Can Chase Utley be as good as Joe Morgan was?

[fearofpopvol1]

Thoughts?

[Johnny Footstool]

I think Morgan has the edge on defense, but other than that, yes.

[Cyclone792]

I think he has a shot to come close, but he'll fall short both in career value and peak value.

If you want a guage of how dominant Morgan was for how long, take Utley's career and stretch it out an additional 11 full seasons at the same rate of production. That will give you Morgan's career. Utley may be able to match Morgan's career rate of production for a bit, but I'm betting his decline phase would take him below Morgan. Plus, I'm doubting Utley has an additional 1,750 games left in him since he'll be 31-years-old in two months.

As for career value, I expect Utley to put up a few really great seasons ... but I don't expect him to touch Morgan of 1975-1976 (or for that matter, Morgan's five year stretch from 1972-1976).

Among historical second basemen, I think Charlie Gehringer may be the closest comp to Utley in terms of overall production, though it wouldn't shock me if Utley passes Gehringer in the process.

[jojo]

Well, it depends.... how is good defined?

If you mean peak value- I'd argue no way. Morgan was a freak.

If you mean value over their careers, Utley has a chance depending upon how he ages.

Here's a comparison based upon WAR over similar ages:



Morgan Utley
year age WAR year age WAR
1970 26 4 2004 25 1.3
1971 27 5.4 2005 26 7.4
1972 28 10 2006 27 6.8
1973 29 10.1 2007 28 8
1974 30 8.8 2008 29 8.1
1975 31 11.8 2009 30 7.7
1976 32 9.9
1977 33 6.1
1978 34 1.6

[fearofpopvol1]

Well, it depends.... how is good defined?

If you mean peak value- I'd argue no way. Morgan was a freak.

If you mean value over their careers, Utley has a chance depending upon how he ages.

Here's a comparison based upon WAR over similar ages:



Morgan Utley
year age WAR year age WAR
1970 26 4 2004 25 1.3
1971 27 5.4 2005 26 7.4
1972 28 10 2006 27 6.8
1973 29 10.1 2007 28 8
1974 30 8.8 2008 29 8.1
1975 31 11.8 2009 30 7.7
1976 32 9.9
1977 33 6.1
1978 34 1.6


Definitely value over career.

[RedsBaron]

In a word, no.
Utley's stats have been helped by playing in a more run friendly environment that Morgan enjoyed. Utley is not as great an offensive force as Moragn was in his prime, nor is Utley a five time Gold Glove defensive player.

[dfs]

Definitely value over career.
well, no. Not even close.

jojo's comparison starts at the age of 26. Before the age of 26 Utely had 420 below average at bats and Joe Morgan had three FULL seasons where he put a 130 OPS+ over 500 or more at bats in each of those season. Plus another season where he put up a 110 and a couple of injury type season.

Utely isn't going to make that up at the other end either. Morgan aged exceptionally well.

I guess anything is possible, but the odds aren't close to good.

[Scrap Irony]

Before reading this thread, my knee-jerk reaction was yes. Maybe.

After reading, I can absolutely say there is little chance of utley being close to Morgan either in terms of top seasons or career value.

[fearofpopvol1]

In a word, no.
Utley's stats have been helped by playing in a more run friendly environment that Morgan enjoyed. Utley is not as great an offensive force as Moragn was in his prime, nor is Utley a five time Gold Glove defensive player.

At the same time, you could argue that Utley plays in a much tougher league now than Morgan did when he played. The pitching is definitely better now then was back then.

[fearofpopvol1]

well, no. Not even close.

jojo's comparison starts at the age of 26. Before the age of 26 Utely had 420 below average at bats and Joe Morgan had three FULL seasons where he put a 130 OPS+ over 500 or more at bats in each of those season. Plus another season where he put up a 110 and a couple of injury type season.

Utely isn't going to make that up at the other end either. Morgan aged exceptionally well.

I guess anything is possible, but the odds aren't close to good.

I think you might be selling Utley short. I think he has a strong chance at aging quite well and being more productive later in his career than Morgan was.

