PDA

View Full Version : Most Overrated/Underrated MLB Players



kbrake
05-03-2006, 05:18 PM
Overrated: Derek Jeter
Underrated: Michael Young

As voted by 370 MLB players. Thoughts?

REDJAKE
05-03-2006, 05:22 PM
Couldn't agree more on Jeter for what he is paid he is #1.GO CINCY!!!!!

RedsManRick
05-03-2006, 05:27 PM
Overrated: Johnny Damon
Underrated: Brian Giles

vaticanplum
05-03-2006, 05:27 PM
It's hard to know exactly what they mean by that...as a not-really-casual baseball fan, I tend to analyze that right away, and they mean over/underrated by whom? Because in my world, there would be very different answers from the broadcasters/casual fan/die-hard fan. Jeter is a perfect example, in a way. Terribly overrated by broadcasters, terribly underrated by stats geeks. in my opinion.

If we're going strictly by payroll, I'd say one of the closers. BJ Ryan comes to mind.

KoryMac5
05-03-2006, 05:30 PM
I don't think Jeter is overrated he's got 4 rings which is more than most of the 370 ballplayers polled. Most guys get to be overrated because they get talked about constantly which for three or four years Jeter was talked alot about. Overpaid yes overrated no.

Overrated Curt Schilling
Underrated Craig Biggio

PuffyPig
05-03-2006, 05:35 PM
If everyone thinks that a player is underrated, can he still be, by definition, underated? I mean, it seams like everyone knows that he's actually much better than people think. Which, then follows, that he's no longer underrated.

Underrated Reds?

Harang, who last year was one of the best 20 starters in the NL, but got bogged down wit hthe rest of the Reds staff because he didn't get very good run support. If Harang pitches as well as he did last year, he'll get 18+ wins if the Reds give him average (for them) run support.

registerthis
05-03-2006, 05:40 PM
I don't think Jeter is overrated he's got 4 rings which is more than most of the 370 ballplayers polled.

So he played for some very talented Yankees teams in the late 90s. Why would that mean he couldn't be overrated?

TOBTTReds
05-03-2006, 05:42 PM
Big wow, 4 rings. I don't think that makes a player what he is, even though they say "he'll be judged by how many rings he wins." If that was the case then Barry Bonds would have atleast one (or 10). Griffey AND A-Rod on one team in their prime and ZERO WS appearances. Rings don't make a player. I'm not picking on you KoryMac bc all media heads say that too.

Overrated I think Jeter is by far number one. He has terrible range on ground balls (see the Bible or your current BA magazine). And Tony Womack. Someone traded two semi-prospects for him and then when that guy got fired, the new GM had to cut TW bc he wasn't very good, AT ALL.

Underrated - Michael Young and many Rangers' hitters. Jonny Gomes (starting to get respect).

Joseph
05-03-2006, 05:53 PM
If everyone thinks that a player is underrated, can he still be, by definition, underated?

I felt the same way in the preseason when everyone was tabbing the Brewers as the 'dark horse' team. If everyone was doing it, how could they be the team least expected to do anything?

vaticanplum
05-03-2006, 05:56 PM
Oh man, I get emotional when defending Jeter so I probably won't shut up here and I'm sorry. The rings are not the greatest example to use as evidence of his talent, but not ignorable when you consider how important a part of most of those teams he was. To the argument that he came along to the right team at the right time -- well, it's cyclical. That team was in great part what it was because of him. Or at least in small part. Yes, he happened to come along in time for a team that won four championships in five years; had he not come along, though, there's a very good chance that it might not have been a team that won four championships in five years.

Again, though, that's not the greatest example of why he's good. See, to call him overrated -- overrated on what? You use his weakness of range as an example, but I rarely hear people refer to Jeter as a great defensive shortstop (except Tim McCarver). In fact the people I know rag on him so badly as a shortstop that I often find myself pointing out that his range to his left is decent and he tracks flyballs like almost nobody else. He's won one (two?) Gold Gloves now, and that's perhaps undeserved. But the first (only?) one was almost ten years into his career, so it's not as if his defense is perpetually overrated. He is a thoughtful hitter who can be patient and also hit for power, he's an extraordinary baserunner, and he's a tough, durable player whose confidence and drive have a lot to do with the quality of that team. That's not overrated to me. Put it this way: even the people I know who loathe Jeter have all admitted to me at some point that they'd want Jeter on their real-life or fantasy teams.

Falls City Beer
05-03-2006, 06:02 PM
Overrated: Nomar (even without all the injuries)

Underrated: Harang's got to be up there. vatican's man Javier V. gets a few votes. But at the present moment, without a doubt it's got to be Contreras--he may be the best starter in baseball over the last 9 months.

kbrake
05-03-2006, 06:10 PM
I really like the Jeter one, I have a friend and for quite sometime we have been in a never ending debate of Barry Larkin vs. Derek Jeter any takes on that?

registerthis
05-03-2006, 06:26 PM
I really like the Jeter one, I have a friend and for quite sometime we have been in a never ending debate of Barry Larkin vs. Derek Jeter any takes on that?

I can say this: Barry HoF induction would be an absolute certainty if he had played on the Yankees.

RedEye
05-03-2006, 06:33 PM
Overrated: Chipper Jones

Yeah, yeah... say what you want about those division titles. Still, this guy has never really impressed me that much. In my opinion, he's never really been one of the best players in the game despite getting that publicity. The Atlanta pitching has been much more important to their success, and this guy's rep has been one of the main beneficiaries. He's also looking more and more like he's going to poop out before his statistics merit Hall consideration. A latter day Dale Murphy if you ask me.

Underrated: Reggie Sanders

I'm sure that I'm biased on this one since this guy was one of the first Reds prospects to catch my attention during a period when I had just learned what a 'prospect' actually was. Although he never quite lived up to the intial hype and the promise of the first half of 1995, he's put together quite a career. His speed and power numbers have been consistent for a long time and he also seems to play in the playoffs every year. Coincidence? I think not. This guy is a low-key personality, but he's been a, low-priced, all-around contributor for lots of winning teams. Too bad he's now wasting away in KC. Something tells me that his magic won't work this year.

indyred
05-03-2006, 06:35 PM
overrated.....torii hunter
under...vizquel

KoryMac5
05-03-2006, 06:46 PM
I'm going to add this to my list of things never to write about. Abortion, Nascar, Politics, and now Derek Jeter. Would people's opinions be different about Jeter had he been picked by the Reds at number 5 instead of the Yankees. Jeter is overrated because all the talking heads have soooo much man love for him. It would have been nice to see him in a Reds uniform instead of Chad Mottola.

rdiersin
05-03-2006, 07:08 PM
Overrated: Jeter, Damon are good ones, but I might go with Beckett.

Underrated: Jason Bay.

StillFunkyB
05-03-2006, 07:10 PM
Overrated - Jeter is by far the most, EVER.

Underrated - Ben Sheets

wolfboy
05-03-2006, 07:24 PM
I really like the Jeter one, I have a friend and for quite sometime we have been in a never ending debate of Barry Larkin vs. Derek Jeter any takes on that?

I took that one up in a thread from last August
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39361&page=2


This was an excellent post RB. I was reading through the thread and couldn't believe how many people were quick to write Jeter off as just average. Larkin played for 18 years. In that time, he failed to reach 2,500 hits. Jeter could very well end up with 3,000 hits with a .315 average. I realize that average isn't a very telling stat in the game, but I know this much: a player with 3,000 hits, and a .300 plus average is without a doubt in the conversation as a first ballot HOFer - no matter who he played for.
I think people's perceptions of Jeter aren't biased in two ways. First, he is a Yankee, and Yankees are generally hated (as a Yankees fan I'd know). Second, there seems to be a degree of jealousy towards the attention Jeter has received. In a sense, Larkin should have had the same attention, but never did (as a Reds fan I'd know). In the early part of his career, he was overshadowed by Ozzie Smith. Towards the end of his career, he was overshadowed by guys like Arod, Jeter, and Garciaparra. I would rank Larkin as one of the best shortstops ever. Unfortunately, that perception doesn't resonate outside of Cincinnati as much as it should. I don't think that's Jeter's fault. If you look at this objectively, you'll see two amazing shortstops. At the end of the day, these guys are both players any team would be happy to have for years. Just because you love one doesn't mean you can't respect the other.


Someone noted that Jeter has never had to carry a lineup. This was my response:


Look at the WS team from 1998. Are Bernie Williams and Paul O'Neill HOF players? No one hit above 28 homeruns on that team. The names on that roster aren't exactly giants protecting Jeter. Also, look at his stats from the 2000 WS. His OBP was .480, his SLG was .864. I would call that carrying a lineup. If you need regular season, have a look at '99.

Cyclone792
05-03-2006, 07:24 PM
I really like the Jeter one, I have a friend and for quite sometime we have been in a never ending debate of Barry Larkin vs. Derek Jeter any takes on that?

In the winter I did a Barry Larkin vs. every other great shortstop comparison, including Derek Jeter, in an effort to gauge where Larkin ranks among the game's greatest shortstops and how he should/may get treated by the BBWAA writers when his name shows up on Hall ballots.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42221 (wayyy too long of a post to copy/paste here)

IMO, Larkin is historically one of the most underrated players ever. Interestingly enough, another great shortstop, Arky Vaughan, is also one of the most underrated players ever.

As far as current overrated and underrated ... Brian Giles is way up there, and he's already been mentioned. Bobby Abreu is another guy that's highly underrated. Since Jeter's already been mentioned as an overrated candidate, I'll toss up Darin Erstad. He's had one great season, two decent seasons and six well below average seasons, including each of his last five seasons.

TOBTTReds
05-03-2006, 07:41 PM
You use his weakness of range as an example, but I rarely hear people refer to Jeter as a great defensive shortstop

He won the last two gold gloves in the AL. That is one MAJOR reason why I say he is over rated, bc I don't feel he is that good of a fielder, like you even stated.


often find myself pointing out that his range to his left is decent and he tracks flyballs like almost nobody else.

His range to his left is much worse than his right (according to the bible), but they do say he tracks fly balls very well "which provides ammunition for the talk of Jeter moving to CF" (Baseball America)

:evil: check post number:evil:

Blarkin
05-03-2006, 07:46 PM
Overrated: Marcus Giles

Underrated: Jack Wilson

BoomerSoonerRed
05-03-2006, 07:48 PM
Most Overrated: Any Yankee free-agent pitcher (Pavano, Jaret Wright, Farnsworth)

Most Underrated: Good call on Michael Young, but I'm going to go with another Ranger, Kevin Mench. He's a poor man's Manny Ramirez, except he plays in a lesser-profile media market and he doesn't spazz out as much as Manny does.

blumj
05-03-2006, 09:47 PM
Most Overrated: Any Yankee free-agent pitcher (Pavano, Jaret Wright, Farnsworth)

Most Underrated: Good call on Michael Young, but I'm going to go with another Ranger, Kevin Mench. He's a poor man's Manny Ramirez, except he plays in a lesser-profile media market and he doesn't spazz out as much as Manny does.

Kevin Mench, career OPS-.828
Manny Ramirez, career OPS-1.006
Not really all that similar to me, plus he has a bigger head. Probably a better fielder, though, but who isn't?

PTI (pti)
05-03-2006, 09:50 PM
Derek Jeter is so overrated, he's actually *underrated* - if that makes any sense. He's a .315 career hitter, has close to 200 home runs, over 200 stolen bases, a good glove at short, and his baseball smarts are top-notch. When the talking heads like John Kruk call him the best player in the game -> overrated. When your typical baseball fan insists he's not much better than David Eckstein -> underrated. Regardless - I hate him.



Most overrated = Kerry Wood (the only thing he and Nolan Ryan have in common is that they're both from Texas)

Most underrated = David Wells (his fatness overshadows a .615 career winning %, 9 seasons of 15+ wins, a respectable 4.00 career era, and 227 career wins - about 30 more than Pedro)

UC_Ken
05-03-2006, 09:57 PM
I love to slam Jeter but he is not the most overrated. Most overpaid? Probably. Most overrated defensively? Without question. But he is a very consistent and productive offensive player. While I believe he is overrated as a superstar he is a legitimate All Star player. I hate to copy someone's answer but Kerry Wood is easliy more overrated than Jeter. I'm sure I could pick out 10-15 more if I had a list in front of me.

Underrated: How about Travis Hafner? This guy is an absolute stud but doesn't get the hype of some of the other great sluggers.

TRF
05-03-2006, 10:06 PM
Overrated: Mark Prior/Kerry Wood. Health has to count for something.

Underrated: Bobby Abreu

Highlifeman21
05-03-2006, 10:48 PM
I'm going to add this to my list of things never to write about. Abortion, Nascar, Politics, and now Derek Jeter. Would people's opinions be different about Jeter had he been picked by the Reds at number 5 instead of the Yankees. Jeter is overrated because all the talking heads have soooo much man love for him. It would have been nice to see him in a Reds uniform instead of Chad Mottola.


Jeter isn't even the best SS on his team right now...

Much of Jeter's early success was largely due to the fact of the players around him. In his defense, he's produced recently, but he's never been in a bad lineup, so I contend that the majority of his career has been due to his teammates.

Had Jeter played for the Reds, I don't think he would have turned out to be a media sensation for 2 reasons. 1, Cincinnati is about 100 media markets lower than NYC. 2, Cincinnati until 2005 and this year hasn't had a good offensively lineup. Jeter would have struggled in the Queen City.

Surprisingly, I feel that Jeter and Felipe Lopez are strikingly similar players b/c they both suffer defensively, and their offensive success is largely due to their teammates. Lopez is the product of the Reds' lineup, just like Jeter was/is the product of a Steinbrenner bought lineup.


Derek Jeter IS the most overrated player in baseball right now. It's good to see that Jeter can pick up where Joe DiMaggio left off as one of the most overrated players in the history of baseball

As for underrated, I gotta give the nod to Morgan Ensberg, although he's borderline for that right now b/c he's starting to get some respect and recognition. If I'm going to go with a true underrated, I'm going with Aaron Rowand.

griffeyfreak4
05-03-2006, 10:57 PM
Overrated: Kerry Wood and the rest of the Scrubs

Underated: Tadahito Iguchi

kbrake
05-03-2006, 10:59 PM
For the record some other guys mentioned in the report I heard were:
Overrated: JD Drew
Underrated: Bobby Abreu

cincinnati chili
05-04-2006, 08:16 AM
Overrated: Alf Soriano (despite his undeniably great start this year). He's worth about half what he's made during his career. Johnny Damon is another good one mentioned above. He was overpaid on his last contract, and is certanly overpaid now. Neither a great power guy or on-base guy. Solid, but not elite.

Underrated: For years it was Abreu, but I think his last contract got him his due attention.

