Will Ichiro get 3000?

[TyCobb]

I agree with this ine of thinking, just ask the guy for an autograph only to see him ignore you. The guy had 2,000 hits in Japan before coming here, but for me he is the best pure hitter in the history of the game. Better than Cobb and Rose for me. He also plays Gold Glove D. That guy is a Hall of Famer and I think 3,000 hits will be very important to him. I also think he will reach that milestone.

Better than Cobb? Is that a joke?

.366/.433/.512 career line

Ichiro doesn't even have a season where he beats Cobb's career line.

[DrungoHazewood]

Better than Cobb? Is that a joke?

.366/.433/.512 career line

Ichiro doesn't even have a season where he beats Cobb's career line.

I guess there's a shadow of an argument somewhere in there that includes the slope of history - Ichiro's level of competition, even including Japan, is significantly better than Cobb's.

But it would be hard to argue the slope is so steep as to make a 118 OPS+ today the equivalent of a 168 in the teens and 20s.

I think you can kind of take any statement that lumps Ichiro, Rose, and Cobb together and calls them the best hitters ever with a big grain of salt. If you're just talking batting average Cobb and Ichiro belong in the discussion, along with some other guys like Boggs, Gwynn, and maybe Hornsby. But Rose was a .303 career hitter who never topped .350.

[Frobby]

My argument is also that a career OPS in the low 800's is not particularly valuable in a corner outfielder.

Now his defense and speed does enhance his value but, to me, a high average with few walks and extra base hits is not as valuable as it is impressive.

I understand your point, but Ichiro is a player who adds value in a lot of ways that OPS doesn't measure well:

- OBP is more important than SLG, and a .378 OBP is very good.

- Within OBP, BA is more important than walk rate, and a .333 BA is outstanding.

- 341 stolen bases at an 81% success rate adds a lot of value.

- His 42% extra bases taken rate is above average.

- He's an outstanding defensive outfielder in every way.

Ichrio's a no-doubt-about-it Hall of Famer, whether or not he collects 3000 hits.

[backwardsk]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/joe_posnanski/03/25/unique.ichiro/index.html?xid=cnnbin&hpt=Sbin

Nice article on Ichiro...

[RShack]

Would it?

As great as Cobb's numbers were (.323 avg at age 41 in his final season), I just have a hard time believing he would even sniff the Majors today.

You think Ty Cobb was not good enough to be a ML ballplayer today?

[Moose Milligan]

Yeah, I highly doubt he would be good enough to play in the Majors today.

I always hear the argument that great is great in any era, and I think that is probably inaccurate.

Cobb did not play against African-Americans, Latin Americans, Asians. Cobb broke into MLB in 1905, and the US population was roughly 83M. Today that population is over 300M.

Players are bigger, stronger, and better trained. If Cobb was born today, he would have the ability/use of all of the improvements in training. If he was pulled out of the prime of his career, and placed into MLB today; I imagine he would be physically lacking.

Yes, I know he was over 6 feet tall, and around 180 lbs.

Yes, I know some of the physical advances of the modern player are tainted by the Steroid era.

Still, in 1900 the Olympic record in the 100M dash was 11 seconds flat. In 2008 the Olympic record in the 100M dash was 9.69 seconds.

You say different sports, I say evidence of the top athletes of today just being superior.

Now just comparing numbers becomes difficult as well. Besides the differences in competition, and how the games were played (innings of starters, vs. specialization of today) you also have to account for travel differences, lighting, field conditions etc etc.

Very hard to compare eras, and I respect what he accomplished in his; I just highly doubt you could take him from his era, and have him be able to compete today.

My guess is that Cobb would not be as good as Felix Pie.

Wow...just...wow.

I understand your arguments and do believe they have merit. However, it's still the same game. It's still 90 feet between the bases and 60 feet, 6 inches to home plate.