[dfs]

I think you might be selling Utley short. I think he has a strong chance at aging quite well and being more productive later in his career than Morgan was.

You may be right. But Joe was a good player at 39 and league average at 40. Joe didn't lose any time to wartime service. He didn't lose any years to injury. He never really had a bad year. By OPS+ a bad year for Joe Morgan would have been pretty much the year that Brandon Phillips has been putting up the last couple of years. (That's sick, but it's true.) In order to make up those extra four years Utely will have to, not only match little joe year for year during his peak, but also have four good years after his age 40 season.

How many guys have four good season left in them after the age of 40?

Molitor didbn't. Heck, Pete didn't. Honus Wagner is revered for how good he was as an older player and he didn't have four full good seasons after the age of 40.

Julio Franco...There we go...Julio Franco had four good years after his age 40 season. Of course the kicker is that although they were good season,little Joe's early years were still better.

Maybe there's somebody else. Maybe if legal problems had not caught up to Bonds. ...That's the kind of generational talent that Morgan was and it's not meant as a slam against Utely. Utley is a fine player. Morgan was unreal.

Corrections are always welcome.

[fearofpopvol1]

You may be right. But Joe was a good player at 39 and league average at 40. Joe didn't lose any time to wartime service. He didn't lose any years to injury. He never really had a bad year. By OPS+ a bad year for Joe Morgan would have been pretty much the year that Brandon Phillips has been putting up the last couple of years. (That's sick, but it's true.) In order to make up those extra four years Utely will have to, not only match little joe year for year during his peak, but also have four good years after his age 40 season.

How many guys have four good season left in them after the age of 40?

Molitor didbn't. Heck, Pete didn't. Honus Wagner is revered for how good he was as an older player and he didn't have four full good seasons after the age of 40.

Julio Franco...There we go...Julio Franco had four good years after his age 40 season. Of course the kicker is that although they were good season,little Joe's early years were still better.

Maybe there's somebody else. Corrections are always welcome.

That's not meant as a slam against Utely. Utley is a fine player. Morgan was unreal.

I don't think that Utley has to have 4 good seasons past 40 to be better than Morgan. I think he just has to be better than Morgan was in his mid to late 30's to make up the difference lost in his 20's.

Will he do that? No way of knowing, but he's been pretty awesome thus far.

And so it's clear, I like Morgan more than Utley, just thought it would make for an interesting discussion.

[RedsBaron]

At the same time, you could argue that Utley plays in a much tougher league now than Morgan did when he played. The pitching is definitely better now then was back then.

Maybe pitching is better now than it was back in Morgan's prime years, but definitely better? What evidence to you have to support that statement?
I realize that there is an argument that the quality of play has improved over time, which does give some basis to rate current players over those who played decades ago--it is an argument, but not one that I believe has been absolutely proven. Apart from that, what evidence is there that pitching is definitely better now than it was in, say, the mid-1970s?
In Joe Morgan's two MVP seasons of 1975 and 1976, the NL team average ERA were 3.63 and 3.98; in 2008 and 2009 the NL avearge team ERAs were 4.49 and 4.63. That doesn't really prove much other than support the argument that this is a more offensive friendly era.
However, I then looked at the pitching staffs Morgan batted against in those years. The Mets featured Tom Seaver, Jon Matlack and Jerry Koosman. The Phillies had Steve Carlton, Jim Kaat and Jim Lonborg. The Dodgers had Tommy John and Don Sutton. The Astros had J.R. Richard, Joaquin Andujar and Joe Niekro. The Braves had Phil Niekro. The Pirates had John Candelaria and Jerry Reuss. The Padres had Randy Jones. The Expos had Steve Rogers. That is a lot of quality starters, a lot of 20 game winners and Cy Young award winners, and includes four Hall of Famers plus two other pitchers who won more than 280 games in their careers. It is also a lot of tough southpaws.
If anything, pitching may have been even tougher when Morgan started his major league career in the 1960s. The starters then included Sandy Koufax, Bob Gibson, Juan Marichal, Gaylord Perry, and Don Drysdale, all future Hall of Famers, all at their peaks.