Adam Dunn. For a LIKELY future Hall of Famer (IMO), the media and fans both focus a whole lot on his negatives. In some ways I blame rotisserie baseball. That whole batting average thing deflates his perceived value, while inflating a guy like Teixeira (who I also like, but is certainly no better and is probably worse).

I'll also throw out there that A-Rod - despite his salary - has been underrated by certain members of media, as well as fans, over the last couple years. In particular, anyone who thought the he was less deserving of the MVP than David Ortiz fails to account for the scarcity of offensive talent on the left side of major league infields.

Mark my words. If they had identical contracts, Theo Epstein and all of the other Sox brain trust would trade A-Rod for Ortiz any day of the week - this year, last year, next year, whenever.

OnBaseMachine
05-04-2006, 08:40 AM
Underrated: For years it was Abreu, but I think his last contract got him his due attention.

Adam Dunn. For a LIKELY future Hall of Famer (IMO), the media and fans both focus a whole lot on his negatives. In some ways I blame rotisserie baseball. That whole batting average thing deflates his perceived value, while inflating a guy like Teixeira (who I also like, but is certainly no better and is probably worse).


Could not agree with you more. Great post.

Blimpie
05-04-2006, 08:50 AM
Overrated: Carlos Zambrano

Underrated: David Wright

TC81190
05-04-2006, 08:53 AM
Overrated: Carlos Zambrano

I was originally gonna disagree and argue this big time, but since I looked it up, you're kinda right.

blumj
05-04-2006, 09:07 AM
Is Vernon Wells underrated? I don't really know how he's perceived, but he always scares the crap out of me when he's up in a big spot. Soriano is definitely overrated, that one's almost too easy. And Rolen is in that same class with Jeter, where the overpraise is much worse than the overrate, if that makes any sense. Neither of those guys found a cure for cancer or saved the world from terrorism. Just tone it down a little.

M2
05-04-2006, 09:14 AM
Overrated: Marcus Giles

Underrated: Jack Wilson

I'd say that's exactly backwards.

I'll go with chili with Soriano as the most overrated player in the game, though I'd consider Vernon Wells here too. The guy's an easy out for most RHPs in recent year. Though both Soriano and Wells are off to red-hot starts.

For underrated I can't quite pick one guy, but Nick Johnson, Melvin Mora, Geoff Jenkins and Chone Figgins come to mind.

NJReds
05-04-2006, 09:25 AM
I'd add Carlos Beltran to the overrated list.

M2
05-04-2006, 09:33 AM
I was originally gonna disagree and argue this big time, but since I looked it up, you're kinda right.

How could anyone looks at what Zambrano's done in recent years and consider him overrated? For three straight years he's been in the league top 10 in ERA. In two of those years he was in the top 10 in IP. He was probably one of the top 10 starters in baseball in the 2003-2005 timeframe.

registerthis
05-04-2006, 09:45 AM
Adam Dunn. For a LIKELY future Hall of Famer (IMO), the media and fans both focus a whole lot on his negatives. In some ways I blame rotisserie baseball. That whole batting average thing deflates his perceived value, while inflating a guy like Teixeira (who I also like, but is certainly no better and is probably worse).

I don't know in what statistical categories Teixeira could be considered "probably worse" than Dunn. But for the past couple of seasons, they've been very similar players--Teixeira has a higher BA, but Dunn walks more. Teixeira has more RBIs, but generally batted in a more favorable position in the lineup than did Dunn. If you were picking one of these guys from which to build your team around, I don't think you could go wrong with either of them. (Even though Teixeira is off to a slow start this year.)

registerthis
05-04-2006, 09:46 AM
For underrated I can't quite pick one guy, but Nick Johnson, Melvin Mora, Geoff Jenkins and Chone Figgins come to mind.

johnson's one of those guys who would be a star if he played for a diff't team.

PTI (pti)
05-04-2006, 10:13 AM
Jeter isn't even the best SS on his team right now...

Much of Jeter's early success was largely due to the fact of the players around him. In his defense, he's produced recently, but he's never been in a bad lineup, so I contend that the majority of his career has been due to his teammates.

Had Jeter played for the Reds, I don't think he would have turned out to be a media sensation for 2 reasons. 1, Cincinnati is about 100 media markets lower than NYC. 2, Cincinnati until 2005 and this year hasn't had a good offensively lineup. Jeter would have struggled in the Queen City.

Surprisingly, I feel that Jeter and Felipe Lopez are strikingly similar players b/c they both suffer defensively, and their offensive success is largely due to their teammates. Lopez is the product of the Reds' lineup, just like Jeter was/is the product of a Steinbrenner bought lineup.


Derek Jeter IS the most overrated player in baseball right now. It's good to see that Jeter can pick up where Joe DiMaggio left off as one of the most overrated players in the history of baseball

As for underrated, I gotta give the nod to Morgan Ensberg, although he's borderline for that right now b/c he's starting to get some respect and recognition. If I'm going to go with a true underrated, I'm going with Aaron Rowand.


I don't really want to get into a Derek Jeter-slurping contest on a Reds message board, but this is exactly why Jeter is *underrated* - especially by non-Yankee fans. Not even the best shortstop on his team??? Come on - do you really buy that?? He'll eventually end his career with about a .310 career BA, 3000+ hits, 300 or so home runs, and 300-400 steals. Not to mention 4 WS rings.


It obviously helps to be in a better lineup, but come on - 3000 hits doesn't just happen by accident. He's a damn good baseball player, and one of the top 3/4 shortstops in the game over the last 10 years.



Underrated = how about Jason Jennings? If he pitched anywhere else in the NL, he'd likely be a #1 starter. Very good hitter, too - career BA around .250.

kbrake
05-04-2006, 10:21 AM
Jeter is still not a better SS then ARod and thats what people are getting at. Another one I would like to throw out as overrated, Jim Edmonds :D

K-GAR
05-04-2006, 10:22 AM
I don't really want to get into a Derek Jeter-slurping contest on a Reds message board, but this is exactly why Jeter is *underrated* - especially by non-Yankee fans. Not even the best shortstop on his team??? Come on - do you really buy that?? He'll eventually end his career with about a .310 career BA, 3000+ hits, 300 or so home runs, and 300-400 steals. Not to mention 4 WS rings.


It obviously helps to be in a better lineup, but come on - 3000 hits doesn't just happen by accident. He's a damn good baseball player, and one of the top 3/4 shortstops in the game over the last 10 years.



Underrated = how about Jason Jennings? If he pitched anywhere else in the NL, he'd likely be a #1 starter. Very good hitter, too - career BA around .250.

Gotta agree here, Jeter is never gonna win an MVP but he's definitely a huge part of the yankees success. I know this is very cliche and cheesy, but his intangibles combined with the FACT that year in and year out he will post solid to above average #'s across the board is a reason I'd have him on my short list of SS's to start a team with.

traderumor
05-04-2006, 10:28 AM
Gotta agree here, Jeter is never gonna win an MVP but he's definitely a huge part of the yankees success. I know this is very cliche and cheesy, but his intangibles combined with the FACT that year in and year out he will post solid to above average #'s across the board is a reason I'd have him on my short list of SS's to start a team with.The Yankees make Derek Jeter. Derek Jeter does not make the Yankees.

K-GAR
05-04-2006, 10:32 AM
The Yankees make Derek Jeter. Derek Jeter does not make the Yankees.

There is some truth to that, but I think it's more like the Yankees enhance Derek Jeter just as Derek Jeter enhances the Yankees

vaticanplum
05-04-2006, 10:33 AM
I don't really want to get into a Derek Jeter-slurping contest on a Reds message board, but this is exactly why Jeter is *underrated* - especially by non-Yankee fans. Not even the best shortstop on his team??? Come on - do you really buy that?? He'll eventually end his career with about a .310 career BA, 3000+ hits, 300 or so home runs, and 300-400 steals. Not to mention 4 WS rings.


It obviously helps to be in a better lineup, but come on - 3000 hits doesn't just happen by accident. He's a damn good baseball player, and one of the top 3/4 shortstops in the game over the last 10 years.



Underrated = how about Jason Jennings? If he pitched anywhere else in the NL, he'd likely be a #1 starter. Very good hitter, too - career BA around .250.

He's talking about his defensive abilities as a shortstop, which are in fact notably below A-Rod's. A-Rod is the best shortstop of his generation and he's also done better at third than Jeter probably could have. I love Derek Jeter with all my soul but even I'm not blind to that.

Ever since Bernie started to deteriorate, there have been rumors every year about moving Jeter to centerfield, and every year I advocate it. Does this mean I think he's overrated? Not at all. He's more valuable to that team than anyone else, and as far as position players go, probably would be on any team.

I know that clutch is a foggy area and I hate to make arguments without solid facts to back them up, especially since I know the numbers are there to argue Jeter's shortcomings as a shortstop. But, while I would never argue that he's a great defensive shortstop, I do think looking only at the stats devalues him there. I watched a good 80% of the games he played over about a three-year period, and I think he's better than the numbers indicate. What do I have to back this up? Well, no numbers really, just what my eyes have seen...his range to his left has notably improved since A-Rod came aboard. His hands and his feet sometimes seem to be at odds -- he's got great hands, but he gets tripped up with his feet. But this has gotten better, and if anything I think maybe the Gold Gloves were a nod toward that. He's also a pretty fielder, kind of showy and graceful, which I admit may make him look better than he is. Nevertheless...I guess my point is that people scream that his number make him the worst shortstop in the majors, while a Gold Glove would indicate that he is the best in the AL. The truth is very much in the middle. So, in my mind, rather average defensively, then throw in his hitting ability, his baserunning ability (severely underrated in my opinion -- he's one of the best I've ever seen, quick and very smart), and everything else he brings to the team, and he's right up there again. So, = not overrated.

Another thing that I think people overlook with Jeter is how many second basemen he's had to deal with over the last 10+ years. He's adjusted at every turn. I'm inclined to think that if he had had more second basemen working with him for more than a couple of season at a time (and sometimes far less), he would have had opportunity to settle in more.

Ravenlord
05-04-2006, 10:39 AM
Overated
C Mike Matheney/Brad Ausmus
1B Sean Casey
2B Jose Vidro/Mark Grudzielanek/Alfonso Soriano
3B Adrian Beltre
SS Jose Reyes
LF Carl Crawford
CF Tori Hunter
RF Jaque Jones/Jose Guillen (at least defensively)
UTL Shea Hillenbrand
SP Bartolo Colon
RP Keith Foulke/Todd Jones

Underrated
C Jason LaRue (by Reds fans)
1B Craig Wilson
2B Mark Bellhorn
3B Russell Branyan
SS Khalil Greene (unrealistic expectations for that ballpark)
LF Brad Wilkerson
CF Mike Cameron
RF Brad Hawpe
DH Adam Dunn
SP Chris Young/Byung-Hyun Kim
RP Adam Wainwright

blumj
05-04-2006, 10:39 AM
I can't believe you guys are making me defend Derek Jeter, but the fact that he's not as good a SS or overall ballplayer as Alex Rodriguez is hardly damning evidence of anything. Who is?

K-GAR
05-04-2006, 10:45 AM
I can't believe you guys are making me defend Derek Jeter, but the fact that he's not as good a SS or overall ballplayer as Alex Rodriguez is hardly damning evidence of anything. Who is?

Great point here, there may not be another person on the planet you can put up there with AROD. Before you guys start slamming me with Pujols, i'd agree you can put Pujols right up there *offensively* with AROD, maybe even a shade above him but the overall package of AROD is unreal. I think you could put him anywhere on the infield and he'd be gold glove caliber.

M2
05-04-2006, 10:49 AM
I can't believe you guys are making me defend Derek Jeter, but the fact that he's not as good a SS or overall ballplayer as Alex Rodriguez is hardly damning evidence of anything. Who is?

Exactly. He'll probably retire as one of the top 10 players in the history of his position. That's not too shabby.

It should be noted that not a lot of guys manage to play SS as a regular position past the age of 30. Robin Yount and Ernie Banks had given the position up by Jeter's age. So had Tony Fernandez.

RedsManRick
05-04-2006, 11:03 AM
I'm sure I'll get flack for it, but I would put ARod in the underrated category if only because he should be THE star of MLB and we never hear about him -- at least rarely in a good light. He has tons of constituencies who all want a piece of him and all we ever hear are complaints that doesn't live up to it somehow.

- He's been doing what Pujols does but for 10 years.
- He's played 2 of the toughest positions VERY well (let me know when Pujols wins a GG at short)
- He's stolen over 200 bases -- at an 80% clip.
- He's a year younger than Jeter. He's closer in age to Adam Dunn than Ken Griffey Jr.

Unfortunately, because he took a ridiculous offer, it's as if nothing he could do is enough. If we're talking about the level of attention/hype people get relative to their skill/performance, I think ARod has be up there. Obviously not THE most underrated, because he does get plenty of attention, but I think we've unfortunately grown accustomed to his greatness -- much like Bonds pre-roids.

vaticanplum
05-04-2006, 11:16 AM
I'm sure I'll get flack for it, but I would put ARod in the underrated category if only because he should be THE star of MLB and we never hear about him -- at least rarely in a good light. He has tons of constituencies who all want a piece of him and all we ever hear are complaints that doesn't live up to it somehow.

- He's been doing what Pujols does but for 10 years.
- He's played 2 of the toughest positions VERY well (let me know when Pujols wins a GG at short)
- He's stolen over 200 bases -- at an 80% clip.
- He's a year younger than Jeter. He's closer in age to Adam Dunn than Ken Griffey Jr.

Unfortunately, because he took a ridiculous offer, it's as if nothing he could do is enough. If we're talking about the level of attention/hype people get relative to their skill/performance, I think ARod has be up there. Obviously not THE most underrated, because he does get plenty of attention, but I think we've unfortunately grown accustomed to his greatness -- much like Bonds pre-roids.

No, I definitely agree with this. In fact there was a thread about it not long ago based on an article about A-Rod in the NYTimes. Somebody (Cyclone?) brought up the point that we will become more famous as he approaches the records, which is probably true.

As per him taking a "ridiculous" offer, the only person that should have this held against him is Steinbrenner.

blumj
05-04-2006, 11:29 AM
As per him taking a "ridiculous" offer, the only person that should have this held against him is Steinbrenner.

Did you mean Hicks, or am I misunderstanding?

TRF
05-04-2006, 11:30 AM
Exactly. He'll probably retire as one of the top 10 players in the history of his position. That's not too shabby.

It should be noted that not a lot of guys manage to play SS as a regular position past the age of 30. Robin Yount and Ernie Banks had given the position up by Jeter's age. So had Tony Fernandez.

