You can’t believe it? How about me? I feel like a careless idiot. Glad I caught it before someone else pointed it out.
A good way to focus on ranking a variety of players, I’ve found, is to reduce the discussion to comparing two players to each other. Clearly, you’ve decided in this case that Musial was a better player than Mantle, and that argument has a lot of merit. Mantle ranked Musial above himself, curiously enough.
Even from just a BoSox point of view, I’d take Manny Ramirez over Yaz.
Could be my memory is faulty, but I seem to remember Yaz failing to come thru in the clutch an awful lot.
Where would you propose Yaz go on the list? What number?
I would omit him.
I probably would too, though the best we can do for now is to ask people to vote for him being placed at #37. Later on, if successful, we could ask to have him ranked even lower, but for now 37 is the lowest we have.
I read a fascinating article claiming that apart from some fantastic seasons, 3 or 4 of them, most of Yaz’s value lies in playing a long time in Fenway. In particular, this article made the case that he was atrocious against lefty pitching and probably should have been platooned for most of his career, but he was too popular in Boston for any manager to even think about sitting him down for any reason at all.
I’m hoping we can discuss the placement of players 1-37 (and others) on (and off) the rankings so far.
It seems obvious to me that this system (any system) will make mistakes, at least in the judgment of some participants, and it will be interesting to try to reach a consensus on correcting them.
As a group, we will be limited in the eras and leagues we’re knowledgeable about, and this is certainly a drawback. for my part, I know very little about the Negro League, and the Japanese league, and 19th century ball, and I suspect I’m not alone in these lacunae.
But even in my field of “expertise,” 20th century MLB, I know the players I saw play MUCH better than pre-1960 players, and am reliant on the work of others to judge them. I was just thinking that there is a direct line, more or less unbroken, of 2B men who were considered at the top of MLB players, or very close to the very top, throughout the last century:
Lajoie
Eddie Collins
Hornsby
Lazzeri
Gehringer
Gordon
Jackie Robinson
Fox
Morgan
Carew
Sandberg
Biggio
And I can’t rate these players with any degree of confidence from “best” to “worst.”
The only ones on our list so far are Collins, Robinson, and Morgan, and I’m not sure who needs to be added next, and who needs to be added last.
So at some point, I think, this ranking project will turn into a guessing game, even without getting into the areas I know very little about. I’m sure similar lists can be drawn up for every position, or at least most of them.
Could you perhaps better explain what I’m supposed to do at this point? I really don’t understand. Are we removing people at the bottom of the list?
If you have a disagreement with where a player is placed in the rankings from 1-37, say who he is and where you think he should be placed, and we’ll vote “Yes” or “No’.” If you don’t think he should be on the list at all, then you can put him #37 and we’ll vote on whether that is low enough at some future time.
If a majority of those voting agree with your re-placement (a “Yes” vote, in other words) then he’ll be placed there. If a majority votes “No” then no. (Tie goes to “Yes.”)
Simple enough?
Nobody has voted on my first proposal.
I’m a YES for Musial at #9
I’d recommend a public poll to accomplish this - otherwise this thread will die from gout.
I like this idea BUT
I’ve never started a poll, so I wonder if it can be incorporated into an existing thread (i.e., this one), and how to go about it. If I can be part of an existing thread, can anyone start one, or just the OP? I’d just as soon NOT take on wrangling duties here, but I will if I must.
Stan Musial to #9
- YES
- NO
0
voters
There’s a thread in MPSIMS that’s nothing but polls. It’s very easy, give it a shot in ATMB.
Yaz to # 37
- Yes
- No
0
voters
Might as well vote for any Negro Leaguers to be included in our pantheon at this point. If you want to propose one for inclusion, give his name (one at a time, please) and the number you would suggest for him, bearing in mind that you can always vote have him moved up later, and you just want a simple majority at this stage.
We should delay the tiebreakers until we’re done here, because some (like Cobb) may be moved out of the tie when we’re done.
I have an issue with Randy Johnson being selected as the best pitcher of all time. I would put his grandfather Walter in the #10 spot.
Do you want Walter Johnson ranked at #10?
- YES
- NO
0
voters
How about moving Rivera into the current tie at #20? He still seems ranked too high to me, given the limited number of innings pitched that all relievers share and the absence of other super relievers at his position that got him voted in a tad too soon, to my mind
Rivera to # 20
Rivera to #20
- Yes
- No
0
voters
I voted no. I think Rivera is an outlying case of being so dominant that even as a reliever he had that much effect on those Yankees championship teams. While the innings may be few, he was very often pitching is high-pressure situations. Almost always, when “Enter Sandman” came on the PA the game was over.