The 12 gold gloves and (record) 5 times leading the league in assists don’t count in consideration?
Aaron clearly has the offensive stats and longevity, but Clemente was ballpark on the OPS+ with Aaron while being the best defensive player at the position. Granted, it’s not a middle-field position, but it should count for something.
Ruth was the best baseball player to ever walk the earth, hands down. Any opinion to the contrary is wrong.
Clemente was not in the same ballpark - 130 OPS+ vs. 155. So the difference between Aaron and Clemente was almost as much as the difference betweeen Clemente and a league-average hitter. Clemente was in the same ballpark in terms of OPS+ with guys like Reggie Jackson, Billy Williams, and Tony Gwynn, all legitimate hall of famers, but not on the level of guys like Aaron, Robinson, or Ott.
I voted for Aaron. I don’t agree 100%, but I like Daniel Tosh’s take on Babe Ruth. Remember folks, he’s a comedian.
OK, point taken… I guess the defensive abilities aren’t enough to include him at the top of the list then.
I voted Paul Waner because I never heard of the guy before.
I voted for Aaron for about the same reasons. Babe Ruth was the greatest player of his time, but I wonder how well he would have hit off of Satchel in his prime.
There is something to be said for that but on the other side, when Ruth played, all the best athletes went to the MLB where they could get paid. The NBA & NFL did not pay much at the time even to top stars. So Ruth’s competition was higher among strictly white players but clearly missing the black & Latin players. It was probably closer to a wash though then you would think at first glance.
Ruth was also so much better then anyone else playing at the time that it is really is not even close. No one has ever been that much better at baseball then his peers. He was a a bonus a great pitcher to start. I’m not sure if it ever happened in the other major sports, maybe horse racing with Secretariat? But that was only for 1-2 years of course.