Barry Larkin didn't.

just sayin'. :D

And IMO that is why Jeter is overrated. Oh, he's a fine hitter, but defensively? He'll never be in Barry's league. Larkin was as smooth as any that ever manned the position, and really ushered in the power hitting SS era.

So, yeah, I think Jeter is overrated. That doesn't mean he isn't great, just overrated.

NJReds
05-04-2006, 11:36 AM
As per him taking a "ridiculous" offer, the only person that should have this held against him is Steinbrenner.

Why? The Rangers made the offer, and I believe that they're still paying a portion of that money today.

kbrake
05-04-2006, 11:45 AM
I was just simply saying there is a better SS on the Yankees team then Derek Jeter. Now that I think about it, ARod made the list of overrated as well but at a small percent. I am going to go see if I can find the whole article.

kbrake
05-04-2006, 11:50 AM
Couldnt find anything. It was done by Sports Illustrated so I am sure it will be in their upcoming issue.

Falls City Beer
05-04-2006, 11:50 AM
I don't think it's fair that Jeter is compared to ARod, but that's how he's portrayed by virtually every media outlet: a true peer of ARod. When, of course, he comes nowhere near ARod's status.

So the comparison of those two is flawed, but strangely, it's fomented by large numbers of people. Maybe that's why all the overrated votes.

Nomar and Jeter are in the same class; ARod is in a class by himself.

Incidentally, it's not possible to overrate the best, ARod.

vaticanplum
05-04-2006, 12:12 PM
Did you mean Hicks, or am I misunderstanding?

I misunderstood you. I automatically assume that when people are criticizing players for taking a large amount of money, they're criticizing them for taking it directly from the Yankees :) . And actually, I'd forgotten some of the details of that deal.

In short, the argument of "he just went where the money way" never holds any water with me as a criticism of a player himself. If a team is dumb enough to overpay a player, it's not his fault if he wants to take it.

Handofdeath
05-04-2006, 01:44 PM
Adam Dunn. For a LIKELY future Hall of Famer (IMO), the media and fans both focus a whole lot on his negatives. In some ways I blame rotisserie baseball. That whole batting average thing deflates his perceived value, while inflating a guy like Teixeira (who I also like, but is certainly no better and is probably worse)

Probably worse? We have discussed on this board time and time again Adam Dunn and his positives/negatives. The main argument made for Dunn is he gets on base. Ok, that's great. The last two seasons Adam Dunn had 616 total bases. Teixiera had 675. He also won a Gold Glove last year. The only way Dunn is getting one is with a can of spray paint. Your loyalty for Dunn is admirable. But to say that Teixeira is "probably worse" is ludicrous. It's okay to say someone is better than Dunn, it doesn't lessen the fact that he is good at what he does. But if you're going to use stats to defend him, then do your homework when comparing him to someone else.

Cyclone792
05-04-2006, 02:04 PM
I'm sure I'll get flack for it, but I would put ARod in the underrated category if only because he should be THE star of MLB and we never hear about him -- at least rarely in a good light. He has tons of constituencies who all want a piece of him and all we ever hear are complaints that doesn't live up to it somehow.

- He's been doing what Pujols does but for 10 years.
- He's played 2 of the toughest positions VERY well (let me know when Pujols wins a GG at short)
- He's stolen over 200 bases -- at an 80% clip.
- He's a year younger than Jeter. He's closer in age to Adam Dunn than Ken Griffey Jr.

Unfortunately, because he took a ridiculous offer, it's as if nothing he could do is enough. If we're talking about the level of attention/hype people get relative to their skill/performance, I think ARod has be up there. Obviously not THE most underrated, because he does get plenty of attention, but I think we've unfortunately grown accustomed to his greatness -- much like Bonds pre-roids.


No, I definitely agree with this. In fact there was a thread about it not long ago based on an article about A-Rod in the NYTimes. Somebody (Cyclone?) brought up the point that we will become more famous as he approaches the records, which is probably true.

Good post, Rick, and vatican, I think I did say something like that earlier. If not, then I'll say it now ;)

Alex Rodriguez has a great chance to go down as one of the top 10 or 15 players of all-time, and even a decent chance to crack the top 10, but most fans today simply do not yet realize it. In about four or five seasons when Rodriguez is busting down the doors to home run #600 and approaching 3,000 hits at the age of 35 people will finally wake up and realize what he's been doing. Unfortunately for those fans, Rodriguez's peak years will probably be behind him by that point so when the baseball world finally gives him his due they'll be watching him play at a lower caliber than what he's already done and doing currently.

Finding an offensive machine that plays shortstop and third base at the level of Alex Rodriguez is about as rare of a player as you'll ever find.

Not simply "great," but more like "all-time great."

Cyclone792
05-04-2006, 02:14 PM
Probably worse? We have discussed on this board time and time again Adam Dunn and his positives/negatives. The main argument made for Dunn is he gets on base. Ok, that's great. The last two seasons Adam Dunn had 616 total bases. Teixiera had 675. He also won a Gold Glove last year. The only way Dunn is getting one is with a can of spray paint. Your loyalty for Dunn is admirable. But to say that Teixeira is "probably worse" is ludicrous. It's okay to say someone is better than Dunn, it doesn't lessen the fact that he is good at what he does. But if you're going to use stats to defend him, then do your homework when comparing him to someone else.

You might want to do your own homework before blatantly calling somebody else out on supposedly not doing their homework.


Win Shares RC/27 LgRC/27 RC/27 Ratio OPS+
Dunn 2004 32 7.86 4.87 1.61 152
Dunn 2005 28 7.15 4.71 1.52 135

Teixeira 2004 25 7.41 5.12 1.45 128
Teixeira 2005 32 7.85 4.85 1.62 146

Win shares and OPS+ is park adjusted, while RC/27 is not. Teixeira plays in a hitter's park, while Dunn's park is largely neutral.

Claiming that Teixeira is "probably worse" than Dunn as chili did is most definitely not ludicrous, but actually pretty darn accurate.

cincinnati chili
05-04-2006, 03:48 PM
You might want to do your own homework before blatantly calling somebody else out on supposedly not doing their homework.


Win Shares RC/27 LgRC/27 RC/27 Ratio OPS+
Dunn 2004 32 7.86 4.87 1.61 152
Dunn 2005 28 7.15 4.71 1.52 135

Teixeira 2004 25 7.41 5.12 1.45 128
Teixeira 2005 32 7.85 4.85 1.62 146

Win shares and OPS+ is park adjusted, while RC/27 is not. Teixeira plays in a hitter's park, while Dunn's park is largely neutral.

Claiming that Teixeira is "probably worse" than Dunn as chili did is most definitely not ludicrous, but actually pretty darn accurate.

Thanks Cyclone for digging up these numbers.

I don't begrudge anyone who makes the argument that Teixeira is better. They might be right. But I think Hand illustrates my point here about Dunn being underrated, by calling the argument "ludicrous." Most people don't focus on the stats that tell you the most about a player, and dwell on many others that tell you substantially less.

Talking specifically about total bases. They're great. They help you win games. But outs are bad. They help you lose games. IMO, you can't praise someone for total bases without evaluating the number of outs it requires to obtain them.

Handofdeath
05-04-2006, 03:50 PM
You might want to do your own homework before blatantly calling somebody else out on supposedly not doing their homework.


Win Shares RC/27 LgRC/27 RC/27 Ratio OPS+
Dunn 2004 32 7.86 4.87 1.61 152
Dunn 2005 28 7.15 4.71 1.52 135

Teixeira 2004 25 7.41 5.12 1.45 128
Teixeira 2005 32 7.85 4.85 1.62 146

Win shares and OPS+ is park adjusted, while RC/27 is not. Teixeira plays in a hitter's park, while Dunn's park is largely neutral.

Claiming that Teixeira is "probably worse" than Dunn as chili did is most definitely not ludicrous, but actually pretty darn accurate.

GABP is largely neutral? Since when? Oh I'm sorry Bill James said it was. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck but Bill James( the L.Ron Hubbard of baseball) says it's a horse, then by god it's a horse. My apologies.

registerthis
05-04-2006, 03:55 PM
GABP is largely neutral? Since when? Oh I'm sorry Bill James said it was. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck but Bill James( the L.Ron Hubbard of baseball) says it's a horse, then by god it's a horse. My apologies.

???

You can verify the numbers for yourself if you'd like, Hand, or you can simply continue to think that GABP skews heavily towards hitters.

It increases HRs by a small amount, but equally suppresses doubles and triples. It really, truly, honest-to-God is a neutral park. Bill james doesn't even warrant a mention in this discussion.

Izzardius
05-04-2006, 04:06 PM
Overrated: As hitter, Jeter is actually quite good, but defensively he's vastly overrated. Although Alfonso Soriano belongs at the top of this list for me.

Underrated: Brian Giles-might be the best player ever to never play on a really good team, assuming he finishes his career in San Diego.

vaticanplum
05-04-2006, 04:08 PM
Timely...

http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2006/05/04/give_him_a_brea_1.php

TRF
05-04-2006, 04:14 PM
GABP is largely neutral? Since when? Oh I'm sorry Bill James said it was. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck but Bill James( the L.Ron Hubbard of baseball) says it's a horse, then by god it's a horse. My apologies.

dude. weak arguement. It does boost HR totals, but all other extra base hits are low, and therefore rates as pretty neutral.

Ya know, A lot of guys can research stuff about baseball statistics and never mention Bill James.

Cyclone792
05-04-2006, 04:28 PM
GABP is largely neutral? Since when? Oh I'm sorry Bill James said it was. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck but Bill James( the L.Ron Hubbard of baseball) says it's a horse, then by god it's a horse. My apologies.

Since 2003.

It is a home run hitter's park, but not a hitter's park. Like register stated, it suppresses other forms of hits to such a degree that the overall run factor of the park is largely neutral.

And no, Bill James has nothing to do with determining the park factor of GABP.

Crash Davis
05-04-2006, 04:34 PM
Overrated: Chipper Jones

Yeah, yeah... say what you want about those division titles. Still, this guy has never really impressed me that much. In my opinion, he's never really been one of the best players in the game despite getting that publicity. The Atlanta pitching has been much more important to their success, and this guy's rep has been one of the main beneficiaries. He's also looking more and more like he's going to poop out before his statistics merit Hall consideration. A latter day Dale Murphy if you ask me.

:confused:

Hmmm...if the goal of playing baseball is to win, Chipper Jones takes a back seat to no one. I don't care much for Chipper, but I sure do respect what he's accomplished.

He's never known a season where his team hasn't won its division, and he's been the consistent driving force in the Braves lineup for most of their 14 year run. He's a switch-hitter, a tough out, has very good power, a very good k/bb ratio, gets on base and produces in big games. He's now become a bit injury prone, but overrated? Not if you're into players who win.

OVERRATED:
Juan Pierre
Chien Ming Wang
Russell Branyan
Erubiel Durazo
Hee Seop Choi
Carlos Pena
Mark Bellhorn
Jose Cruz Jr.
Jeff Francoeur
Adam LaRoche
Paul LoDuca
Randy Winn
Jason Michaels
Meltdown Milton Bradley
Joey Gathright

UNDERRATED:
1. Placido Polanco
2. Adam Dunn
3. Jose Contreras
4. Javier Vazquez
5. Ben Sheets
6. Scott Eyre
7. Chad Tracy
8. Brandon Webb
8. Aaron Cook
10. Chris Capuano
11. Freddy Sanchez
12. Nick Johnson
13. Livan Hernandez
14. Carlos Guillen
15. Scot Shields
16. Toby Hall

M2
05-04-2006, 04:38 PM
GABP is largely neutral? Since when? Oh I'm sorry Bill James said it was. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck but Bill James( the L.Ron Hubbard of baseball) says it's a horse, then by god it's a horse. My apologies.

I've got a son in the second grade who can understand the math involved in determining park factors. It's that basic.

RedsManRick
05-04-2006, 04:40 PM
GABP is largely neutral? Since when? Oh I'm sorry Bill James said it was. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck but Bill James( the L.Ron Hubbard of baseball) says it's a horse, then by god it's a horse. My apologies.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/attend.shtml
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor?season=2003

Since it's opening GABP has played neutral in regards to runs scored at .989 - which means teams score 1% less in GABP than they do on average.

Over the same time period, Ameriquest has a factor of 1.17 - 17% above average.

Now yes, GABP is slightly homer friendly, but it kills other extra base hits, functionally negating the homer boost. The idea that it's some launching pad is borne more out of anecdotal media commentary and the fact that the Reds hit a ton of homers everywhere, they just happen to play 81 games at home.

----------------------------------

For those that may be wary of Park Factor's -- it's pretty simple. How did you do (whatever -- runs, homers, etc.) at home compared to on the Road. If the Reds scored 500 runs and allowed 500 runs at home and scored 300 runs and allowed 300 runs on the road, their runs factor would be:

(500 runs scored at home + 500 runs allowed at home)/81 games = 12.34

DIVDED BY

(300 runs scored on the roade + 300 runs allowed on the road)/81 games = 7.41

12.34/7.41 = 1.67

That is, the Reds and their opponents scored 67% more runs at home than on the road. Any difference of more than .1 is pretty significant.

The Reds have had 1 neutral year ('03), one very pitcher friendly year ('04), and hitter friendly year ('05).

vaticanplum
05-04-2006, 04:40 PM
UNDERRATED:
3. Jose Contreras

He won again today. The White Sox are knocking me out. As far as I'm concerned they're the story in baseball right now apart from the Reds. It's not surprising that they're succeeding with that staff, but they're doing so in an even more convincing way than I expected.

Good to see Vazquez getting some love. True Javier the Great is due to emerge any day now.

re: Chien-Ming wang. Interesting to hear him called overrated. I kind of have hopes that he continues to flouder a little bit with the Yankees this season so they're willing to trade him at the deadline. They've been so gung-ho on not trading him to this point, but with the need-it-now mentality they have, it wouldn't be surprising to see them rethink this. He'd be a great pickup for Cincinnati I think. All groundballs, all the time. And I think he's definitely talented, so I'll chalk some of his recent blips up to youth.

wolfboy
05-04-2006, 04:44 PM
My vote for underrated goes to Vlad Guerrero. Over a ten year span, he has a .977 OPS. What amazes me about Guerrero is that he isn't a guy that takes a lot of walks. He's had over 65 walks once in a season. I don't place a premium on batting average for the most part, but I find it amazing that he is a .324 hitter coming into this season. He has never hit under .300 in a full season. His RC/27 compares pretty favorably to A Rod. He has a higher OPS for his career than A Rod, and their OPS+ is pretty similar. I'm not trying to compare the two, but it does give some perspective on how good Guerrero has been.

