Most Overrated/Underrated MLB Players

[edabbs44]

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]

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]

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]

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]

underrated, David Delucci.

[vaticanplum]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Larry Schuler]

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]

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]

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]

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]

[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...
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]