While the talent pool is larger, a 95 mph fastball is still a 95 mph fastball be it in 1910 or 2010. Now I'm assuming that there are way more guys that can throw harder in the big leagues today than there were when he played so I don't think he'd be hitting .367 routinely...but he'd be a damn good hitter.

You're not taking into account that he had ridiculous hand-eye coordination skills, and insane bat control and those skills would transcend any generation. Incredibly smart, by all accounts extremely fast...again, that would trasncend any time period. And you're also not taking into account his willpower, an incredibly tough, determined and focused bastard. I don't think there's anyone in the game today that has that mentality that he had.

We're talking about a man who went on a weekend power hitting rampage when challenged to do so...just to prove a point. And then went back to slashing singles and doubles and raising hell on the basepaths because that's how he thought the game should be played.

I realize I touched on a lot of intangibles, things that can't be quantified...which makes this whole argument fun. However, travel, lights, modern day things that he didn't have to deal with could all be overcome simply by getting used to them. You're also not taking into account that he'd play now with a lot more advantages...much better equipment and smaller parks come to mind at first.

I just think to say that if you plucked him out of 1910 and dropped him into todays game that he'd be as good as Felix Pie is a huge, huge stretch. You're telling me that Ty Cobb wouldn't be as good as the 4th outfielder on a last place club that routinely finishes in the cellar? And at what point do you draw the line? Does that mean Babe Ruth wouldn't be as good as Prince Fielder? Would Joe DiMaggio not be as good? Where do you draw the line in terms of saying players of the past couldn't hang with the players of today? In other words at what time period/generation do you look at guys and go "Alright, he could have probably performed the same today as he did back then." ?

[Moose Milligan]

I get what you are saying, and I think the intangibles you mention about Cobb actually have value.

However, in this theoretical argument I have trouble believing that just because Cobb was far superior to his competition, that it equates to him being of equal stature today.

I think all you can state for sure is that Cobb was superior to the players he played against. If Strasburg had spent last Spring playing against 9 & 10 year-olds, his numbers would have been even better

I do not believe there is any era, where players of the past could perform as well as they did, if they were transplanted from their prime to today.

As you get closer in-time, the closer I get to believing their numbers equate.

But what about the flip side? Would Felix Pie be a HoF caliber player if he was playing 100 years ago?

[RShack]

Yeah, I highly doubt he would be good enough to play in the Majors today.

I always hear the argument that great is great in any era, and I think that is probably inaccurate.

Cobb did not play against African-Americans, Latin Americans, Asians. Cobb broke into MLB in 1905, and the US population was roughly 83M. Today that population is over 300M.

Players are bigger, stronger, and better trained. If Cobb was born today, he would have the ability/use of all of the improvements in training. If he was pulled out of the prime of his career, and placed into MLB today; I imagine he would be physically lacking.

Yes, I know he was over 6 feet tall, and around 180 lbs.

Yes, I know some of the physical advances of the modern player are tainted by the Steroid era.

Still, in 1900 the Olympic record in the 100M dash was 11 seconds flat. In 2008 the Olympic record in the 100M dash was 9.69 seconds.

You say different sports, I say evidence of the top athletes of today just being superior.

Now just comparing numbers becomes difficult as well. Besides the differences in competition, and how the games were played (innings of starters, vs. specialization of today) you also have to account for travel differences, lighting, field conditions etc etc.

Very hard to compare eras, and I respect what he accomplished in his; I just highly doubt you could take him from his era, and have him be able to compete today.

My guess is that Cobb would not be as good as Felix Pie.

Well, gee...

As I understand it, you're saying that it's not so much about innate baseball talent but more about measurable athletic ability, conditioning/nutrition, and whether the competition includes non-lilly-white guys... or something like that...

So, where do you think the cut-off is for everybody being not good enough? If we consult the history of 100m dash, this is what we see...