When Guerrero was in Montreal, he barely got any attention. Now that he's with the OC Angels, he's getting a bit more press. I just don't know if he has the recognition that one of the best in the game should have.

Highlifeman21
05-04-2006, 04:52 PM
I don't really want to get into a Derek Jeter-slurping contest on a Reds message board, but this is exactly why Jeter is *underrated* - especially by non-Yankee fans. Not even the best shortstop on his team??? Come on - do you really buy that?? He'll eventually end his career with about a .310 career BA, 3000+ hits, 300 or so home runs, and 300-400 steals. Not to mention 4 WS rings.


It obviously helps to be in a better lineup, but come on - 3000 hits doesn't just happen by accident. He's a damn good baseball player, and one of the top 3/4 shortstops in the game over the last 10 years.



Underrated = how about Jason Jennings? If he pitched anywhere else in the NL, he'd likely be a #1 starter. Very good hitter, too - career BA around .250.


Good lord you sound like Skip Bayless, since in fact something similar came from his mouth during 1st and 10 on Cold Pizza.

And yes, I really do buy the fact Jeter isn't the best SS on the Yankees 25 man roster right now. The guy playing next to him, Alex Rodriguez is a FAR SUPERIOR SS than Derek Jeter can ever hope to be, both offensively and defensively.

WS rings are just a byproduct of the club you're on. His rings actually enhance his entire overratedness, due to the fact, he's never been the best player on his team, and that he's a glorified role player. There have been, and will continue to be plenty of far better ballplayers than Derek Jeter who will never come close to sniffing a WS ring, let alone put one on.

Derek Jeter = Gary Sheffield = Paul O'Neil. What do all three of them have in common? They all have enjoyed statistical success while playing for the YANKEES. Paul O'Neil's numbers drastically improved once putting on the pinstripes, just as Gary Sheffield's numbers have enjoyed similar results. IIRC, Sheffield had 1 good season way back when with the Padres, and that's it. If Derek Jeter weren't constantly surrounded with some of the best players money could buy, then he wouldn't be anything more than a below to average glove SS with limited plate discipline who can find the gap here and again.

He's not even in the top 5 of best SS in the game over the last 10 years, so I don't know where you magically made up that he's one of the best 3/4. Please prove me wrong.

M2
05-04-2006, 04:54 PM
OVERRATED:
Juan Pierre
Chien Ming Wang
Russell Branyan
Erubiel Durazo
Hee Seop Choi
Carlos Pena
Mark Bellhorn
Jose Cruz Jr.
Jeff Francoeur
Adam LaRoche
Paul LoDuca
Randy Winn
Jason Michaels
Meltdown Milton Bradley
Joey Gathright

Outside of Pierre, LoDuca and Bradley, I'd call that an unrated list. I suspect the overwhelming majority of solid, but casual baseball fans don't even know who the rest of the guys are.

jmcclain19
05-04-2006, 05:01 PM
As far as the Jeter discussion goes

By Age 31

Player From To Yrs G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG SB CS OPS+
--------------------+---------+--+----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+----+----+----+-----+-----+-----+----+---+----+
Derek Jeter 1995-2005 11 1525 6167 1159 1936 308 47 169 763 636 1089 .314 .386 .461 215 57 121
Alan Trammell 1977-1989 13 1689 6143 938 1759 292 49 138 721 639 657 .286 .353 .417 187 86 112

Trammell got 17.7% of the HOF votes this year.

wolfboy
05-04-2006, 05:02 PM
re: Chien-Ming wang. Interesting to hear him called overrated. I kind of have hopes that he continues to flouder a little bit with the Yankees this season so they're willing to trade him at the deadline. They've been so gung-ho on not trading him to this point, but with the need-it-now mentality they have, it wouldn't be surprising to see them rethink this. He'd be a great pickup for Cincinnati I think. All groundballs, all the time. And I think he's definitely talented, so I'll chalk some of his recent blips up to youth.

I don't know that Wang is overrated. Maybe anyone in the NY market is. I'm not sure if I'd like Wang for the Reds or not. He has the ability to provide league average pitching. Sometimes his mechanics are off, and he can't keep the ball down. That would worry me in GABP. His K and K:BB numbers dropped off a good bit in 2005 (majors and minors). A lot of Yankees fans wanted to get rid of him this past offseason. Make a sell high kind of move. I would take him over Wilson, Milton or Williams. Then again, I'd take most beer league aces over those guys.

vaticanplum
05-04-2006, 05:11 PM
Derek Jeter = Gary Sheffield = Paul O'Neil. What do all three of them have in common? They all have enjoyed statistical success while playing for the YANKEES. Paul O'Neil's numbers drastically improved once putting on the pinstripes, just as Gary Sheffield's numbers have enjoyed similar results. IIRC, Sheffield had 1 good season way back when with the Padres, and that's it. If Derek Jeter weren't constantly surrounded with some of the best players money could buy, then he wouldn't be anything more than a below to average glove SS with limited plate discipline who can find the gap here and again.

Again, I'm baffled by this argument. Yes, they won while playing for the Yankees, but funnily enough, the Yankees won because of their players. The name of the team, and four titles in five years, are not arbitrary things. People act as if Derek Jeter was just hanging out chewing gum in the dugout as the Yankees won. He was a big part of all of those Series, MVP in one, and in the two Series he played in which the Yankees did NOT win (01 and 03), he didn't perform quite up to par, the November homer notwithstanding.

Shane Spencer got a couple of those rings with the Yankees too. I never hear anybody talking about him as one of baseball's greatest players. I don't even hear it about Scott Brosius, who was a World Series MVP once, just like Jeter. Jeter was a far more crucial part of all of those teams, and the titles and the rings -- not to mention the seasons that got them there -- are a part of why he is great, just as much as he is a part of why they happened.

I'm also a little baffled as to what's behind your statements that he has no plate discipline, as well as your notion that Sheffield is anything but a very dangerous hitter.

Cyclone792
05-04-2006, 05:21 PM
Good lord you sound like Skip Bayless, since in fact something similar came from his mouth during 1st and 10 on Cold Pizza.

And yes, I really do buy the fact Jeter isn't the best SS on the Yankees 25 man roster right now. The guy playing next to him, Alex Rodriguez is a FAR SUPERIOR SS than Derek Jeter can ever hope to be, both offensively and defensively.

WS rings are just a byproduct of the club you're on. His rings actually enhance his entire overratedness, due to the fact, he's never been the best player on his team, and that he's a glorified role player. There have been, and will continue to be plenty of far better ballplayers than Derek Jeter who will never come close to sniffing a WS ring, let alone put one on.

Derek Jeter = Gary Sheffield = Paul O'Neil. What do all three of them have in common? They all have enjoyed statistical success while playing for the YANKEES. Paul O'Neil's numbers drastically improved once putting on the pinstripes, just as Gary Sheffield's numbers have enjoyed similar results. IIRC, Sheffield had 1 good season way back when with the Padres, and that's it. If Derek Jeter weren't constantly surrounded with some of the best players money could buy, then he wouldn't be anything more than a below to average glove SS with limited plate discipline who can find the gap here and again.

He's not even in the top 5 of best SS in the game over the last 10 years, so I don't know where you magically made up that he's one of the best 3/4. Please prove me wrong.

Nate, while I agree with ya that Jeter is overrated, I think you're going a bit too far with this one, bud ;)

If Jeter finishes his career with a normal aging pattern and plays at least into his late 30s, then he'll be a deserving Hall of Famer and very possible top 10 shortstop in the game's history. Of course, by that point people will probably be trying to throw his name into the top five - and thereby continuing to overrate him - but that's not happening unless he has a few more high caliber peak seasons like his 1999 campaign. Still though, as long as he doesn't flame out in next few years, he should be a deserving Hall of Famer.

Shortstops from the last 10 years greater than Jeter: Larkin and Rodriguez. Garciaparra has some peak seasons greater than Jeter's peak seasons (sans Jeter's 1999), but Nomar hasn't been able to stay off the DL and Jeter crushes him in career value. Jeter's also been a better player than Tejada so far, but Miguel's two years younger so he has a shot to change that. Guys like Michael Young, Jhonny Peralta, Felipe Lopez, Rafael Furcal, etc. have had a few good seasons, but they're all many seasons away from being able to lump themselves in with the Jeter class. That doesn't mean they can't do it, but it just hasn't happened yet.

And FWIW, Gary Sheffield's been an absolute beast his entire career. :p:

wolfboy
05-04-2006, 05:24 PM
Good lord you sound like Skip Bayless, since in fact something similar came from his mouth during 1st and 10 on Cold Pizza.

And yes, I really do buy the fact Jeter isn't the best SS on the Yankees 25 man roster right now. The guy playing next to him, Alex Rodriguez is a FAR SUPERIOR SS than Derek Jeter can ever hope to be, both offensively and defensively.

WS rings are just a byproduct of the club you're on. His rings actually enhance his entire overratedness, due to the fact, he's never been the best player on his team, and that he's a glorified role player. There have been, and will continue to be plenty of far better ballplayers than Derek Jeter who will never come close to sniffing a WS ring, let alone put one on.

Derek Jeter = Gary Sheffield = Paul O'Neil. What do all three of them have in common? They all have enjoyed statistical success while playing for the YANKEES. Paul O'Neil's numbers drastically improved once putting on the pinstripes, just as Gary Sheffield's numbers have enjoyed similar results. IIRC, Sheffield had 1 good season way back when with the Padres, and that's it. If Derek Jeter weren't constantly surrounded with some of the best players money could buy, then he wouldn't be anything more than a below to average glove SS with limited plate discipline who can find the gap here and again.

He's not even in the top 5 of best SS in the game over the last 10 years, so I don't know where you magically made up that he's one of the best 3/4. Please prove me wrong.


Derek Jeter has certaintly been the best player on his team. I'd like to know who was better in 99. That was a WS year for the record. I'm not going to elevate the guy onto a pedestal that he hasn't earned, but I'll defend garbage arguments against him. Calling the guy a role player is where your argument failed to be logical and quickly became nothing more than personal bias. When it is all said and done, he will have a compelling argument for the Hall of Fame. One of the best ever? No. A "glorified role player"? Hell No.

Concerning Sheffield.....take the time to look his numbers up (as with Jeter). The guy has regressed as a Yankee. His best seasons were with teams in Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Miami. They were damn good years too. Yet, you claim that he had one good year for San Diego once. Next time, just come out and say I HATE THE YANKEES. I will have a lot more respect for that than some poorly thought out argument that tries to crap on anything in pinstripes.

vaticanplum
05-04-2006, 05:24 PM
Oh, that reminds me...I think Tejada is underrated. Whatever that means, I've kind of lost touch at this point.

Handofdeath
05-04-2006, 05:31 PM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/attend.shtml
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor?season=2003

Since it's opening GABP has played neutral in regards to runs scored at .989 - which means teams score 1% less in GABP than they do on average.

Over the same time period, Ameriquest has a factor of 1.17 - 17% above average.

Now yes, GABP is slightly homer friendly, but it kills other extra base hits, functionally negating the homer boost. The idea that it's some launching pad is borne more out of anecdotal media commentary and the fact that the Reds hit a ton of homers everywhere, they just happen to play 81 games at home.
I disagree. The Reds led the NL in doubles last year. The Reds have been a swing for the fences all or nothing team for the last few years. That skewers any data concerning GABP. The ballpark played in has something to do with offensive production but the team that plays in it has more to do with how the ballpark is looked at. There are too many variables involved to treat these statistics as fact. Formulas are great but if it can't judge something with 100% accuracy then the results cannot be treated as fact.

creek14
05-04-2006, 05:31 PM
Overrated by Geo Grande: Jim Edmonds

Underrated by Marty B.: Adam Dunn and EdE

Crash Davis
05-04-2006, 05:42 PM
Outside of Pierre, LoDuca and Bradley, I'd call that an unrated list. I suspect the overwhelming majority of solid, but casual baseball fans don't even know who the rest of the guys are.

On the contrary, they're not only rated, they're annointed. While it's tough to come up with a criteria for what makes one underrated or overrated, it's uncommonly simple to come up with a list of saber-annointed darlings.

If excuses are made for your every failure; if it's always the team's fault for its handling of the player; if glaring weaknesses are habitually glossed over in favor of one predetermined strength; if third, fourth and fifth chances become the order of the day rather than re-evaluation of the player, then there is an obvious overrating going on.

As common and formulaic as the everyman sabermetrics expert has become in the baseball community (and clearly "an idea newly grasped stirs the blood to aggressiveness"), there's no doubt these players are widely known and, in fact, overrated on baseball message boards. This is with whom we interact in the high times of the information revolution, so it's pretty easy to see who rates and who doesn't among the internet fans.

Was this thread really about whom the casual fan thinks highly? It's tough to even find a casual baseball fan anymore. What I find is that too often you either follow the game daily, or you don't follow it at all because you have major beefs with what the game has become.

M2
05-04-2006, 05:46 PM
I disagree. The Reds led the NL in doubles last year. The Reds have been a swing for the fences all or nothing team for the last few years. That skewers any data concerning GABP. The ballpark played in has something to do with offensive production but the team that plays in it has more to do with how the ballpark is looked at. There are too many variables involved to treat these statistics as fact. Formulas are great but if it can't judge something with 100% accuracy then the results cannot be treated as fact.

Once again, this is the simplest math in the world. There are no ifs or variances here. We know EXACTLY how the GAB played compared to other park in the 2003-2005 time period. It's a matter of clear and established record.

That people think the park is more offensively skewed is a matter of faulty perception based upon the Reds having a powerful offense and horrible pitching. You seem to recognize this, but then in the same breath you act like that belongs in the equation inside of being factored out of it. The Reds have a powerful offense and horrible pitching on the road too. When you compare that to how the home park has played it turns out that the GAB has been a neutral park in its three-year existence. If you want to be more precise. It was neutral in 2003, a pitching-skewed park in 2004 and an offense-skewed park in 2005 (those changes reflecting the effects of creative groundskeeping on the game).

M2
05-04-2006, 06:08 PM
On the contrary, they're not only rated, they're annointed. While it's tough to come up with a criteria for what makes one underrated or overrated, it's uncommonly simple to come up with a list of saber-annointed darlings.

You, of course, realize that you're swiftly going mad, right? Randy Winn and Jason Michaels have never been anointed as anything by anyone. They play baseball for a living, better than some, worse than others. I've yet to hear anyone anoint them as anything more than that. And then you take a leap to "saber-annointed darlings," which is precious. First off, is there an official mechanism for this anointing? Does Bill James rub some sort of oil on their foreheads and give them a pointy hat?

Aside from that, you've got a bunch of guys on your overrated list that places like Baseball Prospectus have been down on (look no farther than Francouer). If you somehow think you've compiled a list of "saber-anointed darlings," I hate to tell you that you're working from a platform of extreme ignorance. For something you claim is uncommonly simple, you've made a complete mess of it.


