Cal Ripken's Legacy

[Redskins Rick]

IIRC, Cal's comment was that Beltre was a better defensive player than Brooks. So their offense is not relevant to the discussion.

In any case, I disagreed with Cal about that comment, but he's entitled to his opinion. I'm certainly not going to hold a grudge against the guy for something he said while broadcasting. Nothing takes away from the fact that he was one of the greatest players in Orioles history.

We all have opinions on this board, and some of them are vastly different from each other.

No reason, this doesn't hold true for ex-players.

[brianod]

Palmer also had the advantage of pitching with ridiculous defenses behind him.

Frank didn't play here long enough, IMO. Best overall career, no contest...and maybe the biggest impact player the Orioles ever had, but the tenure between Brooks and Cal comes into play.

I thought the question was who was the greatest Oriole of all time. The greatest player ever to play for this franchise was FRob. But, I agree with you if the question was who had the greatest career as an Oriole. Cal and Brooks are very close. Flip a coin on that...

[Olson30]

Greatest player in the history of the franchise.

LOL wow, Ripken is not even in the same zip code as both Robinson's and Palmer

[Olson30]

Exactly. Ripken is a top 10 defensive player of all time too. He had some MONSTER seasons. Well over .300 with 30+ bombs at SS and playing it very well. Just an incredible player.

Ripken lifetime avg is .276, he batted .300 only 4 times & had 1 season where he hit 30 homers

[Nigel Tufnel]

LOL wow, Ripken is not even in the same zip code as both Robinson's and Palmer

I dunno, they're all obviously great players so to some extent it's splitting hairs, but I think you can make a pretty persuasive argument that Cal was better than Brooks or Palmer. Career-wise, I think Frank was the best of the four, but we might be talking about just his time as an Oriole here.

[Redskins Rick]

I dunno, they're all obviously great players so to some extent it's splitting hairs, but I think you can make a pretty persuasive argument that Cal was better than Brooks or Palmer. Career-wise, I think Frank was the best of the four, but we might be talking about just his time as an Oriole here.

I guess I might be in the minority on this board, but, I don't even believe Palmer was the best pitcher the Orioles had.

Back to Cal.

Cal had a good bat and decent power, and remade the SS position, from the likes of the no stick all glove guys.

Cal had decent range at SS for a big guy, but what he brought to the position, was a cannon for an arm, and the ability to know where the ball was likely to be hit, and move himself to be able to make a play if the play came is way.

You could argue all day long and twice on Sunday, who was the best Oriole ever, and there would be no clear winner. Maybe thats a thought for the Oriole History Forum.

[DrungoHazewood]

Greatest player in the history of the franchise.

I think that's fairly obvious to anyone who's done more than a cursory, subjective look at things.

...if you ignore the first 25yrs.

Brooks was a great player. But it would be difficult to argue with the available evidence that he's better than Cal. Either in peak or career value.

Well, in your lifetime sure.

But others will point out, that in their lifetime, Brooks is Mr. Oriole and the greatest in history.

I personally like them both, and have a hard time saying either is more important or greater than the other.

Ironically, they both point to the other as being Mr. Oriole.

When the evidence suggests Cal was ~15 wins better than Brooks it's hard to argue otherwise. If it was close I could see it coming down to subjective factors. But it's not particularly close.

Palmer is 36th all-time in wins, 42nd in winning percentage, 52nd in strikeouts, and 122nd in career ERA, 66th in adjusted ERA. Therefore, is it the 3 Cy Youngs that have him supposedly "mentioned with the all time elite pitchers of the game?"

I do agree that Ripken isn't in the category of "elite bats."

Cal is an elite bat among shortstops. If you set minimum thresholds of 1000 games played and at least 750 at SS Cal was 8th in history in OPS+ when he retired.

So if this thread was largely created because Ripken said Beltre was better than Robinson then what is the huge deal? You can make an argument and a solid one that Beltre is a better player than Robinson.

You can make a reasonable argument that Beltre might end up with more overall career value than Brooks. Which I don't think is terribly controversial. I don't think many people believe Brooks is the best all-around 3B of all time, that's pretty clearly Schmidt. And I don't think many people believe Beltre has taken Brooks' crown as best defensive 3B (or possibly player) of all time.

LOL wow, Ripken is not even in the same zip code as both Robinson's and Palmer

Ripken lifetime avg is .276, he batted .300 only 4 times & had 1 season where he hit 30 homers

I don't think your first assertion is supported by facts. And your second post is but a small part of the overall analysis.

[Tony-OH]

I'll play.