Looks like we have a few different plateaus. Where do you think the important diff is? Would Babe Ruth make it? Walter Johnson? Is everybody from before WW2 not good enough? Looks like guys in the 40's were still pretty slow compared to now. So, are DiMaggio and Teddy Ballgame good enough? Howsabout guys who showed up in the 50's and 60's? Would Willie Mays and Frank Robinson and Hank Aaron and Mickey Mantle make it? How about Koufax and Gibson? Would they be stars? Or stuck in bus leagues? Would they be marginal AAAA players, or would they be run-of-the-mill ML'ers today?

Now, it's completely normal for folks to think their own era is somehow the epoch, the peak of mankind, the age when things really matter, but saying that nobody from way-back-when is good enough seems like a bit much to me.

[TyCobb]

Wow...just...wow.

I understand your arguments and do believe they have merit. However, it's still the same game. It's still 90 feet between the bases and 60 feet, 6 inches to home plate.

While the talent pool is larger, a 95 mph fastball is still a 95 mph fastball be it in 1910 or 2010. Now I'm assuming that there are way more guys that can throw harder in the big leagues today than there were when he played so I don't think he'd be hitting .367 routinely...but he'd be a damn good hitter.

You're not taking into account that he had ridiculous hand-eye coordination skills, and insane bat control and those skills would transcend any generation. Incredibly smart, by all accounts extremely fast...again, that would transcend any time period. And you're also not taking into account his willpower, an incredibly tough, determined and focused bastard. I don't think there's anyone in the game today that has that mentality that he had.

We're talking about a man who went on a weekend power hitting rampage when challenged to do so...just to prove a point. And then went back to slashing singles and doubles and raising hell on the base paths because that's how he thought the game should be played.

I realize I touched on a lot of intangibles, things that can't be quantified...which makes this whole argument fun. However, travel, lights, modern day things that he didn't have to deal with could all be overcome simply by getting used to them. You're also not taking into account that he'd play now with a lot more advantages...much better equipment and smaller parks come to mind at first.

I just think to say that if you plucked him out of 1910 and dropped him into today's game that he'd be as good as Felix Pie is a huge, huge stretch. You're telling me that Ty Cobb wouldn't be as good as the 4th outfielder on a last place club that routinely finishes in the cellar? And at what point do you draw the line? Does that mean Babe Ruth wouldn't be as good as Prince Fielder? Would Joe DiMaggio not be as good? Where do you draw the line in terms of saying players of the past couldn't hang with the players of today? In other words at what time period/generation do you look at guys and go "Alright, he could have probably performed the same today as he did back then." ?

Better equipment works both ways because the fielders would have gloves that actually worked. haha

Not to mention in Cobb's day the ball was allowed to get as dirty as possible until the Chapman incident.

In today's game the background for the pitcher has to be a solid color.

I have no doubts that the greats of baseball would be able to play in any era and still be great.

Take Yogi.

In 1947 at age 22 he was a 115 OPS+ player. In 1963 at the age of 38 he was able to put up a 138 OPS+.

Ty Cobb was listed at 6'1'' and 175 lbs. Now that would be consider small in today's game, but Cobb would still be one of the fastest/quickest players in the game.

[TyCobb]

I get what you are saying, and I think the intangibles you mention about Cobb actually have value.

However, in this theoretical argument I have trouble believing that just because Cobb was far superior to his competition, that it equates to him being of equal stature today.

I think all you can state for sure is that Cobb was superior to the players he played against. If Strasburg had spent last Spring playing against 9 & 10 year-olds, his numbers would have been even better

I do not believe there is any era, where players of the past could perform as well as they did, if they were transplanted from their prime to today.

As you get closer in-time, the closer I get to believing their numbers equate.

Strasburg would probably be some fat nobody if he was born in Cobb's day.

Players came from independent leagues where they had to have regular jobs and play on the side to get notice by the Big league teams. No college/ highschool programs to mold players.