[dfs]

I don't think that Utley has to have 4 good seasons past 40 to be better than Morgan. I think he just has to be better than Morgan was in his mid to late 30's to make up the difference lost in his 20's.

Will he do that? No way of knowing, but he's been pretty awesome thus far.

And so it's clear, I like Morgan more than Utley, just thought it would make for an interesting discussion.

I guess the easy way to put it is that by WAR Joe Morgan is currently the 19th most valuable baseball player to ever put on a uniform. He rates well above guys like Ripken, Brett or Yaz. They guys who are better than Morgan can mostly be recognized on a first name basis...Babe, Honus, Ty, Tris, Stan, Rickey and Mickey....those kind of players. Joe is likely to be passed in the next 3 years by Alex Rodriguez. Rodriguez was in the majors at 18. Morgan was in the majors at 19. Utely didn't get started till he was 26. In the realm of ...is anything possible...sure Utely can catch Morgan, but it's not a bet anybody with any sense is going to propose.


Albert Pujols.....Alpert Pujols might stand a chance at catching little joe in WAR.

[fearofpopvol1]

Maybe pitching is better now than it was back in Morgan's prime years, but definitely better? What evidence to you have to support that statement?
I realize that there is an argument that the quality of play has improved over time, which does give some basis to rate current players over those who played decades ago--it is an argument, but not one that I believe has been absolutely proven. Apart from that, what evidence is there that pitching is definitely better now than it was in, say, the mid-1970s?
In Joe Morgan's two MVP seasons of 1975 and 1976, the NL team average ERA were 3.63 and 3.98; in 2008 and 2009 the NL avearge team ERAs were 4.49 and 4.63. That doesn't really prove much other than support the argument that this is a more offensive friendly era.
However, I then looked at the pitching staffs Morgan batted against in those years. The Mets featured Tom Seaver, Jon Matlack and Jerry Koosman. The Phillies had Steve Carlton, Jim Kaat and Jim Lonborg. The Dodgers had Tommy John and Don Sutton. The Astros had J.R. Richard, Joaquin Andujar and Joe Niekro. The Braves had Phil Niekro. The Pirates had John Candelaria and Jerry Reuss. The Padres had Randy Jones. The Expos had Steve Rogers. That is a lot of quality starters, a lot of 20 game winners and Cy Young award winners, and includes four Hall of Famers plus two other pitchers who won more than 280 games in their careers. It is also a lot of tough southpaws.
If anything, pitching may have been even tougher when Morgan started his major league career in the 1960s. The starters then included Sandy Koufax, Bob Gibson, Juan Marichal, Gaylord Perry, and Don Drysdale, all future Hall of Famers, all at their peaks.

Guys are bigger and stronger now than they were in that era. My eyes have confirmed that.

As for pitching, how about the fact that in the 70s, a LOT of pitchers regularly pitched complete games? Or if teams went to the bullpen, they maybed faced 1 or 2 other guys? With the way pitching is now, you have many managers that micromanage every at bat with a different pitcher late in the game giving the hitter a decreased chance and having a good AB and many teams have power closers that are dialing it up to the high 90s. That is certainly not how it was in the 70s.

Also, while you mentioned some amazing HOF pitchers, you did cherrypick. How about Utley facing Santana, Clemons, Maddux, Glavine, Peavy etc.? While it's too early to declare anything about Peavy, those other guys are all Cy Young/HOF caliber pitchers that are (or were) in the same league.

Also, ERA isn't necessarily an effective way to evaluate pitching for a variety of reasons. I will grant you that there isn't quite as much data about the 70s as there is now, but it's my belief that as a whole, pitching has gotten better.

