I'll give you this.
This means nothing to me. Chipper has more XBH in 2,000 fewer PAs. He shouldn't be sorry he hit 177 more home runs than Biggio. No one would trade those for more doubles and triples. Chipper hit more homeruns than Biggio, than Biggio hit more doubles/triples than Chipper.
If you do it by rates, just looking at doubles and triples, it's not that big of a discrepancy, either.
Biggio 723 doubles and triples in 12,504 PAs (17.29 PAs per double/triple).
Chipper 587 doubles and triples in 10,614 PAs (18.08 PAs per double/triple).
If that's Biggio's better skill, he can have it.
Lineup dependent. Chipper got on base at a higher rate, and had more total bases in far fewer PAs. He hit in the middle of the order, not the top. If he hit leadoff for most of his career like Biggio, he would have more runs scored.
His nearly 500 RBI (also lineup dependent) advantage more than makes up for it, anyhow.
but the idea Chipper was better at every skill than Biggio is just stupid.
Better at every skill? No.
Better at most every skill? Yes.
To me, the best skill Biggio maintained over Chipper was the ability to stay healthy. He stayed on the field constantly. Even into his late 30s. That's remarkable.
Chipper is knocked too often for his health (was mostly healthy through his peak), but once he aged, he just wasn't able to play as much and Biggio was. So I put that strongly in his favor.
Thinking Biggio is better is perfectly defensible,
I don't really see how. Chipper was worth 20 more wins than Biggio in fewer games.
Obviously I'm a well-known Braves fan. Chipper is my favorite player. But to me, the numbers are completely in his favor, and I don't think that's me being a homer.
If you put up Player A and Player B and listed all the stats blind, everyone would choose Chipper's numbers.
This post was edited on 1/10 at 8:56 am