If excuses are made for your every failure; if it's always the team's fault for its handling of the player; if glaring weaknesses are habitually glossed over in favor of one predetermined strength; if third, fourth and fifth chances become the order of the day rather than re-evaluation of the player, then there is an obvious overrating going on.

This is where I'll suggest you rest and check your heart rate because this is a screed that I suspect is only going to make sense to you. For my part, it's a complete non-sequitor.


As common and formulaic as the everyman sabermetrics expert has become in the baseball community (and clearly "an idea newly grasped stirs the blood to aggressiveness"), there's no doubt these players are widely known and, in fact, overrated on baseball message boards. This is with whom we interact in the high times of the information revolution, so it's pretty easy to see who rates and who doesn't among the internet fans.

If you think Russ Branyan, Hee Sop Choi and Carlos Pena qualify as household names, I think you need to get out to more households. As far as them being overrated, I suggest you go and check out where the decidedly non-numbers-oriented folks at BA ranked those guys, because no one liked those three better than BA. The only "everyman sabermetrics expert" cases I've heard for them is that they might give you cheap production. I don't recall anyone on this message board, and it's the only one I frequent, claiming one of those three was headed for any type of stardom.


Was this thread really about whom the casual fan thinks highly? It's tough to even find a casual baseball fan anymore. What I find is that too often you either follow the game daily, or you don't follow it at all because you have major beefs with what the game has become.

Yes, I think it's fair to say it was about what the casual fan/mass media perceives. Seems to me it was pretty clearly about that, thus the constant mention of high-profile players in the overrated category.

As for finding casual fans, go to a game and talk to the person next you. That person is probably a casual fan.

I'm not touching "or you don't follow it at all because you have major beefs with what the game has become" because that smacks of being a trip wire for another screed.

Falls City Beer
05-04-2006, 06:15 PM
Overratedness is absolutely, positively a perceptual phenomenon of the casual fan, Crash.

You're "rated" when people talk about you constantly. People in Cincinnati talked about Sean Casey, wore more Casey than Dunn jerseys, called him the Mayor. In other words, he was rated highly. Too highly. His talent fell well, well short of his perceived value vis. the fans.

Was Casey overrated by the national media? I think so, to some extent--insofar as he was portrayed as the Reds' best hitter for several seasons. Which is patently false.

Handofdeath
05-04-2006, 06:20 PM
Once again, this is the simplest math in the world. There are no ifs or variances here. We know EXACTLY how the GAB played compared to other park in the 2003-2005 time period. It's a matter of clear and established record.

That people think the park is more offensively skewed is a matter of faulty perception based upon the Reds having a powerful offense and horrible pitching. You seem to recognize this, but then in the same breath you act like that belongs in the equation inside of being factored out of it. The Reds have a powerful offense and horrible pitching on the road too. When you compare that to how the home park has played it turns out that the GAB has been a neutral park in its three-year existence. If you want to be more precise. It was neutral in 2003, a pitching-skewed park in 2004 and an offense-skewed park in 2005 (those changes reflecting the effects of creative groundskeeping on the game).
But my point is the ballpark doesn't "play." The players play. How can GABP be judged properly when one season it's a hitters park and the next season it's not? Because the equation says so? If x+y=z how can you tell what x is if y keeps changing? Say for example Pujols gets hurt. :evil: The whole team revolves around him and now the Cardinals get pitched differently because of it. Their whole outlook at the plate is different. How then do you judge Busch Stadium? Or say for example that Cincy has a rainy summer and the grounders start slowing up because the field is wet? The stadium is what the stadium is unless the groundskeepers start screwing with things. Math is not the problem. I know math. I think philosophy is what the problem is.

ochre
05-04-2006, 06:29 PM
But my point is the ballpark doesn't "play." The players play. How can GABP be judged properly when one season it's a hitters park and the next season it's not? Because the equation says so? If x+y=z how can you tell what x is if y keeps changing? Say for example Pujols gets hurt. :evil: The whole team revolves around him and now the Cardinals get pitched differently because of it. Their whole outlook at the plate is different. How then do you judge Busch Stadium? Or say for example that Cincy has a rainy summer and the grounders start slowing up because the field is wet? The stadium is what the stadium is unless the groundskeepers start screwing with things. Math is not the problem. I know math. I think philosophy is what the problem is.
that's the beauty of rate type statistics. As long as Pujols doesn't only miss home games his affect on the park rating for that year is immaterial individually. Were he to succom to some odd malady that precluded him from participating in games played at home, then you would see a disparity that would really impact the ratings. All of this, of course, ignores the fact that, generally, park ratings are best viewed over ~3 year runs.

RedsManRick
05-04-2006, 06:32 PM
But my point is the ballpark doesn't "play." The players play. How can GABP be judged properly when one season it's a hitters park and the next season it's not? Because the equation says so? If x+y=z how can you tell what x is if y keeps changing? Say for example Pujols gets hurt. :evil: The whole team revolves around him and now the Cardinals get pitched differently because of it. Their whole outlook at the plate is different. How then do you judge Busch Stadium? Or say for example that Cincy has a rainy summer and the grounders start slowing up because the field is wet? The stadium is what the stadium is unless the groundskeepers start screwing with things. Math is not the problem. I know math. I think philosophy is what the problem is.


Over time, these sorts of variances balance out. Yes, the argument could be made that luck has meant the numbers for GABP aren't representative of the actual park effect. However, without any sort of evidence to back up that claim (ie. Milton pitched 25 games on the road and 7 at home), it's flaunting your assumption in the face of stats which explicitly counter you.

M2
05-04-2006, 06:32 PM
But my point is the ballpark doesn't "play." The players play.

And they play in ballparks.


How can GABP be judged properly when one season it's a hitters park and the next season it's not? Because the equation says so?

No, because one year they grew elephant grass and the next they kept the carpet well-trimmed, something most Reds fans on this board knew without ever having to look at a number.


Say for example Pujols gets hurt. :evil: The whole team revolves around him and now the Cardinals get pitched differently because of it. Their whole outlook at the plate is different. How then do you judge Busch Stadium?

The same way you'd judge any park, by comparing how the Cardinals and their opponents fared in home games vs. how they fared in away games. Unless Pujols only plays home or away it wouldn't have an ounce of effect on the park factors.


Or say for example that Cincy has a rainy summer and the grounders start slowing up because the field is wet? The stadium is what the stadium is unless the groundskeepers start screwing with things. Math is not the problem. I know math. I think philosophy is what the problem is.

Well, if El Nino blows into Cincinnati anytime soon, I'll be sure to take the park factors with a grain of salt. Barring that, we know exactly how the Reds and their opponents fared in the GAB as compared to on the road.

RedsManRick
05-04-2006, 06:45 PM
I disagree. The Reds led the NL in doubles last year. The Reds have been a swing for the fences all or nothing team for the last few years. That skewers any data concerning GABP. The ballpark played in has something to do with offensive production but the team that plays in it has more to do with how the ballpark is looked at. There are too many variables involved to treat these statistics as fact. Formulas are great but if it can't judge something with 100% accuracy then the results cannot be treated as fact.

Park factor has nothing to do with HOW MANY of a given thing happen (ie. doubles). It has to do with how many of those things happen at home versus on the road. The FACT is that over the last 3 years, the Reds and their opponents have hit many more homers in Reds home games than at GABP.

Now, you do sort of make a point. Given only 3 years of data, we shouldn't be drawing any sorts of conclusions about the definitive effect of GABP. However, we must take the actual events at their face value. The actual events of the past 3 years are that:

1.) The Reds and their Opponents have scored slightly fewer runs when the Reds are at home than when they are on the road
2.) The Reds and their Opponents have hit many fewer doubles when the Reds are at home than when they are on the road
3.) The Reds and their Opponents have hit many more homers when the Reds are at home than when they are on the road

Now, we can say that there are too many variables to draw any conclusions and I might even agree with you. As time progresses and we get more and more data, we'll see how the tendencies of GABP play out. But all the data we have suggests that it's basically a neutral run environment which favors homers but dampens doubles and triples. However, we cannot say "The Reds (or Dunn, etc) have been aided by a hitter friendly park" because the FACT is that there is absolutely no evidence to support that claim.

Another caveat is understanding the effect of park characteristics on certain players. Ryan Freel isn't going to hit homers anywhere and our park may actually hurt him because if the ball doesn't go over the wall, it gets caught. Again more time and ABs are needed, but the numbers show the GABP is definitely misunderstood.

Crash Davis
05-04-2006, 06:52 PM
You, of course, realize that you're swiftly going mad, right? Randy Winn and Jason Michaels have never been anointed as anything by anyone. They play baseball for a living, better than some, worse than others. I've yet to hear anyone anoint them as anything more than that. And then you take a leap to "saber-annointed darlings," which is precious. First off, is there an official mechanism for this anointing? Does Bill James rub some sort of oil on their foreheads and give them a pointy hat?

Aside from that, you've got a bunch of guys on your overrated list that places like Baseball Prospectus have been down on (look no farther than Francouer). If you somehow think you've compiled a list of "saber-anointed darlings," I hate to tell you that you're working from a platform of extreme ignorance. For something you claim is uncommonly simple, you've made a complete mess of it.



This is where I'll suggest you rest and check your heart rate because this is a screed that I suspect is only going to make sense to you. For my part, it's a complete non-sequitor.



If you think Russ Branyan, Hee Sop Choi and Carlos Pena qualify as household names, I think you need to get out to more households. As far as them being overrated, I suggest you go and check out where the decidedly non-numbers-oriented folks at BA ranked those guys, because no one liked those three better than BA. The only "everyman sabermetrics expert" cases I've heard for them is that they might give you cheap production. I don't recall anyone on this message board, and it's the only one I frequent, claiming one of those three was headed for any type of stardom.



Yes, I think it's fair to say it was about what the casual fan/mass media perceives. Seems to me it was pretty clearly about that, thus the constant mention of high-profile players in the overrated category.

As for finding casual fans, go to a game and talk to the person next you. That person is probably a casual fan.

I'm not touching "or you don't follow it at all because you have major beefs with what the game has become" because that smacks of being a trip wire for another screed.

Somehow you managed to completely misrepresent almost every point I've made.

Why would I make a list of overrated players containing some with sabermetric darlings and some clearly not and try to pass it off as all saber-friendly players? I didn't. I don't subscribe to any particular movement, so a list of overrated/underrated players won't fall in line with any parties.

Of course Francouer & Randy Winn aren't Baseball Prospectus types. Did it occur to you that an overrated list could contain all types of players?

Who said anything about household names? I know I didn't it. Would you prefer if we change the momentum of the thread to "which perennial all-stars are overrated/underrated."

I want no part of a BA vs. BP debate. It should be clear to anyone who follows the game that neither camp has all of the answers. And I know I've made my feelings clear on the subject that I think falling in line with either party while ignoring or damning the other is foolish.

Has it occured to you that a guy could find fault with players like Choi, Pena & Branyan without toeing BA's party line. Or the same guy could find fault with Francouer without toeing BP's party line. Hey, it's not an either/or proposition here.

I've made a mess of nothing, I articulated exactly what I wanted to, and you smeared ketchup all over it. I'll thank you not to preach to me about platforms of ignorance.

TC81190
05-04-2006, 07:05 PM
You what'd be awesome? If the conversation could divert back to the original topic instead of park factors being challenged.

Wheelhouse
05-04-2006, 07:18 PM
Overrated: Adam Dunn

Underrated: Scott Kazmir

Cedric
05-04-2006, 07:23 PM
Overrated: Any DH getting mvp votes

Underrated: Any Padres player's numbers.

I didn't really answer the question.

Handofdeath
05-04-2006, 07:30 PM
You what'd be awesome? If the conversation could divert back to the original topic instead of park factors being challenged.
My fault. Some people said Dunn was better than Texieria and I felt I had to respond. I shall say no more...today

M2
05-04-2006, 07:32 PM
Somehow you managed to completely misrepresent almost every point I've made.

Seems to me that your larger argument here is with yourself, but we'll get to that soon enough.


Why would I make a list of overrated players containing some with sabermetric darlings and some clearly not and try to pass it off as all saber-friendly players? I didn't. I don't subscribe to any particular movement, so a list of overrated/underrated players won't fall in line with any parties.

Then this was a particularly odd thing to say when I noted that your overrated list looked awfully anonymous -- "On the contrary, they're not only rated, they're annointed. While it's tough to come up with a criteria for what makes one underrated or overrated, it's uncommonly simple to come up with a list of saber-annointed darlings."

You're the one who introduced "saber-annointed" into the discussion. All I said was you picked a bunch of guys with bags over their heads.


Of course Francouer & Randy Winn aren't Baseball Prospectus types. Did it occur to you that an overrated list could contain all types of players?

Sure, that's what I originally thought it was, until you went on your sabermetrics rant. I took that to mean that your list had something to do with the rant and that it wasn't just a tic.


Who said anything about household names? I know I didn't it. Would you prefer if we change the momentum of the thread to "which perennial all-stars are overrated/underrated."

Aside from pretty much everyone before you picking generally well-known, All-Star-level players, no one said anything about it. You then listed a bunch of fairly anonymous guys without any seeming common thread that would make them "overrated." If they lack any sort of large constituency thinking they're the bee's knees, how can they be overrated?


I want no part of a BA vs. BP debate.

So says the guy who decided to use "sabermetric" as a pejorative. Once again, I'm not the guy who typed, "it's uncommonly simple to come up with a list of saber-annointed darlings." All I did was note that you hadn't come up with any such sort of list, using a sabermetric group and a seamhead group to provide examples.


It should be clear to anyone who follows the game that neither camp has all of the answers. And I know I've made my feelings clear on the subject that I think falling in line with either party while ignoring or damning the other is foolish.

Thou dost protest too much. That was never the topic here. That you inserted it into the discussion ... well, that's what's speaking volumes to me.


Has it occured to you that a guy could find fault with players like Choi, Pena & Branyan without toeing BA's party line. Or the same guy could find fault with Francouer without toeing BP's party line. Hey, it's not an either/or proposition here.

A) Again, you're the one who stuck the "sabermetric" wrapper around what you wrote.

B) I haven't said a thing here about any of those guys as players, though I imagine Francouer will be all right in a few years when he's had the chance to more fully develop. I can imagine all sorts of reasons why someone might not be enamored with anyone on your list. What I can't imagine is the notion that any large group of people has a highly elevated opinion of them.


I've made a mess of nothing, I articulated exactly what I wanted to, and you smeared ketchup all over it. I'll thank you not to preach to me about platforms of ignorance.