[fearofpopvol1]

I guess the easy way to put it is that by WAR Joe Morgan is currently the 19th most valuable baseball player to ever put on a uniform. He rates well above guys like Ripken, Brett or Yaz. They guys who are better than Morgan can mostly be recognized on a first name basis...Babe, Honus, Ty, Tris, Stan, Rickey and Mickey....those kind of players. Joe is likely to be passed in the next 3 years by Alex Rodriguez. Rodriguez was in the majors at 18. Morgan was in the majors at 19. Utely didn't get started till he was 26. In the realm of ...is anything possible...sure Utely can catch Morgan, but it's not a bet anybody with any sense is going to propose.


Albert Pujols.....Alpert Pujols might stand a chance at catching little joe in WAR.

Hard to disagree too much with that. For the record, I don't think Utley will get there, but he certainly has been making a good bid.

[dfs]

I realize that there is an argument that the quality of play has improved over time, which does give some basis to rate current players over those who played decades ago--it is an argument, but not one that I believe has been absolutely proven.

The game is different now then it was then. More of the roster is given over to pitchers. More pitchers in a game. Far more power up and down the lineup in the game now than in the 70's. Better? I don't know.

[Chip R]

One thing to consider, Morgan played the majority of his career on artificial turf and Utley has played on grass.

[RedsBaron]

Guys are bigger and stronger now than they were in that era. My eyes have confirmed that.

As for pitching, how about the fact that in the 70s, a LOT of pitchers regularly pitched complete games? Or if teams went to the bullpen, they maybed faced 1 or 2 other guys? With the way pitching is now, you have many managers that micromanage every at bat with a different pitcher late in the game giving the hitter a decreased chance and having a good AB and many teams have power closers that are dialing it up to the high 90s. That is certainly not how it was in the 70s.

Also, while you mentioned some amazing HOF pitchers, you did cherrypick. How about Utley facing Santana, Clemons, Maddux, Glavine, Peavy etc.? While it's too early to declare anything about Peavy, those other guys are all Cy Young/HOF caliber pitchers that are (or were) in the same league.

Also, ERA isn't necessarily an effective way to evaluate pitching for a variety of reasons. I will grant you that there isn't quite as much data about the 70s as there is now, but it's my belief that as a whole, pitching has gotten better.

Oh I cherry picked some, but I had quite a tree to pick.
Roger Clemens was still tremendously effective during the three seasons he was in Houston (2004-06), and Santana has been great since he came to the Mets in 2008. Peavy is very good. Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine though were well past their primes by the time Utley became a regular.
The real question isn't the superstars IMO, although I do believe the HOF caliber pitchers Joe Morgan faced from 1963 through 1984 were at least the equal of those faced by Utley since 2003. What I really find of interest is not whether or not pitching staffs now not only have more arms, since they clearly do----is the pitching better?
Maybe it is tougher to face a journeyman middle reliever with borderline stuff who is rested than it is to face a more weary star pitcher who has already thrown 100 pitches when you come up to bat in the 7th inning---it truly may be tougher. I just wonder if we have definite proof of that.

[jojo]

At age 30, Utley has roughly a third of the WAR that Morgan amassed for his career.

Utley would have to average 6 WAR/yr over the next ten years to eclipse Morgan.

It's possible but it's also a monumentally hard thing to contemplate a player doing.

[Johnny Footstool]

Here's a comparison based upon WAR over similar ages:



Morgan Utley
year age WAR year age WAR
1970 26 4 2004 25 1.3
1971 27 5.4 2005 26 7.4
1972 28 10 2006 27 6.8
1973 29 10.1 2007 28 8
1974 30 8.8 2008 29 8.1
1975 31 11.8 2009 30 7.7
1976 32 9.9
1977 33 6.1
1978 34 1.6


So from ages 26-30, Morgan's total WAR is 38.3. Utley's is 38. That's a lot closer than one would expect.