He's credited by some as saving baseball after the strike.

He was an excellent 3rd baseman; but no Brooks Robinson.

He was great to the fans and tireless in signing autographs long after the games were over.

But he is also described as aloof and standoffish in the clubhouse and selfish by some when the subject of the "streak" comes up.

He surprised the the press when he said he really didn't know very much about Lou Gehrig when he was chasing his record. He was chastised by Keith Olbermann for that.

Some of his teammates weren't crazy over his choice to use a private limo over the team bus or when he would opt to stay in a hotel other than the team hotel during away games.

He was dull; not exciting. Frank Wren signed Albert Belle because he felt the team needed a star "with more passion, more fire."

And during the 2012 playoff games on TBS, "Carl" Ripken, Jr. was roundly criticized, primarily by Orioles fans, for his seemingly pro-NY Yankees bias.

I think this is a pretty good wrap up myself. As a player, Cal Ripken is probably the greatest Oriole ever. As Great8 said, he helped redefine the position of SS. As a 19-time All-Star with over 3,000 hits and 400 home runs, he was easily a first ballot hall of famer.

Saying all that, over the last ten year's of his career he only put up three season of 100 OPS+ or better (meaning he was below average offensively for 7 of his last ten years in the majors). During that time the Orioles only made the playoffs twice and finished first just once. The Orioles had a losing record in 7 of his last 12 years in the big leagues.

I'll admit his unnecessary Brooks comments during the playoffs turned me off of Ripken, but it was more than just those comments. He was so pro-Yankee during that series that it became embarrassing even though it was obvious he was trying to overcompensate. The real question was why, why would he care if he came off as a little biased towards the Orioles, afterall, everyone knows he was an Orioles icon. That's what made his Brooks comments so treacherous. It wasn't that he had that opinion, but that he actually cared so little about Baltimore and Brooks Robinson that he would say that opinion on the air. He knows how Baltimore feels about Brooks Robinson's defense and how Brooks is held in almost sainthood regard. But Cal didn't care. He only cared about how his corporate image would look better nationally since there are more Yankee fans across the country than Orioles fans.

So Roy is right, Cal doesn't ow Baltimore nothing, but I would argue that we don't owe Cal anymore either. We've given him his props for his on field production and for all his contributions on and off the field during his career. He's chosen to become National Cal and that means he's no longing Baltimore Cal to me.

If he chooses to manage the Nationals or any other team, I say go for it. I'll root against him like I would any other manager managing against the Orioles and won't feel anything else.

As a player, Cal's legacy will always be as a Baltimore Orioles and we should be proud of his accomplishments. Off the field is another thing and Cal's actions proves he's about Cal and has little regard for his overall Baltimore legacy.

[TonySoprano]

Cal is an elite bat among shortstops. If you set minimum thresholds of 1000 games played and at least 750 at SS Cal was 8th in history in OPS+ when he retired.

I believe he was referring to elite in comparison to all hitters, respective of position. That is why I don't Cal up in that category, nor would anyone put him in that group which includes Ruth, Gehrig, Mays, Williams, Cobb....

Cal is tied for 538th in career OPS.

[DrungoHazewood]

I believe he was referring to elite in comparison to all hitters, respective of position. That is why I don't Cal up in that category, nor would anyone put him in that group which includes Ruth, Gehrig, Mays, Williams, Cobb....

Cal is tied for 538th in career OPS.

No argument there. But I think saying he's 538th in OPS, while true, sounds worse than it is. There are 1831 players who qualify on the bb-ref list you reference (3000+ PAs), and most of those 1831 got that many PAs by being good hitters. So Cal is in the top 30% of MLB players with long careers in offensive output despite being a shortstop.

Even Honus Wagner and Arky Vaughn couldn't crack the top 100 in OPS all time.

Since WWII Cal is in a pretty tight group with Tejada, Yount, Larkin, Jeter, Reyes, and Trammell in offensive ability among shortstops. Only ARod, Garciaparra, and Banks clearly above that group, and Nomar's career was half as long.

I guess that was just a long-winded way of saying obviously you're right, but he was a heck of a hitter for a shortstop.

[El Gordo]

I think this is a pretty good wrap up myself. As a player, Cal Ripken is probably the greatest Oriole ever. As Great8 said, he helped redefine the position of SS. As a 19-time All-Star with over 3,000 hits and 400 home runs, he was easily a first ballot hall of famer.

Saying all that, over the last ten year's of his career he only put up three season of 100 OPS+ or better (meaning he was below average offensively for 7 of his last ten years in the majors). During that time the Orioles only made the playoffs twice and finished first just once. The Orioles had a losing record in 7 of his last 12 years in the big leagues.