Don't stand on one and then I won't note whats under your feet. Though I am going to get some business cards made up that read: M2, Ketchup-Crazy Evangelist.

Highlifeman21
05-04-2006, 09:19 PM
Nate, while I agree with ya that Jeter is overrated, I think you're going a bit too far with this one, bud ;)

If Jeter finishes his career with a normal aging pattern and plays at least into his late 30s, then he'll be a deserving Hall of Famer and very possible top 10 shortstop in the game's history. Of course, by that point people will probably be trying to throw his name into the top five - and thereby continuing to overrate him - but that's not happening unless he has a few more high caliber peak seasons like his 1999 campaign. Still though, as long as he doesn't flame out in next few years, he should be a deserving Hall of Famer.

Shortstops from the last 10 years greater than Jeter: Larkin and Rodriguez. Garciaparra has some peak seasons greater than Jeter's peak seasons (sans Jeter's 1999), but Nomar hasn't been able to stay off the DL and Jeter crushes him in career value. Jeter's also been a better player than Tejada so far, but Miguel's two years younger so he has a shot to change that. Guys like Michael Young, Jhonny Peralta, Felipe Lopez, Rafael Furcal, etc. have had a few good seasons, but they're all many seasons away from being able to lump themselves in with the Jeter class. That doesn't mean they can't do it, but it just hasn't happened yet.

And FWIW, Gary Sheffield's been an absolute beast his entire career. :p:


Ah me and my hyperbole.

I agree Jeter will be a HOF, but the idea was overrated, which it's no secret Jeter has to be at the top of any overrated player list. I'm not questioning Jeter as a HOF, in fact I think that's a lock, but I don't think he's as good as everyone makes him out to be.

I honestly think it's an issue about media market. NYC is arguably the biggest media market, so you're going to have that microscope effect for every player on the Yankees and Mets rosters. It doesn't surprise me that Carlos Beltran's name has been kicked around as overrated for a similar reason. The reason I tossed Sheffield into the mix is b/c no one really made a whole lot of noise about his stats until he put on the pinstripes. It happens that way for plenty of Yankees, and to an extent the Mets as well. Carlos Delgado is probably on his way to the overrated list b/c he plays for the Mets. I think it's an issue of being held to a different standard due to media market, as well as media exposure.

Plenty of people on this board knock ESPN all the time b/c it largely comes down to Boston vs. New York, which I think to an extent is true. They're going to primarily cover those teams b/c of the geographic proximity to Bristol, CT, as well as the surrounding fan bases.

I mean seriously, was there any reason that Doug Mirabelli getting a police escort from Logan Airport to Fenway Park was a story? Only b/c he plays for Boston.

While I may have gotten a little too excited at work earlier today, I don't feel that I'm honestly that far from the truth, except maybe for Sheffield. He can still rake.

Highlifeman21
05-04-2006, 09:30 PM
Derek Jeter has certaintly been the best player on his team. I'd like to know who was better in 99. That was a WS year for the record. I'm not going to elevate the guy onto a pedestal that he hasn't earned, but I'll defend garbage arguments against him. Calling the guy a role player is where your argument failed to be logical and quickly became nothing more than personal bias. When it is all said and done, he will have a compelling argument for the Hall of Fame. One of the best ever? No. A "glorified role player"? Hell No.

Concerning Sheffield.....take the time to look his numbers up (as with Jeter). The guy has regressed as a Yankee. His best seasons were with teams in Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Miami. They were damn good years too. Yet, you claim that he had one good year for San Diego once. Next time, just come out and say I HATE THE YANKEES. I will have a lot more respect for that than some poorly thought out argument that tries to crap on anything in pinstripes.

Not true.

I think Mike Mussina should have won a Cy Young (I forget the year) while with the Yankees when instead, his teammate Roger Clemens took home the hardware.

My statement "glorified role player" stems from the roster year in and year out for the Yankees. There are no superstars on that team, although Jeter is tried to be made into one. It's no secret Alex Rodriguez is the best player on that team, yet he gets arguably the least amount of press/media coverage. Steinbrenner buys the team he wants, b/c each player has a role, thus, each player is a glorified role player. He needed a 3B after Aaron Boone blew out his knee playing hoops, so he needed a 3B to fill that role, thus, Alex Rodriguez. This year, he thought he needed to replace Tom Gordon with a setup man to get to Mariano, so he brings in a role player, Kyle Farnsworth. He needed to replace the CF, needed a legitimate leadoff hitter, another role position/player, so he signs Johnny Damon to play a role. My argument is that each player on the Yankees is in fact a glorified role player due to the fact there are no superstars on that team, they all have their role and place on the roster. This isn't the case for every team in the league. Plenty of teams have that "superstar". With the Reds, you could make an argument for Dunn, Kearns, Lopez, Arroyo, even Harang that each one could be the superstar. Look at the Angels, you immediately think Vlad. Look at the Giants, you immediately think Bonds. Look at the Cardinals, and you immediately think Pujols. I think you get the picture.

I'm sorry you couldn't see the underlying logic in my statement, so for whatever reason I felt obligated to explain how there was no personal bias in my argument, but more so an analysis of media markets and the players in each respective market.

At the end of the day, Jeter is a HOF, and that's never been in question, but he is in fact overrated in terms of his role on the Yankees, not to mention the numbers he puts up compared to historical and current day players when looking at all the hype he receives.

wolfboy
05-04-2006, 10:33 PM
Not true.

I think Mike Mussina should have won a Cy Young (I forget the year) while with the Yankees when instead, his teammate Roger Clemens took home the hardware.

My statement "glorified role player" stems from the roster year in and year out for the Yankees. There are no superstars on that team, although Jeter is tried to be made into one. It's no secret Alex Rodriguez is the best player on that team, yet he gets arguably the least amount of press/media coverage. Steinbrenner buys the team he wants, b/c each player has a role, thus, each player is a glorified role player. He needed a 3B after Aaron Boone blew out his knee playing hoops, so he needed a 3B to fill that role, thus, Alex Rodriguez. This year, he thought he needed to replace Tom Gordon with a setup man to get to Mariano, so he brings in a role player, Kyle Farnsworth. He needed to replace the CF, needed a legitimate leadoff hitter, another role position/player, so he signs Johnny Damon to play a role. My argument is that each player on the Yankees is in fact a glorified role player due to the fact there are no superstars on that team, they all have their role and place on the roster. This isn't the case for every team in the league. Plenty of teams have that "superstar". With the Reds, you could make an argument for Dunn, Kearns, Lopez, Arroyo, even Harang that each one could be the superstar. Look at the Angels, you immediately think Vlad. Look at the Giants, you immediately think Bonds. Look at the Cardinals, and you immediately think Pujols. I think you get the picture.

I'm sorry you couldn't see the underlying logic in my statement, so for whatever reason I felt obligated to explain how there was no personal bias in my argument, but more so an analysis of media markets and the players in each respective market.

At the end of the day, Jeter is a HOF, and that's never been in question, but he is in fact overrated in terms of his role on the Yankees, not to mention the numbers he puts up compared to historical and current day players when looking at all the hype he receives.

I respect you as a poster, and I apologize if what I responded with came across as harsh. Without further explanation, it looked like personal bias sprinkled with a bit of frustration. I just wanted to point out that Jeter was a central part of the 98-00 WS teams. They didn't field the power lineup they have now. In '99 he was the central cog to that offense. In the '00 series, he absolutely raked. That's why he's deified in NY. He may be a "role player" now. He definately wasn't when they were winning championships. Is the guy overrated? Maybe. Is he oversaturated in the media? Definately.

One of the things about the NY media is that it becomes, to a degree, the nation's media. It annoys me at times. Some accomplishments are placed on a higher pedestal than they should be. In the '90 WS, Billy Hatcher posted some monster numbers. Far better than what Jeter did in '99 Outside of Cincinnati, no one knows that. If he'd played for a NY team, they probably would.

Highlifeman21
05-04-2006, 11:02 PM
I respect you as a poster, and I apologize if what I responded with came across as harsh. Without further explanation, it looked like personal bias sprinkled with a bit of frustration. I just wanted to point out that Jeter was a central part of the 98-00 WS teams. They didn't field the power lineup they have now. In '99 he was the central cog to that offense. In the '00 series, he absolutely raked. That's why he's deified in NY. He may be a "role player" now. He definately wasn't when they were winning championships. Is the guy overrated? Maybe. Is he oversaturated in the media? Definately.
One of the things about the NY media is that it becomes, to a degree, the nation's media. It annoys me at times. Some accomplishments are placed on a higher pedestal than they should be. In the '90 WS, Billy Hatcher posted some monster numbers. Far better than what Jeter did in '99 Outside of Cincinnati, no one knows that. If he'd played for a NY team, they probably would.

Ding Ding Ding!

This is the key to the whole overrated/underrated issue. Media exposure vs. oversaturation. Guys that produce, but don't get any media love = underrated. Guys that get too much media love and can't perform up to some unrealistic standard = overrated. Much of my thoughts on Jeter being overrated deal directly with his defensive ability. This is the same reason why I feel how I do about Felipe Lopez. Both Jeter and Lopez are solid at the plate, but in the field they struggle. Maybe I'm a little too demanding, but I'd actually take an Omar Vizquel type player over a Jeter or Lopez b/c I put such a high premium on defense up the middle. Ozzie Smith made a HOF career out of defense, so the playbook is out there on how to be a slick fielding light hitting SS. Jeter will be a HOF, but for far different reasons than The Wiz.

Outside of Cincinnati, not a lot of people know we are contending in the NL Central. You're absolutely right, Washington DC might be the nation's capital, but NYC dominates our nation's news, and even in world news. You think it's nuts the reception Ichiro gets in Seattle with the asian population? Imagine if he played in the Big Apple...

Thanks for slapping me around and getting me to explain myself. Too many times I assume people will think like me and follow an unstated line of logic.

Underrated player? Gomes down in TB. Bedard in Baltimore.

PTI (pti)
05-05-2006, 12:12 PM
Highlifeman =

* Jeter is a "glorified role player?" Hahahahahaa. Well, he'll probably be the first role player in the 3000-hit club. I hate him too, but not enough to blind me of his talent. Honestly - I don't feel like looking up the stats, but if you can find 4 better shortstops over the last 10 years, *please* let me know.

* Sheffield (2003) = .330, 39 home runs, 132 rbi, 126 runs, .419 obp (this was with Atlanta - not New York - and he was 3rd in MVP voting on a team with very little firepower)

Handofdeath
05-05-2006, 03:31 PM
Both Jeter and Lopez are solid at the plate, but in the field they struggle. Jeter has won a Gold Glove the last two seasons. I'll bet any shortstop would kill to struggle like that.

pahster
05-05-2006, 04:07 PM
Jeter has won a Gold Glove the last two seasons. I'll bet any shortstop would kill to struggle like that.

Remember that time Rafael Palmiero won a GG in a year he played something like 19 games at first?

cincinnati chili
05-05-2006, 04:08 PM
Jeter has won a Gold Glove the last two seasons. I'll bet any shortstop would kill to struggle like that.

Rafael Palmeiro won a Gold Glove once, despite playing only 28 games there, and despite having a scrotum the size of a raspberry.

Falls City Beer
05-05-2006, 04:16 PM
and despite having a scrotum the size of a raspberry.

:barf: :oops:

Raisor
05-05-2006, 07:04 PM
Rafael Palmeiro won a Gold Glove once, despite playing only 28 games there, and despite having a scrotum the size of a raspberry.


I'd hate to be the guy hired to measure that.

KronoRed
05-05-2006, 07:42 PM
I don't want to know how chili knows that :runawaycr

OnBaseMachine
05-05-2006, 07:46 PM
Speaking of "raspberries".

I bet Barry Bonds has a tough time pleasing his wife after taking all those steroids.

Highlifeman21
05-06-2006, 12:25 AM
Highlifeman =

* Jeter is a "glorified role player?" Hahahahahaa. Well, he'll probably be the first role player in the 3000-hit club. I hate him too, but not enough to blind me of his talent. Honestly - I don't feel like looking up the stats, but if you can find 4 better shortstops over the last 10 years, *please* let me know.

* Sheffield (2003) = .330, 39 home runs, 132 rbi, 126 runs, .419 obp (this was with Atlanta - not New York - and he was 3rd in MVP voting on a team with very little firepower)


Shortstops

Player Timespan RC (total) RC (average) OPS
Jeter 2000-present 643.4 107.2 .839
Tejada 2000-present 636.3 106.05 .843
Young 2003-present 338.7 112.9 .840
Rodriguez 2000-2004 573.1 143.28 1.015
Garciaparra 2000-2004 469.1 117.28 .928

So, in order of being better than Jeter.... Rodriguez, Garciaparra, Young, Tejada, and that's just from 2000 to the present. Since you said 10 years, I could trot out a fan favorite on this board, Barry Larkin, and I could also mention Cal Ripken, Jr.

Obviously you didn't read any of my other posts where I explained why I called Jeter a "glorified role player".... I'm not blinded to miss Jeter's talent. He'll be a HOF, but there are better than him, it's that simple.

So there you have it, there have been at least 4 better shortstops in the last 10 years than Derek Jeter.

Anything else?

Cedric
05-06-2006, 12:34 AM
Shortstops

Player Timespan RC (total) RC (average) OPS
Jeter 2000-present 643.4 107.2 .839
Tejada 2000-present 636.3 106.05 .843
Young 2003-present 338.7 112.9 .840
Rodriguez 2000-2004 573.1 143.28 1.015
Garciaparra 2000-2004 469.1 117.28 .928

So, in order of being better than Jeter.... Rodriguez, Garciaparra, Young, Tejada, and that's just from 2000 to the present. Since you said 10 years, I could trot out a fan favorite on this board, Barry Larkin, and I could also mention Cal Ripken, Jr.

Obviously you didn't read any of my other posts where I explained why I called Jeter a "glorified role player".... I'm not blinded to miss Jeter's talent. He'll be a HOF, but there are better than him, it's that simple.

So there you have it, there have been at least 4 better shortstops in the last 10 years than Derek Jeter.

Anything else?

Sorry, but Derek Jeter is a better baseball player than Michael Young, Nomar, or Miguel Tejada. Being the most stable member of the most famous team in professional sports means something. I know people hate the chemistry word, but what Derek Jeter means to the Yankees isn't gonna be shown in any RC stat.

That's not even considering the differences in Arlington, Camden, and Fenway compared to Yankee Stadium for RH hitters.

kyle1976
05-06-2006, 08:41 AM
Most Overrated: Carlos Beltran
Most Underrated: Chris Capuano

Most Overrated Red: Adam Dunn....you gotta love his .129 batting average with runners in scoring position. :bang:
Most Underrated Red: Rich Aurilia.....he, unlike Dunn, can atleast hit the ball when men are on base.