[fearofpopvol1]

Oh I cherry picked some, but I had quite a tree to pick.
Roger Clemens was still tremendously effective during the three seasons he was in Houston (2004-06), and Santana has been great since he came to the Mets in 2008. Peavy is very good. Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine though were well past their primes by the time Utley became a regular.
The real question isn't the superstars IMO, although I do believe the HOF caliber pitchers Joe Morgan faced from 1963 through 1984 were at least the equal of those faced by Utley since 2003. What I really find of interest is not whether or not pitching staffs now not only have more arms, since they clearly do----is the pitching better?
Maybe it is tougher to face a journeyman middle reliever with borderline stuff who is rested than it is to face a more weary star pitcher who has already thrown 100 pitches when you come up to bat in the 7th inning---it truly may be tougher. I just wonder if we have definite proof of that.

I think you have to put stock into the fact that middle relievers and closers can come in and pitch max effort each outing compared to the 70s when you may be facing a pitcher for the last few innings who may have been gassed or less effective.

Can you prove that?? I'm sure it could be if you had a bunch of time on your hands at did side by side comparisons for how those pitchers in the 70's pitched in the last few innings vs. what relievers today pitch in the last few innings. I am guessing you would find the relievers and closer have more Ks, fewer allowed HRs, less hits etc. Again though, I admit this is speculation on my part...but I'm sure it could be proven.

[jojo]

So from ages 26-30, Morgan's total WAR is 38.3. Utley's is 38. That's a lot closer than one would expect.

I agree. Utley is having a HOF career so far.

The key though is that Morgan's peak value years were significantly better than Ultley's best years thus far (and presumably we've seen his peak value). Also, Morgan racked up significant value from age 21 to age 25 while eeking out pretty good seasons from age 35 to 40.

So Utley is missing the great production from an early age and his peak production doesn't look like it will be as stellar as Morgan's amazing 5 season run from '72 to '76. Utley needs to avoid "aging" in order to surpass Morgan from a WAR perspective.

[Dom Heffner]

I didn't realize Morgan slugged over .500 only twice.

Utley has a career slugging percentage over .500, I think.

[westofyou]

I didn't realize Morgan slugged over .500 only twice.

Utley has a career slugging percentage over .500, I think.

The game is different beast, Dave Parker doesn't have a career slugging% of .480, which is exactly what George Foster and Al Kaline have and that's .18 better than Carl Yastrzemski's.

Utley is a great player, but his impact on the game is nothing like Joe Morgan's was.

[Dom Heffner]

The game is different beast, Dave Parker doesn't have a career slugging% of .480, which is exactly what George Foster and Al Kaline have and that's .18 better than Carl Yastrzemski's.

Utley is a great player, but his impact on the game is nothing like Joe Morgan's was.

I'm with you- just had Morgan's numbers as being better in my head.

[westofyou]

CAREER
MODERN (1900-)
2B
AGE <= 35
RUNS CREATED/GAME (vs league 2nd basemen)displayed only--not a sorting criteria
OBA vs. the league average displayed only--not a sorting criteria
SLG vs. the league average displayed only--not a sorting criteria
SECONDARY AVERAGE vs. the league average displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS CREATED/GAME DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE RC/G OBA SLG SEC
1 Rogers Hornsby 6.30 11.42 5.12 11.42 .105 .226 .187
2 Nap Lajoie 4.04 8.67 4.62 8.67 .074 .140 .046
3 Jackie Robinson 3.65 8.15 4.50 8.15 .081 .133 .138
4 Joe Morgan 3.28 7.11 3.82 7.11 .078 .092 .250
5 Eddie Collins 2.80 7.07 4.26 7.07 .080 .084 .106
6 Chase Utley 2.67 7.54 4.87 7.54 .038 .115 .098
7 Charlie Gehringer 2.63 7.75 5.12 7.75 .049 .098 .069
8 Rod Carew 2.39 6.07 3.68 6.07 .066 .092 .033
9 Craig Biggio 2.31 7.00 4.69 7.00 .055 .064 .095
10 Julio Franco 2.24 6.24 4.00 6.24 .059 .085 .077

[RollyInRaleigh]

Joe Morgan wouldn't have made that error in a big game.

[TheNext44]

Joe Morgan wouldn't have made that error in a big game.