You also forgot to mention all the players from the NFL/NBA/NHL that would be in the MLB today if it was America's #1 (by far) sport. There probably more than 100+ athletics in those leagues that would be MLB players today if it was the main sport.

[TyCobb]

No, I think that would be an inaccurate portrayal of my opinion. I could take full advantage of current conditioning and nutrition and I would still lack the talent necessary to play professionally.

But that really does not matter. The point was would Cobb have the ability to physically compete with modern players if he was dropped off from the middle of his prime to the Majors today, and I see no reason to believe he would.

Why would you think otherwise? Moose pointed to some of the known intangibles about Cobb, and I think that has some weight.

If you think he could play today, it is because you look at his numbers and say those numbers could play in any era. Those numbers were put up against inferior competition. It is not about 'lilly white-guys.' It is that Cobb being the best in a country of 83M (in a time where people had far less time for recreational activities and the development of physical talent) is far less impressive than becoming a player in the Majors today... when the USA has over 300M, and you are also forced to compete against African Americans, Latin Americans, and Asians.

As I said in the last-post to Moose, I do not believe there is any era, where players of the past could perform as well as they did, if they were transplanted from their prime to today.

As you get closer in-time, the closer I get to believing their numbers equate.

If the competition was less, and the physical skills were less; why

There is good chance that the best athletics in the USA don't even play baseball. That wasn't the case in the 1920s.

[GoldGlove21]

Better than Cobb? Is that a joke?

.366/.433/.512 career line

Ichiro doesn't even have a season where he beats Cobb's career line.

I am sure it was harder for Cobb to put up those numbers while seeing the same 12 or so pitchers during the year as it is for Ichiro to close to two hundred pitchers during the course of his season. In addition to seeing the same pitchers Cobb didn't have to look for a slider because they were not thrown back then. There were also fewer players throwing the ball at 95+ MPH.

[Can_of_corn]

I am sure it was harder for Cobb to put up those numbers while seeing the same 12 or so pitchers during the year as it is for Ichiro to close to two hundred pitchers during the course of his season. In addition to seeing the same pitchers Cobb didn't have to look for a slider because they were not thrown back then. There were also fewer players throwing the ball at 95+ MPH.

I am sure the spitballs, scuffballs and shineballs were much easier to hit then sliders.

[RShack]

No, I think that would be an inaccurate portrayal of my opinion. I could take full advantage of current conditioning and nutrition and I would still lack the talent necessary to play professionally.

But that really does not matter. The point was would Cobb have the ability to physically compete with modern players if he was dropped off from the middle of his prime to the Majors today, and I see no reason to believe he would.

Why would you think otherwise? Moose pointed to some of the known intangibles about Cobb, and I think that has some weight.

If you think he could play today, it is because you look at his numbers and say those numbers could play in any era. Those numbers were put up against inferior competition. It is not about 'lilly white-guys.' It is that Cobb being the best in a country of 83M (in a time where people had far less time for recreational activities and the development of physical talent) is far less impressive than becoming a player in the Majors today... when the USA has over 300M, and you are also forced to compete against African Americans, Latin Americans, and Asians.

As I said in the last-post to Moose, I do not believe there is any era, where players of the past could perform as well as they did, if they were transplanted from their prime to today.

As you get closer in-time, the closer I get to believing their numbers equate.

OK, so you're saying it's just about the size of the population he was competing against? What % of good athletes were focused on baseball then vs. now? You could just as well argue that a minority of good athletes today focus on baseball. (I don't know what the truth is about that.)

But you ignored what I asked you. Where do you think the epoch starts? At what point do you think the best players in the game would no longer be good enough? Which of the players I mentioned do you think would make it today? And why?

[Moose Milligan]

Ok, I might agree with this... but this only matters if the other part of your argument is that you think the athletes in MLB in 2010, are just equal to the athletes that existed in the game during Cobb's career.

As I said before, it takes the same amount of hand/eye coordiation to hit a baseball back then as it does today. That hasn't changed and it never will.