Neyer on Top 10 Indiv Seasons

[markdublya]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=neyer_rob&id=3187711

Would you have swapped #1 with #2? I might.

[Baltimoron]

I think defense is a major factor that a 20 something year old Babe had over a 40+ Bonds. This doesn't appear to be factored in.

[Moose Milligan]

Good list, though I don't think you can hold postseasons against players who were on teams that didn't make it.

A tad surprised that Hack Wilson's 1930 wasn't on there.... .354/56/191...hell of a line.

[TyCobb]

Good list, though I don't think you can hold postseasons against players who were on teams that didn't make it.

A tad surprised that Hack Wilson's 1930 wasn't on there.... .354/56/191...hell of a line.

How about Ty Cobb's 1911?

.420/.467/.621 with 127 RBI and 147 Runs. Oh and 83 SB.

[Moose Milligan]

How about Ty Cobb's 1911?

.420/.467/.621 with 127 RBI and 147 Runs. Oh and 83 SB.

Yeah, Cobb definitely deserves a nod, especially this one. All the seasons occur after 1920 so he might have (unconsciously) done a post dead ball era list.

That said, how about Rogers Hornsby 1924? 1.203 OPS, .424/.507 or even his 1925 with his 1.245 OPS?

I know it's not Bonds-like 1.300-1.400 OPS, but for the time thats pretty incredible. It might be just me, but Hornsby seems to get overlooked a bit.

[Odenton O]

Yeah, Cobb definitely deserves a nod, especially this one. All the seasons occur after 1920 so he might have (unconsciously) done a post dead ball era list.

Wagner's 1908 season was on there. And I do think Cobb's season was probably worth making the list somewhere.

[Sports Guy]

Where does Cal's 1991 season rank? His WARP3 was over 17.

[Lucky Jim]

I think there's a strong argument for both Cobb and Hack Wilson. I thought of Hack first, too.

How about Rogers Hornsby's 1924? Jimmie Foxx's 1932?

[Lucky Jim]

Where does Cal's 1991 season rank? His WARP3 was over 17.

His WARP3 was 15.6, btw.

[Lucky Jim]

Yeah, Cobb definitely deserves a nod, especially this one. All the seasons occur after 1920 so he might have (unconsciously) done a post dead ball era list.

That said, how about Rogers Hornsby 1924? 1.203 OPS, .424/.507 or even his 1925 with his 1.245 OPS?

I know it's not Bonds-like 1.300-1.400 OPS, but for the time thats pretty incredible. It might be just me, but Hornsby seems to get overlooked a bit.

Apparently I should have read further...

[Moose Milligan]

Surprised Drungo isn't all over this one...where ya at Drungo?

[Hallas]

His WARP3 was 15.6, btw.

It looks like they revalued WARP3 - it was 17 as late last mid-season last year.

[DrungoHazewood]

Good list, though I don't think you can hold postseasons against players who were on teams that didn't make it.

A tad surprised that Hack Wilson's 1930 wasn't on there.... .354/56/191...hell of a line.

I just saw this thread, but yes, this is right up my alley.

Hack's season was very good, but you have to remember that an average batter in the NL in 1930 had a .303/.360/.448 line. And Wrigley was a hitter's park on top of that. The 1930 Cubs had six players with 150+ at bats who hit at least .330, five of them regulars, and they didn't win the pennant.

If Ruth or Bonds had been in that environment at their peaks they might have had a 1.500 OPS.

[DrungoHazewood]

This whole concept hinges on how much you think, and account for, baseball getting better over the years. Ruth, Wagner, and even Williams played in leagues that were objectively much worse than the ones Bonds or Pedro did. In Ruth and Wagner's time the minors were mostly independent, and it was pretty common for very good players to choose to spend their careers in leagues other than the majors. That's unthinkable today. Plus you have the differences in scouting, racial discrimination, and a host of other factors that made it far easier to stand above the average major league player.

[DrungoHazewood]

Yeah, Cobb definitely deserves a nod, especially this one. All the seasons occur after 1920 so he might have (unconsciously) done a post dead ball era list.

That said, how about Rogers Hornsby 1924? 1.203 OPS, .424/.507 or even his 1925 with his 1.245 OPS?

I know it's not Bonds-like 1.300-1.400 OPS, but for the time thats pretty incredible. It might be just me, but Hornsby seems to get overlooked a bit.

Cobb (and Hornsby) has the curve of history thing going against him, too. And a lot of people think he was overrated defensively.

Hornsby may have been the worst defensive second baseman to have a long career at the position. He came up in an era where second base was where you stuck your big guy who couldn't charge the bunt well enough to play third. By the end of his career a second baseman was expected to turn 120 double plays a year, and he couldn't.

From a defensive point of view Hornsby was like a guy who hit cleanup in 1914 with 5 homers, and he was still hitting cleanup in 1925 with 5 homers. It was defensible, if not really a positive thing, in 1914. It was kind of a joke in 1925. I know we're talking a few seasons with some great offense here, but think of Ryan Braun this year. He probably shouldn't have won the ROY despite slugging over .600 because his defense was awful, awful, awful.

When you're talking the best 10 seasons of all time that kind of thing eliminates you.