That's because he's short enough for Fowler to jump over without Morgan noticing. :cool:

[HeatherC1212]

That's because he's short enough for Fowler to jump over without Morgan noticing. :cool:

That was HILARIOUS tonight. :lol:

[RedsBaron]

I didn't realize Morgan slugged over .500 only twice.

Utley has a career slugging percentage over .500, I think.

Morgan's failure to consistently slug at least .500 is probably more as a result of the conditions under which he played than anything else.
Baseball-Reference.Com's Stats Neutralizer can be used to adjust both Morgan's and Utley's stats to the historic major league average of 716 runs per 162 games per team. With that adjustment, Morgan has a career batting average of .302 with a career OBP of .429 and a career SLG of .475. Utley's adjusted career numbers in those categories are .297 .382 .525.
More impressive are the adjsuted average/OBP/SLG of Morgan during his six year run of truly great seasons 1972-77. Get these numbers:
1972: .339/.471/.506
1973: .321/.441/.543
1974: .323/.461/.542
1975: .364/.507/.565
1976: .354/.482/.636
1977: .305/.437/.509
These adjustments show Morgan slugging .500+ six seasons in a row.

[Dom Heffner]

Joe Morgan wouldn't have made that error in a big game.

I thought the error was charged to Rollins.

[MWM]

I think you have to put stock into the fact that middle relievers and closers can come in and pitch max effort each outing compared to the 70s when you may be facing a pitcher for the last few innings who may have been gassed or less effective.

Can you prove that?? I'm sure it could be if you had a bunch of time on your hands at did side by side comparisons for how those pitchers in the 70's pitched in the last few innings vs. what relievers today pitch in the last few innings. I am guessing you would find the relievers and closer have more Ks, fewer allowed HRs, less hits etc. Again though, I admit this is speculation on my part...but I'm sure it could be proven.

I don't think any of the era comparisons really matter. The measurements listed in this thread are relative to their peers at the time they played. That's the only way to compare players of different generations. Trying to take a player from decades previously and compare them to modern players is a futile exercise. You compare them to how much better they were than the rest of the players of that day and age.

[RollyInRaleigh]

I thought the error was charged to Rollins.

Could have been charged to both. Utley panicked and Rollins maybe could have caught it. Didn't matter, ultimately, but not good baseball.

[dfs]

Westofyou's chart is entertaining, but it's looking at rate values over a career.
I don't know that it's the best way to judge either career value or peak value.
Rate values over a career would seem to give maximum value to players who came into the league fairly old and retired early.

If you want to look at peak value....fine compare rates over the best N years.
If you want to look at career value, something like WAR works great.

Still....Wow. I'm impressed that Utley ranks that high.

[fearofpopvol1]

I don't think any of the era comparisons really matter. The measurements listed in this thread are relative to their peers at the time they played. That's the only way to compare players of different generations. Trying to take a player from decades previously and compare them to modern players is a futile exercise. You compare them to how much better they were than the rest of the players of that day and age.

You can call it "futile," but that miss the spirit in which the topic was being discussed. And in order to assess that, you have to consider the eras.

[MWM]

You can call it "futile," but that miss the spirit in which the topic was being discussed. And in order to assess that, you have to consider the eras.

I disagree. If you took an average major leaguer as they are right now and transplant them back into the 1950s, chances are they'd be a absolute stud. And conversely, if you took a star from that era and placed him in today's game as they were back then, I'd venture to say that in most cases they'd struggle to keep their head above water. There are exceptions, but in general I believe this to be the case. Athletes are bigger and stronger nowadays than ever and they've been groomed from much younger ages in developmental programs, etc..... It's a different world today, but it's the same for all players. That's why you have to compare how much better they were than their peers. Babe Ruth as he was in the 1920s would have a hard time hitting today's average pitcher.

[Sea Ray]

I think Morgan has the edge on defense, but other than that, yes.

Not just defense. I doubt Utley will ever lead the league in SBs. Morgan was sparkplug who could rattle pitchers with his big leads off of 1st.