I'll admit his unnecessary Brooks comments during the playoffs turned me off of Ripken, but it was more than just those comments. He was so pro-Yankee during that series that it became embarrassing even though it was obvious he was trying to overcompensate. The real question was why, why would he care if he came off as a little biased towards the Orioles, afterall, everyone knows he was an Orioles icon. That's what made his Brooks comments so treacherous. It wasn't that he had that opinion, but that he actually cared so little about Baltimore and Brooks Robinson that he would say that opinion on the air. He knows how Baltimore feels about Brooks Robinson's defense and how Brooks is held in almost sainthood regard. But Cal didn't care. He only cared about how his corporate image would look better nationally since there are more Yankee fans across the country than Orioles fans.

So Roy is right, Cal doesn't ow Baltimore nothing, but I would argue that we don't owe Cal anymore either. We've given him his props for his on field production and for all his contributions on and off the field during his career. He's chosen to become National Cal and that means he's no longing Baltimore Cal to me.

If he chooses to manage the Nationals or any other team, I say go for it. I'll root against him like I would any other manager managing against the Orioles and won't feel anything else.

As a player, Cal's legacy will always be as a Baltimore Orioles and we should be proud of his accomplishments. Off the field is another thing and Cal's actions proves he's about Cal and has little regard for his overall Baltimore legacy.

This is one area where we are in complete agreement. In short Cal saw fit to throw Brooks and the O's under the bus to further his new career.

[bradyrocks]

I think this is a pretty good wrap up myself. As a player, Cal Ripken is probably the greatest Oriole ever. As Great8 said, he helped redefine the position of SS. As a 19-time All-Star with over 3,000 hits and 400 home runs, he was easily a first ballot hall of famer.

Saying all that, over the last ten year's of his career he only put up three season of 100 OPS+ or better (meaning he was below average offensively for 7 of his last ten years in the majors). During that time the Orioles only made the playoffs twice and finished first just once. The Orioles had a losing record in 7 of his last 12 years in the big leagues.

I'll admit his unnecessary Brooks comments during the playoffs turned me off of Ripken, but it was more than just those comments. He was so pro-Yankee during that series that it became embarrassing even though it was obvious he was trying to overcompensate. The real question was why, why would he care if he came off as a little biased towards the Orioles, afterall, everyone knows he was an Orioles icon. That's what made his Brooks comments so treacherous. It wasn't that he had that opinion, but that he actually cared so little about Baltimore and Brooks Robinson that he would say that opinion on the air. He knows how Baltimore feels about Brooks Robinson's defense and how Brooks is held in almost sainthood regard. But Cal didn't care. He only cared about how his corporate image would look better nationally since there are more Yankee fans across the country than Orioles fans.

So Roy is right, Cal doesn't ow Baltimore nothing, but I would argue that we don't owe Cal anymore either. We've given him his props for his on field production and for all his contributions on and off the field during his career. He's chosen to become National Cal and that means he's no longing Baltimore Cal to me.

If he chooses to manage the Nationals or any other team, I say go for it. I'll root against him like I would any other manager managing against the Orioles and won't feel anything else.

As a player, Cal's legacy will always be as a Baltimore Orioles and we should be proud of his accomplishments. Off the field is another thing and Cal's actions proves he's about Cal and has little regard for his overall Baltimore legacy.

Bingo.

[Orioles4Life21]

Do we only have room in our hearts for one hero? Cal and Brooks are equally great Orioles. I love them both.

[DrungoHazewood]

This is one area where we are in complete agreement. In short Cal saw fit to throw Brooks and the O's under the bus to further his new career.

It's funny, maybe ironic, that Cal was and is possibly the most careful, guarded, politically correct interviewee I've ever seen. He's probably talked to the press tens of thousands of times in his life and in almost zero of those interviews did he ever say anything remotely controversial. Even when they fired his Dad seven games into the season for not winning with a terrible team he never came right out and criticised the team.

So once in 30 years he says something a little controversial in an offhand statement and a good chunk of the fanbase turns on him like rabid dogs.

I doubt we ever hear an original thought come out of his mouth in public again. It's right back to "gosh darn it Joe, yep, both those guys were great ballplayers, winners, hard workers, gave 120% and nobody in their right mind would pick one over the other."

[Guest]

JIM BOWDEN ‏@JimBowdenESPNxm 1m

Nationals giving serious consideration to Cal Ripken Jr.as a Managerial Candidate according to source