OnBaseMachine
05-06-2006, 08:45 AM
Most Overrated: Carlos Beltran
Most Underrated: Chris Capuano

Most Overrated Red: Adam Dunn....you gotta love his .129 batting average with runners in scoring position. :bang:
Most Underrated Red: Rich Aurilia.....he, unlike Dunn, can atleast hit the ball when men are on base.

And yet Dunn had more RBI last year and this year. BA with RISP is the suck. Worst. Stat. Ever.

OPS with RISP is a much better stat to use.

M2
05-06-2006, 09:23 AM
Shortstops

Player Timespan RC (total) RC (average) OPS
Jeter 2000-present 643.4 107.2 .839
Tejada 2000-present 636.3 106.05 .843
Young 2003-present 338.7 112.9 .840
Rodriguez 2000-2004 573.1 143.28 1.015
Garciaparra 2000-2004 469.1 117.28 .928

So, in order of being better than Jeter.... Rodriguez, Garciaparra, Young, Tejada, and that's just from 2000 to the present. Since you said 10 years, I could trot out a fan favorite on this board, Barry Larkin, and I could also mention Cal Ripken, Jr.

Obviously you didn't read any of my other posts where I explained why I called Jeter a "glorified role player".... I'm not blinded to miss Jeter's talent. He'll be a HOF, but there are better than him, it's that simple.

So there you have it, there have been at least 4 better shortstops in the last 10 years than Derek Jeter.

Anything else?

I'm not sure how you'd conclude Tejada is better than Jeter from that sample. They're in a dead heat according to those numbers. In general, Miggy will hit for better power and Jeter will be on base more often.

To make it a fair sample, I think you'd need to compare six-year samples of other shortstops if you want to use Jeter's 2000-present numbers. Nomar would fall off the pace if you did that. Young's played exactly one season where he's out-produced Jeter (2005).

Ripken probably grades out slightly ahead of Jeter for his first 10 seasons, but Ripken's game came apart at the seams at age 31. During the last decade of Ripken's career he was a fairly forgettable ballplayer riding a consecutive games streak. Jeter looks like he's going to be a very good player for the forseeable future and it's likely going to elevate his career numbers well above Ripken's -- maybe not his counting stats, but certainly on the percentages.

Highlifeman21
05-06-2006, 12:57 PM
I'm not sure how you'd conclude Tejada is better than Jeter from that sample. They're in a dead heat according to those numbers. In general, Miggy will hit for better power and Jeter will be on base more often.

To make it a fair sample, I think you'd need to compare six-year samples of other shortstops if you want to use Jeter's 2000-present numbers. Nomar would fall off the pace if you did that. Young's played exactly one season where he's out-produced Jeter (2005).

Ripken probably grades out slightly ahead of Jeter for his first 10 seasons, but Ripken's game came apart at the seams at age 31. During the last decade of Ripken's career he was a fairly forgettable ballplayer riding a consecutive games streak. Jeter looks like he's going to be a very good player for the forseeable future and it's likely going to elevate his career numbers well above Ripken's -- maybe not his counting stats, but certainly on the percentages.


Miggy's better defensively, so since the offensive numbers are a wash, he gets the overall nod due to the glove.

I want to repeat, Jeter is a solid HOF SS, but there have been better than him in the past 10 years, and that was the construction of the list.

Only reason I included some of the earlier years for Jeter and Miggy is b/c they were around. Young's only been around about 3 seasons, and Nomar hasn't played SS since 2004, IIRC. The same was the case for Rodriguez. He hasn't played SS since end of 2003.

I remember back to some of the ASG circa 1999 to 2003 where Jeter was the 4th best SS on the AL alone!

Again, Jeter is a HOF, but he's not the best there ever was, and he's not the best there ever will be, he's just overhyped due to that NYC media market.

I wanted to use winshares for that same time period, but I was unable to easily find them, so I used RC instead, which I thought was on the same path of logic.

Cedric
05-06-2006, 01:28 PM
What's overhyped about Jeter? He not only plays his best at the highest level, he produces at a pretty incredibly steady rate.

How can you be labeled "solid" and then be a hall of famer?

Again, Derek Jeter is the face of the most famous franchise in sports. He not only produces on the field, he handles the circus better than any athlete I've ever seen.

And your stats aren't that lopsided. Put Jeter in Arlington or Fenway and I bet you'd be surprised how close it became. Add in the intangibles of Jeter and to me he's clearly a better baseball player than Tejada, Nomar, or Young ever were or will be.

I don't care about Giambi not sliding. Watch that play again and tell me how many players would have the mental capacity to pull that off? That's something you can't judge in sports and win shares and RC isn't gonna do it.
That's the greatest single play I've ever watched in my baseball life.

Handofdeath
05-06-2006, 01:39 PM
Most Overrated Red: Adam Dunn....you gotta love his .129 batting average with runners in scoring position. :bang:

Kyle, you're a little more new than I am so I'll give you two pointers since you have committed the two cardinal sins on this board.

1. You never, ever, ever, mention batting average. It means nothing, its obsolete. A walk is as good as a hit blah blah blah...:rolleyes:
2. You must never ever criticize Saint Adam because he's going to the HOF.
Ignore everything that to you says otherwise. Forget the strikeouts and forget that he reeks defensively at two positions. Forget that right now he's fourth on his own team in RBI's. Ignore the fact the in the NL this season only two other players with two or more homers have a worse homer/RBI ratio. (Arroyo and Darryl Ward). He is a Hall of Famer. Accept it. Because the Reds board says it is. Don't make them throw their calculators at you.

When you can do these two things you will reach true enlightenment my son.

The handofdeath is no more.

Highlifeman21
05-06-2006, 01:42 PM
What's overhyped about Jeter? He not only plays his best at the highest level, he produces at a pretty incredibly steady rate.

How can you be labeled "solid" and then be a hall of famer?

Again, Derek Jeter is the face of the most famous franchise in sports. He not only produces on the field, he handles the circus better than any athlete I've ever seen.

And your stats aren't that lopsided. Put Jeter in Arlington or Fenway and I bet you'd be surprised how close it became. Add in the intangibles of Jeter and to me he's clearly a better baseball player than Tejada, Nomar, or Young ever were or will be.

I don't care about Giambi not sliding. Watch that play again and tell me how many players would have the mental capacity to pull that off? That's something you can't judge in sports and win shares and RC isn't gonna do it.
That's the greatest single play I've ever watched in my baseball life.

You've still yet to concede that Jeter isn't even close to being the best SS on his own team. Alex Rodriguez has almost 1300 games at SS and those stats shadow anything Jeter's ever accomplished, and that includes Arlington and Kingdome numbers.

You may prefer Jeter, I still prefer Rodriguez, Tejada, a healthy Nomar, Michael Young, Barry Larkin and Cal Ripken, Jr.

You can't measure intangibles, yet you try to quantify them.

I've conceded that Jeter is a HOF, and will most likely finish in the top 10 of greatest SS of all time, but he'll never crack the top 5, and that's why he's overhyped and overrated. He's good/great, but not elite. Alex Rodriguez is elite, and as the argument was posed, the discussion was the last 10 years of SS, which Rodriguez definitely qualifies.

It's Jeter's average to sub par defense that continues to bother me about him, since that's largely the basis for him being overrated. I'm not knocking his stick at all, he's put up solid/respectable numbers, but his defense leaves a lot to be desired.

edabbs44
05-06-2006, 02:09 PM
What's overhyped about Jeter? He not only plays his best at the highest level, he produces at a pretty incredibly steady rate.

How can you be labeled "solid" and then be a hall of famer?

Again, Derek Jeter is the face of the most famous franchise in sports. He not only produces on the field, he handles the circus better than any athlete I've ever seen.

And your stats aren't that lopsided. Put Jeter in Arlington or Fenway and I bet you'd be surprised how close it became. Add in the intangibles of Jeter and to me he's clearly a better baseball player than Tejada, Nomar, or Young ever were or will be.

I don't care about Giambi not sliding. Watch that play again and tell me how many players would have the mental capacity to pull that off? That's something you can't judge in sports and win shares and RC isn't gonna do it.
That's the greatest single play I've ever watched in my baseball life.

Living in NJ and watching the Yankees on a consistent basis (since I hate them with every bone in my body) I can say that Jeter is probably one of the most overrated players in sports.

Now don't get me wrong, I think he is a really good ballplayer and one who I would love to have in Cincy, but putting this guy up there among the best players in the game makes me sick. He is living a charmed life and because of this, everyone thinks he is the greatest.

Anyone who plays for the Yankees gets the automatic bump in reputation. Is it because of the media circus that takes place here? Is it because of the fact that they are always on national television? Or is it because of the fact that they have been in the postseason for the last 10 or so years? I think it is the postseason factor.

Now everyone can say that without Jeter, the Yankees wouldn't have been in all of those postseasons. True? I can't really argue either way, but personally I'd say he was a nice part of it. But look back at the "core of the Yankees dynasty" and you'll see 4 players: Posada, Jeter, Bernie and Mariano. Those guys have been there throughout this run. Now when is the last time they won a WS? 2000. All of those guys have been in NY since then, but they've lost players like O'Neill, Tino, Cone, Key, etc etc since then. So why does "the core" get all the pub? Beats me. As far as I am concerned, these 4 have added ARod, Sheff, Unit, Mussina, Giambi and other and, in NY's eyes, haven't won squat since 2000.

Let's look at some of Jeter's accolades. 2 Gold Gloves? Throw those in the trash. Not only is he an overrated fielder, but the Yanks bought the reigning GG shortstop and moved him to 3rd. Why would you take an MVP and GG shortstop and move him? Not to hurt Jeter's feelings? Any way you look at it, it was a dumb baseball move.

Throw out his All-Star appearances also. Torre put him on the roster almost every year. One year, they had ARod, Tejada, Vizquel, Nomar and Jeter. How on Earth do you have 5 shortstops on the roster? That year they had 1 second baseman on the roster. So you mean being the 5th best SS is better than the 2nd best second baseman? Sorry, but that makes no sense. Torre was extremely biased when he filed out his rosters and even though he probably should have made the roster a few of those years, let's not use that as an argument of how great he is. Think about when Larkin used to be Ozzie's backup and how much sense that made.

So let's go to his stats. He has 2 categories where he really lights it up. Runs and hits. Jeter will finish with over 3000 hits. No problem there. His career average is .314. Pretty good. But is it enough to say that he is great? I think 3000 hits is great, but what if it takes you over 10000 ABs to get them? Doesn't it diminish the value even a little? Hitting in one of the best lineups in baseball gives him many more ABs than other players. For everyone who complains about Sutton, Perry and Neikro taking so much time to get their final wins, look at how many ABs Jeter has. Same argument for runs scored, especially hitting in front of the people he does. Gwynn hit .338 in his career with 3141 hits. Jeter will probably end up in the low .300s. Not bad, but I wouldn't say Jeter is a great hitter. Gwynn was one of the best.

Is Jeter a winner? Sure, he has won a lot in his career. But so has Brosius, Sojo, Stanton and a lot of other guys on those same teams. If Jeter really has all of these intangibles and is such a winner, then why, with the highest payroll is baseball, haven't the Yanks won a WS since 2000?

And yeah, that was one hell of a play he made in Oakland. But when you are a good player and play 115 postseason games in your career (all on national TV) then you are bound to do something good. If Eckstein makes that play everyone forgets about it in a month. If Jeter makes the play, his intangibles are off the charts and it ends up in baseball lore for eons.

Don't get me wrong, Jeter is a very good ballplayer. But let's reserve the accolades for those who really deserve it. Being the face of the Yankees, handling a media circus and having a good play in the playoffs shouldn't be enough to get you in on the first ballot or make you one of the best players in the game.

UC_Ken
05-06-2006, 02:46 PM
You brought up the one thing that really bothers me when people talk about Jeter. Leadership skills. When the Yankees won their titles it was a veteran team with O'Neil, Brosius, Bernie, Posada, and other veterans. There is no way you could look at the young kid and say that he was the leader of those teams. On teams that have that many veterans there is no way that the youngest player was the leader. I would argue that on a team like that there is no one leader, rather there is a pressure for everyone to get their job done and not be the weak link. Has he been the leader since the retirement of the O'Neil's, Brosius, and co? Maybe but they haven't won a WS since then so I think that would negate him being one of the great leaders ever. And I don't think the A'Rods, Sheffields, Posadas, and Giambis look up to Jeter as a leader.

All- Star? No question
Superstar? No way
Gold Glover? That's a freaking joke
Leader? Questionable at best

M2
05-06-2006, 02:55 PM
2005 SS Win Shares leaders:

Eckstein - 28
Young - 27
Furcal - 27
Tejada - 26
Jeter - 26
Peralta - 25

2004 SS Win Shares leaders:

Tejada - 30
Jeter - 26
Young - 25
Izturis - 25
Rollins - 25

2003 SS Win Shares leaders:

A-Rod - 32
Tejada - 25
Nomar - 25
Renteria - 25
Furcal - 25
(Jeter had 18, but only played 119 games because Ken Huckaby jumped on top of him).

Tejada had 32 Win Shares in 2002, his MVP season, while it was Jeter's worst season. So Tejada's ahead of Jeter on the Win Shares count over the past four seasons. The four seasons prior to that were all Jeter. Interestingly, Jeter and Tejada have been in a dead heat on defensive Win Shares the past two seasons. Jeter's actually gotten better in that area (and feel free to blame gaining A-Rod to his right while losing Alfonso Soriano to his left as a big reason why.

edabbs44
05-06-2006, 03:04 PM
You brought up the one thing that really bothers me when people talk about Jeter. Leadership skills. When the Yankees won their titles it was a veteran team with O'Neil, Brosius, Bernie, Posada, and other veterans. There is no way you could look at the young kid and say that he was the leader of those teams. On teams that have that many veterans there is no way that the youngest player was the leader. I would argue that on a team like that there is no one leader, rather there is a pressure for everyone to get their job done and not be the weak link. Has he been the leader since the retirement of the O'Neil's, Brosius, and co? Maybe but they haven't won a WS since then so I think that would negate him being one of the great leaders ever. And I don't think the A'Rods, Sheffields, Posadas, and Giambis look up to Jeter as a leader.

All- Star? No question
Superstar? No way
Gold Glover? That's a freaking joke
Leader? Questionable at best

Agreed. It kills me when people use the intangibles, leadship and other BS to fight for Jeter's case. Look at what the Yankees' record was when Jeter missed the first month of the season a few years back. No problem without him then.