[fearofpopvol1]

I disagree. If you took an average major leaguer as they are right now and transplant them back into the 1950s, chances are they'd be a absolute stud. And conversely, if you took a star from that era and placed him in today's game as they were back then, I'd venture to say that in most cases they'd struggle to keep their head above water. There are exceptions, but in general I believe this to be the case. Athletes are bigger and stronger nowadays than ever and they've been groomed from much younger ages in developmental programs, etc..... It's a different world today, but it's the same for all players. That's why you have to compare how much better they were than their peers. Babe Ruth as he was in the 1920s would have a hard time hitting today's average pitcher.

What about the fact that in the earlier days, most pitchers pitched complete games? Or certainly didn't face 3-5 people in the pen on top of the starting pitcher? This fact simply can't be overlooked and plays an important role.

By the argument you're presenting, Chase Utley was better than Joe Morgan because he has been putting up similar stats to Morgan (at least for the last few years) with MUCH tougher pitching.

[RedsBaron]

I disagree. If you took an average major leaguer as they are right now and transplant them back into the 1950s, chances are they'd be a absolute stud. And conversely, if you took a star from that era and placed him in today's game as they were back then, I'd venture to say that in most cases they'd struggle to keep their head above water. There are exceptions, but in general I believe this to be the case. Athletes are bigger and stronger nowadays than ever and they've been groomed from much younger ages in developmental programs, etc..... It's a different world today, but it's the same for all players. That's why you have to compare how much better they were than their peers. Babe Ruth as he was in the 1920s would have a hard time hitting today's average pitcher.
I've seen that argument many times.....but I can't say I have ever seen any convincing proof of the argument.
I believe that the quality of play has improved somewhat, but, at least until the steroid era, players were not all that much bigger than they had been decades earlier. More importantly, we don't see that steep improvement in play that renders guys who were stars in the 1950s suddenly unable to play within 10 or 15 years solely because the quality of play had greatly improved.
Obviously this would be an easier exercise if major league players had 40+ year long careers. However examine those players who did play a long time--here are a few at random, all Hall of Famers:
In 1941 Ted Williams had a BA/OBP/SLG of .406 .553 .735
In 1957 Ted Williams had a BA/OBP/SLG of .388 .526 .731
In 1957 Hank Aaron had a BA/OBP/SLG of .322 .378 .600
In 1971 Hank Aaron had a BA/OBP/SLG of .327 .410 .669
In 1971 Reggie Jackson had a BA/OBP/SLG of .277 .352 .508
In 1982 Reggie Jackson had a BA/OBP/SLG of .275 .375 .532
In 1982 Rickey Henderson had a BA/OBP/SLG of .267 .398 .382
In 1999 Rickey Henderson had a BA/OBP/SLG of .315 .423 .466

Now, Teddy Ballgame, Hammering Hank, Mr. October and Rickey are not your average ballplayers, but there is a span of nearly 60 years and in each case the quality of play did not so significantly increase that a player who was a star as a young man was no longer competitive as an old man.

[Johnny Footstool]

Not just defense. I doubt Utley will ever lead the league in SBs. Morgan was sparkplug who could rattle pitchers with his big leads off of 1st.

Stealing bases is a great skill. Hitting homers is a great skill, too, and Utley is better than Morgan at that. So that's a push, IMO.

[westofyou]

Stealing bases is a great skill. Hitting homers is a great skill, too, and Utley is better than Morgan at that. So that's a push, IMO.

Utley plays in the perfect park for that too.

From 1971-1976 Morgan had 121 HR's to the league average of 66 and the position average of 31, so back then Joe Morgan was pretty darn good at hitting HR's too.

Better vs his peers than Chase has been.

[princeton]

Utley's my favorite current player, as was Morgan. And like the BRM and Morgan, Phillies have adopted Utley's personality to become world champs. It's a nice comp

Joe gets big edge because he made the pitchers go loopy with his huge leads off first. Utley doesn't have that. Such a smart player though.

I thought Utley was NL MVP last season, yet he barely got ANY votes. apparently, a very underrated performer.

