I watched a lot of Cubs games during his peak years, and I recall him ranging a lot to his right, scooping balls out, and flinging them across his body as his momentum is heading towards left field to get guys at first. He also seemed able to cover the hole pretty well, and he almost never made an error. I will grant you that his DP pivot seemed weak. IIRC when they further break his D down the numbers confirm that-a quick and dirty perusal of Cubs DP totals during 84-93 does show some pretty averagish totals despite the Cubs often putting a lot of people on and often having people like Maddux giving up lots of grounders. Compare the Cubs to what Robby Thompson over in San Fran was doing.
At any rate almost all of the various defensive systems consider him a good, tho not stellar, defender. Believe what you will (at least he’s on your ballot).
Here’s the thing tho-almost never does a truly bad defensive player remain at a premium defensive position for the bulk of a career (Jeter being the most obvious exception). They’ll usually shuffle off to someplace else where they can’t do as much damage before too long.
Agreed, it was an awful, awful place to watch baseball. Among other things, the seats weren’t angled toward the field IIRC, and one of the outfield fences looked…temporary. Seems like I remember somebody hitting a homer to right and it just…rolled. Maybe not. Seagulls congregated in right field and in the bleachers near me–definitely more gulls in the park than people. Still, I’m glad I went to a game there once, if for no other reason than that the experience made the Metrodome, old Comiskey Park, and EVEN OLYMPIC STADIUM seem like halfway decent places to watch a little baseball.
Was Jeter a “truly bad defensive player?” I thought he was just kind of average on defense. Not as good as ARod, which led to the controversy in the first place.
I assume Sandberg was also about middle of the road. I mentioned the errorless streak earlier, which is probably the highlight of his career defensively.
My recollection, for what it’s worth, is that Robby Thompson’s defense was considered at the time to be pretty much the gold standard where NL second basemen were concerned. So not measuring up to the Greek God of Second Basemen, where DP totals are concerned, shouldn’t necessarily a huge negative for Sandberg.
Like others, I remember Sandberg to be a more-than-adequate defender. (Of course, I remember Sandberg’s almost-immediate predecessor Manny Trillo as the best in the business, especially at going to his left, which he may or may not have been; so my memory may not be the best judge.)
Probably Astroturf plays differently from grass. I wouldn’t call that an illusion. If you’re going to be a starting position player for a team that plays on turf, you’d better learn to adjust to the stuff.
No real order to this, and like everyone else, I found it tough for the last few guys on the ballot.
Biggio
Robbie Alomar
Ryne Sandberg
Eddie Collins
Nap Lajoie (yeah, I mentioned not including WW1 players in my 1B ballot. Oh well; he’s that much higher than the rest.)
Joe Morgan
Lou Whitaker
Joe Gordon (WW2 effect)
Gehringer
Frisch
I’m surprised Grich is rated so high by BR. I watched Grich play for the Angels as a kid, and while I was wowed by his teammate Carew, I never was by Grich. Yet there he is, 7th in JAWS for 2B, with nearly 71 WAR.
I’m pretty sure Cano and Utley are going to knock some people off this list, eventually. Probably deserve to be on there now, if I didn’t have some lingering bias against including those still playing.
For those who have voted for Robinson Canó, and not Chase Utley, could you please explain your reasoning? Some have a reluctance to vote for still-active players, which is understandable, but they are almost exact contemporaries.
Canó does have a slightly better bat (but note that baserunning almost completely erases that advantage, however-Utley is 2nd all-time in stolen base percentage, with 87%, Canó is mired at 57%), but they are pretty close in terms of counting stats. Canó of course is 4 years younger and thus figures to slaughter Utley there when both are done, but we vote based on what they have done so far, not what they might do, right?
Defense? A bit surprised Canó does as well as he does here (+25 runs), but in his best seasons he is well over +10 runs/year. Utley tho utterly slaughters him 141 to 25. Is it simple skepticism that his D could be that good?
Just off the cuff, I think of Cano as being the better player. But you’re right, they are pretty much even. It’s surprising that Cano has had more plate appearances than Utley. He’s been very durable so far…the fewest number of games he’s played in the last 10 years is 156.
It’s a shame Utley hasn’t been able to stay on the field more. He probably only has a year or two left, while Cano has seven years left on his contract. It will be interesting to see what happens in the eventual HOF voting. I read that no candidate in the expansion era has gotten in without having reached at least 2000 hits. Utley still needs 223 to reach that milestone.
I voted for Cano and not Utley. As I mentioned, my ballot was cast for this position with no research other than referencing the list in the OP.
Now I’m looking at the stats. Utley’s had a slightly longer career. But Cano still has the edge in almost every offensive career stat. And Cano is still going strong. 2016 was an MVP caliber season if he’d been on a decent team. To me, he’s clearly had the better career.
My reasoning is basically that I am looking forward a little. Utley is pretty much done; he’s still an OK player but his good years are well behind him and I’ll be impressed if he even plays 400 more MLB games. Consequently, his career - which is like 65 WAR or something - or more or less defined. Cano, four years younger and a much better player than Utley was at the same age, remains one of the best second basemen in the world; he is still going very strong, and barring an unexpected injury he will clearly surpass Utley. I don’t want to look back on my vote in 2020 and think “well, that looks silly now.”
I think accounting for what a player will likely do in the near future is reasonable.
Don’t get me wrong, Chase Utley’s had a hell of a career, but this is a high standard. Ranking 15th among all the second basemen who’ve ever played baseball is no insult.
The bolded part is why I chose Cano over Utley. I didn’t vote based on current career numbers, I voted over the projected career numbers. The Hall of Fame wouldn’t just have the numbers up to the point of induction. They would have the entire career numbers (assuming an inducted member went back to play, which would be weird). IF some catastrophic career ending happenstance occurred to Cano before reaching those projected numbers, I would simply… be wrong, I guess. As it stand now, by the end of Cano’s career, I don’t think it will be close.
Roger Hornsby
Joe Morgan
Napolean Lajoie
Roberto Alomar
Eddie Collins
Frankie Frisch
Craig Biggio
Charlie Gehringer
Joe Gordon
Ryne Sandberg
Sentimental vote for Duane Kuiper and his one career home run.
I’m okay on voting for current players based on current stats, under the assumption that our Hall has no 5 years of retirement requirement. Voting based on players future achievements is, to me, against the spirit of this exercise.