The other thing is that last year, the Yankees said they are at their max payroll. $200 million, not bad. But if the Yankees used more of Jeter's $19 million on other areas of the team and signed an Eckstein or someone like that, I bet they would be a much better team. But with a $200 million payroll, you shouldn't really have to worry about money. Cashman and Torre being overrated could be a book on itself.

For all of those scoffing at these posts, don't take this as a Jeter bashing session, becuase he is a very good ballplayer. But when people want to put him up there with the best of the best, that's when it starts to get out of hand.

Jpup
05-06-2006, 03:06 PM
underrated, David Delucci.

vaticanplum
05-06-2006, 04:02 PM
You brought up the one thing that really bothers me when people talk about Jeter. Leadership skills. When the Yankees won their titles it was a veteran team with O'Neil, Brosius, Bernie, Posada, and other veterans.

Posada was hardly a veteran in the late 90s. He came up after Jeter, did not play in the World Series in 1996, and split duties with Girardi in 1998 (I believe he was still officially the backup catcher that year).

In fact, that team of the 90s was NOT a team of veterans at all, which was a huge aberration for the Yankees, not even the Yankees as we know them now, but in terms of their entire history. The Yankees have been buying their great players ever since Babe Ruth. One of the reasons their farm system was allowed to develop in the early 90s was because Steinbrenner was suspended for the Dave Winfield suit. To say that Jeter was the only kid on the team is a huge misconception. Bernie had been around since the early 90s, but was still pretty young, and until the kids came up from the farm system, if he was leading at all, he was leading a pretty crappy team that already had Don Mattingly as their veteran. Bernie was as new to the postseason as the rest of them.

That team got by on the efforts of Bernie, Pettitte, [later] Posada, Rivera, Ramiro Mendoza and yes, Jeter, all of were very young players who came up through the farm system. Their "veterans" were players like David Justice, Jim Leyritz, Strawberry and Mariano freaking Duncan for crying out loud. (Getting into 99/2000, we get into a few hired guns like Clemens, but they were still an exception.) The fact that they won so convincingly with such a young, inexperienced team IS a testament to the young ones who stepped up to lead them, and Jeter is definitely at the top of that list. Again, Jeter's ability is not a byproduct of the Yankees' greatness; the Yankees' greatness is in small part a byproduct of Jeter's greatness.

I'm still waiting for someone to point me in the direction of exactly where it is claimed that Jeter is an excellent defensive shortstop.

edabbs44
05-06-2006, 04:22 PM
Posada was hardly a veteran in the late 90s. He came up after Jeter, did not play in the World Series in 1996, and split duties with Girardi in 1998 (I believe he was still officially the backup catcher that year).

In fact, that team of the 90s was NOT a team of veterans at all, which was a huge aberration for the Yankees, not even the Yankees as we know them now, but in terms of their entire history. The Yankees have been buying their great players ever since Babe Ruth. One of the reasons their farm system was allowed to develop in the early 90s was because Steinbrenner was suspended for the Dave Winfield suit. To say that Jeter was the only kid on the team is a huge misconception. Bernie had been around since the early 90s, but was still pretty young, and until the kids came up from the farm system, if he was leading at all, he was leading a pretty crappy team that already had Don Mattingly as their veteran. Bernie was as new to the postseason as the rest of them.

That team got by on the efforts of Bernie, Pettitte, [later] Posada, Rivera, Ramiro Mendoza and yes, Jeter, all of were very young players who came up through the farm system. Their "veterans" were players like David Justice, Jim Leyritz, Strawberry and Mariano freaking Duncan for crying out loud. (Getting into 99/2000, we get into a few hired guns like Clemens, but they were still an exception.) The fact that they won so convincingly with such a young, inexperienced team IS a testament to the young ones who stepped up to lead them, and Jeter is definitely at the top of that list. Again, Jeter's ability is not a byproduct of the Yankees' greatness; the Yankees' greatness is in small part a byproduct of Jeter's greatness.

I'm still waiting for someone to point me in the direction of exactly where it is claimed that Jeter is an excellent defensive shortstop.

You forgot Cone, Key, Tino, O'Neill, Wetteland, Knoblauch (say what you will, he had some good times there), El Duque, Wells and others. Hardly rookies we're talking about here.

vaticanplum
05-06-2006, 04:49 PM
You forgot Cone, Key, Tino, O'Neill, Wetteland, Knoblauch (say what you will, he had some good times there), El Duque, Wells and others. Hardly rookies we're talking about here.

I would never forget about Tino, but he had maybe five years of experience on a pretty terrible Seattle team before he came over to New York. I'd lump him in with the young ones before I'd list him as a veteran; I just didn't mention him because he didn't come up through the Yankees farm system. Cone I'll give you. Knoblauch to a degree, though he wasn't on the 96 team. O'Neill was a veteran, but the only World Series in which he really performed well with New York was 2000. Hernandez's first year of professional American baseball was 1998; not a veteran. Wetteland and Key were on the team for exaclty one World Series apiece. Wells too, and while his contributions were crucial, he's hardly the first person most people would list when referring to a team leader.

I'm not saying these players' contributions were not important, but of the players that carried them through ALL of those postseasons, the majority were the young ones, and in my mind in terms of "leadership" Jeter carried the most weight. It is also well worth noting that most of those exact same people who carried that team are the ones still with the team ten years later, apart from Pettitte, and that counts in the leadership arena too.

edabbs44
05-06-2006, 05:06 PM
I would never forget about Tino, but he had maybe five years of experience on a pretty terrible Seattle team before he came over to New York. I'd lump him in with the young ones before I'd list him as a veteran; I just didn't mention him because he didn't come up through the Yankees farm system. Cone I'll give you. Knoblauch to a degree, though he wasn't on the 96 team. O'Neill was a veteran, but the only World Series in which he really performed well with New York was 2000. Hernandez's first year of professional American baseball was 1998; not a veteran. Wetteland and Key were on the team for exaclty one World Series apiece. Wells too, and while his contributions were crucial, he's hardly the first person most people would list when referring to a team leader.

I'm not saying these players' contributions were not important, but of the players that carried them through ALL of those postseasons, the majority were the young ones, and in my mind in terms of "leadership" Jeter carried the most weight. It is also well worth noting that most of those exact same people who carried that team are the ones still with the team ten years later, apart from Pettitte, and that counts in the leadership arena too.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. At first you said the team was basically young. But El Duque was young in terms of American baseball experience, O'Neill was a vet but only played well in one WS, Tino had experience on a losing team, Wells wasn't a leader and Knoblauch doesn't count b/c he wasn't there in 96. That doesn't make the team young. They were all major contributors. The Yankee front office put together a very good team in the late 90s and Cashman has murdered the system. Anyone can put together an all-star team with that payroll and the fact that they haven't won a WS since 2000 should be an embarrassment. They have gotten every player they wanted at the break and in the off-season and have nothing to show for it. I realize that they have had success since 2000, but with the $ they drop every season anything short of a WS is not good enough.

The only reason why everyone says Jeter is a great leader is b/c he was anointed that once he made it to the majors. Would a great leader EVER let his team lose to the Red Sox after leading 3-0? Why does he get a pass on this? It was the biggest collapse ever! If he really had these unbelievable intangibles and leadership powers, that never would have happened. Case closed.

vaticanplum
05-06-2006, 06:03 PM
Sorry, but I have to disagree. At first you said the team was basically young. But El Duque was young in terms of American baseball experience, O'Neill was a vet but only played well in one WS, Tino had experience on a losing team, Wells wasn't a leader and Knoblauch doesn't count b/c he wasn't there in 96. That doesn't make the team young. They were all major contributors. The Yankee front office put together a very good team in the late 90s and Cashman has murdered the system. Anyone can put together an all-star team with that payroll and the fact that they haven't won a WS since 2000 should be an embarrassment. They have gotten every player they wanted at the break and in the off-season and have nothing to show for it. I realize that they have had success since 2000, but with the $ they drop every season anything short of a WS is not good enough.

I'm saying not that the team was young, but that it was the young ones who carried the team through its all of its peak years and beyond. The breaking down of the specific players was just to show that the ones you mentioned were not all veterans and/or parts of every single one of the WS-winning teams.

The way the team has handled its signings since then is an entirely separate argument, and one on which I probably agree with you on most points. If nothing else, the fact that they haven't assembled a WS-winning team since 2000 is even more evidence that it was the young team, not a collection of superstars, that has been successful for them.


The only reason why everyone says Jeter is a great leader is b/c he was anointed that once he made it to the majors. Would a great leader EVER let his team lose to the Red Sox after leading 3-0? Why does he get a pass on this? It was the biggest collapse ever! If he really had these unbelievable intangibles and leadership powers, that never would have happened. Case closed.

So jeter cannot be held responsible for the team's success, but he's solely responsible for the team's failures? That's completely contradictory logic. The truth as far as I'm concerned is in the middle. If you can blame any one player for an entire team's winning or losing records, then it's track and field you're interested in, not baseball.

Jeter's "leadership" does not mean that he shows the team how to win or lose. That, in my mind, is not what a leader does anyway, because a leader accepts that while winning is the goal, it does not overshadow the playing of the game itself. He has exemplary attitudes towards playing the game, his approach at the plate, his pretty much unshakable confidence, his ability to go out and play the best he can every day and put the results behind him, win or lose, to pursue the next thing coming. That's certainly going to have more of an effect on young players around him than it will on A-Rod, Gary Sheffield, Jason Giambi, Johnny Damon, Randy Johnson, etc. ad nauseum. If the team could go a single year without adding even one more superstar, the chance might exist for this kind of leadership to have a long-term effect. but nevertheless he is the rock of that team, and while they may not have won a World Series since 2000, they have weathered some very bumpy paths well, and I think he has something to do with that.

The "intangibles" in reference to Jeter also involve things off the field as well. I'm sorry, but this cannot be discounted in the sport of professional baseball. Was he anointed in New York when he came up as a rookie? Sure, and well he should have been. His story, when played the right way (which it has been, no question) is extraordinary. The man practically came out of the womb a Yankee. A child of a mixed-race couple, he has been saying since he was five years old that he would be the shortstop for the Yankees. He worked hard through his childhood and through a couple of horrendous years of rookie ball. He happened to come up to the Yankees at a time when they were just on the brink of winning the World Series -- and becoming a dynasty -- after their longest stretch of sucktitude in the team's history. His father is a drug counselor. He's never misstepped with the media. He does great things for charity. He has a sense of humor. He probably gets more action than Paris Hilton, but he's discreet enough that he's never been slapped with any kind of character assasination from spurned people from his past. I'm sure he rescues kittens from trees on alternate weekends. I mean, it's definitely almost too much sometimes, and for all I know the guy could be a jerk in real life, but if he is, the people around him have certainly covered it well. His handlers or whoever saw what he was pretty early and played it brilliantly. And in this, they've given children a fantastic role model at a time when baseball has been realing from both the strike and steroids, and Jeter has given and continues to give millions to charity. What does this have to do with his defensive stats? Nothing. What does it have to do with Major League Baseball? Everything. The game of baseball doesn't need superstars, but the sport does. Many people say he only gets attention because he's a Yankee; that has something to do with the level of attention he gets, but I'm almost certain he'd be even more LOVED if he played for any other team. so I think the fact that he's a Yankee causes a lot of people to hold his level of stardom against him, and that's where the overrated label comes from. Once again, within baseball, not many people rate him as the perfect shortstop. But the overrated tag as an all-around good guy baseball player, which is a byproduct of the "leader" label in some ways? That's your choice to believe he's overrated there. I happen to think he's good for the game, on and off the field.

The Baumer
05-06-2006, 06:16 PM
When I think of fan bias, I remember back to the year Walt Weiss was voted in as the starting short stop in the all-star game. Maybe they were really voting for the creature he wore on his hand?

wolfboy
05-06-2006, 06:57 PM
The only reason why everyone says Jeter is a great leader is b/c he was anointed that once he made it to the majors. Would a great leader EVER let his team lose to the Red Sox after leading 3-0? Why does he get a pass on this? It was the biggest collapse ever! If he really had these unbelievable intangibles and leadership powers, that never would have happened. Case closed.


Great leaders don't let their team do anything. They still have to go out there and play the game. Unfortunately, Kevin Brown played in game 7 of that series. He pitched a gem, giving up 5 ER in 1.1 IP. I don't know how Jeter could have controlled that. I'm guessing that you do?
Once you have a cogent, well reasoned argument against Jeter being a great player, please post it. Calling his leadership skills suspect because of that series just doesn't cut it.

edabbs44
05-06-2006, 07:08 PM
Great leaders don't let their team do anything. They still have to go out there and play the game. Unfortunately, Kevin Brown played in game 7 of that series. He pitched a gem, giving up 5 ER in 1.1 IP. I don't know how Jeter could have controlled that. I'm guessing that you do?
Once you have a cogent, well reasoned argument against Jeter being a great player, please post it. Calling his leadership skills suspect because of that series just doesn't cut it.

I think if DJ hit above .200 that series and did a little better than 4-19 in the final 4 games there may have been a different outcome. Especially since 2 of those games went to extra innings. So if Jeter was a big part of those championships, which I will not argue, he was a very large part of the biggest choke in sports history.

wolfboy
05-06-2006, 07:47 PM
I think if DJ hit above .200 that series and did a little better than 4-19 in the final 4 games there may have been a different outcome. Especially since 2 of those games went to extra innings. So if Jeter was a big part of those championships, which I will not argue, he was a very large part of the biggest choke in sports history.

Again, the Yankees provided more than enough offense to win that series. They scored 45 runs. Jeter's offense didn't cost the Yankees that series. In fact, all of the RBI he had in the series came in the last 4 games. In game 5 (the 14 inning game), Jeter drove in 3 of the 4 runs the Yankees had.

Could he have done better? Yes. Was it as big a factor as Kevin Brown posting a 24.30 ERA, or Javier Valentin posting a 9.95 ERA? No. I won't even mention the less than memorable performance Tom Gordon delivered from the 'pen.

Handofdeath
05-10-2006, 01:43 PM
[QUOTE=Handofdeath]Kyle, you're a little more new than I am so I'll give you two pointers since you have committed the two cardinal sins on this board.

1. You never, ever, ever, mention batting average. It means nothing, its obsolete. A walk is as good as a hit blah blah blah...:rolleyes:
2. You must never ever criticize Saint Adam because he's going to the HOF.
Ignore everything that to you says otherwise. Forget the strikeouts and forget that he reeks defensively at two positions. Forget that right now he's fourth on his own team in RBI's. Ignore the fact the in the NL this season only two other players with two or more homers have a worse homer/RBI ratio. (Arroyo and Darryl Ward). He is a Hall of Famer. Accept it. Because the Reds board says it is. Don't make them throw their calculators at you.

When you can do these two things you will reach true enlightenment my son.QUOTE]