[Johnny Footstool]

Utley plays in the perfect park for that too.

From 1971-1976 Morgan had 121 HR's to the league average of 66 and the position average of 31, so back then Joe Morgan was pretty darn good at hitting HR's too.

Better vs his peers than Chase has been.

Morgan was the best second baseman in a time in which there were very few good second basemen.

[RollyInRaleigh]

They looked for a different skill set at that time.

[westofyou]

They looked for a different skill set at that time.

All that turf, less runs will do that to you.

Great game then, mix of power and speed.

[TheNext44]

Morgan knew how to turn a DP in the playoffs. :cool:

[redhawkfish]

!

[redhawkfish]

Morgan knew how to turn a DP in the playoffs. :cool:

:DWell played!

[dougdirt]

Morgan knew how to turn a DP in the playoffs. :cool:

Maybe... if only he could remember how to hit when he got there. Dude was a .182/.323/.348 career hitter in the playoffs. At least Utley could hit some (.241/.400/.430 coming into todays game in his playoff career) in the playoffs.

[westofyou]

Maybe... if only he could remember how to hit when he got there. Dude was a .182/.323/.348 career hitter in the playoffs. At least Utley could hit some (.241/.400/.430 coming into todays game in his playoff career) in the playoffs.
.235/.347/.435 in the WS though

[TheNext44]

.235/.347/.435 in the WS though

And one very special hit in the ninth inning of game 7 in 1975. :)

[Slyder]

Just wanted to throw this story in to the fire for discussion (couple people have made mention of it already).

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/An-Utley-failure-Chase-morphs-into-Knoblauch-be?urn=mlb,196526


Just when you assumed it was safe for Chase Utley(notes) to throw a baseball, he went all Chuck Knoblauch on the Phillies at Dodger Stadium the past two games.

Nobody in the front row was safe!

Utley's throwing error on Friday afternoon — his second in as many days — proved very costly as it allowed the tying run to score and fueled an eighth-inning rally that led to the Dodgers 2-1 victory and evened the NLCS at a game apiece. Watch it here

"It was just a bad throw," Utley told reporters after the game. "I just made a bad throw."

Utley has never won a Gold Glove — which doesn't say much about those who select the award — but he's still known as one of the best defensive second basemen in the league. After making it through 2009's regular season with just four throwing errors, Utley has made two in two games and both came at unfortunate moments for the Phillies.


More of the story is written at the link.

[traderumor]

Utley has never won a Gold Glove — which doesn't say much about those who select the award — but he's still known as one of the best defensive second basemen in the league.Sorry, but he is the 3rd best defensive 2b, at best, behind Phillips and Hudson.

[jojo]

Sorry, but he is the 3rd best defensive 2b, at best, behind Phillips and Hudson.

Personally, it's Utley>Phillips>>>Hudson.

Defensive metrics such as UZR and Dewans show a clear break between each "group" of player though Phillips and Utley belong in the same conversation while Hudson probably nolonger does given his injuryitus.

It's really tough to support a statement that Utley is only third at best (implying he might not even be that good) empirically.

[blumj]

It's almost a theme of this postseason, good defensive players making some really huge defensive mistakes. But, having watched Mike Lowell all season, and A-Rod to a lesser extent, defense seems to be where that hip problem shows up the most.

[Scrap Irony]

Hudson used to be great. He's gotten old and is living on his reputation.

Utley and Phillips are far better then the rest of the league.

[RedsManRick]

Sorry, but he is the 3rd best defensive 2b, at best, behind Phillips and Hudson.

Phillips may be a more physically gifted defender than Utley, but Utley's positioning is unparalleled in the game giving him effectively more range than anybody else. Phillips may cover more ground once the ball is hit, but Utley doesn't have to, because he's already there.

[fearofpopvol1]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4603767

pretty impressive

[edabbs44]

I am sure some Yankee fans were asking who this Utley guy is and how long until he is a free agent.

[fearofpopvol1]

Utley has now tied Reggie Jackson for the most home runs in 1 World Series. Dude is just a beast.