false hope..so the end is even more painfull.;)



I really think we are witnessing that.

We tagged their closer with a honerun.
Got him thinking.

Astros celebrated an out very early in game one.
Go ahead.


Let’s see!


Until you beat us.... we are the gosh darn mother flowering Yankees..... winning battles is not same as winning the war. 1-0 in best of 7... I still like our chances even if Keuchel pitches 3 games.
 

Cowboys_22

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,995
Reaction score
9,675
I really think we are witnessing that.

We tagged their closer with a honerun.
Got him thinking.

Astros celebrated an out very early in game one.
Go ahead.


Let’s see!


Until you beat us.... we are the gosh darn mother flowering Yankees..... winning battles is not same as winning the war. 1-0 in best of 7... I still like our chances even if Keuchel pitches 3 games.

True, it's still anybody's series. I like our chances too.

The Yankees have the better overall pitching, hopefully the Astros bats can scrape enough runs win a few more battles.

Go Stros!
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
41,819
Reaction score
41,680
I really think we are witnessing that.

We tagged their closer with a honerun.
Got him thinking.

Astros celebrated an out very early in game one.
Go ahead.


Let’s see!


Until you beat us.... we are the gosh darn mother flowering Yankees..... winning battles is not same as winning the war. 1-0 in best of 7... I still like our chances even if Keuchel pitches 3 games.
Verlander is up next
 

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,985
Reaction score
27,885
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
True, it's still anybody's series. I like our chances too.

The Yankees have the better overall pitching, hopefully the Astros bats can scrape enough runs win a few more battles.

Go Stros!

The Yankees have the better overall pitching?

Definitely the bullpen.

Houston has the better starting staff.

I consider the pitching overall to be a "push".
 
Top