- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How good was Cal Ripken Jr? Was he a centerpiece?
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:16 am
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:16 am
One of the most underrated or better under hyped players from the 80s/90s to me was Cal Ripken. He won an MVP and World Series at the beginning of his career, however his longevity could have led to many forgetting that later in his career. He did take an MVP in '91 but no more titles.
Was he a franchise guy? With over three thousand hits and 400 HRs the numbers say yeah. But his incredible longevity and being "The Iron Man" how much of those numbers were simply because he played everyday and never took off, and played for so long. Was he a good player who got lucky with injuries and was able to extrapolate his stats accordingly. Had Griffey played so many consecutive games he would have blown every stat to hell and back.
Was Ripken a guy to build a team around like a Jeter? Or was he a good piece to have?
Was he a franchise guy? With over three thousand hits and 400 HRs the numbers say yeah. But his incredible longevity and being "The Iron Man" how much of those numbers were simply because he played everyday and never took off, and played for so long. Was he a good player who got lucky with injuries and was able to extrapolate his stats accordingly. Had Griffey played so many consecutive games he would have blown every stat to hell and back.
Was Ripken a guy to build a team around like a Jeter? Or was he a good piece to have?
7
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:23 am to ThePerkins927
2nd to A-Rod
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:35 am to ThePerkins927
quote:
Was Ripken a guy to build a team around like a Jeter?
Jeter wouldn't be close to my first guy to build around. Good player but definitely overhyped by playing his career for the Yankees.
He was average defensively, solid hitter for average but with little power. You can't really build a team around that. But you can insert that into an already great team (multiple Yankees teams), and obtain good results.
quote:
Or was he a good piece to have?
Basically sums up Jeter imo
This post was edited on 2/15/17 at 10:37 am
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:36 am to ThePerkins927
He's ranked 37th all time in career WAR in between Carl Yaz and Bert Blyleven. He's in the same group as Eddie Mathews, Al Kaline, and Roberto Clemente.
He was top 3 in defensive WAR at his position 9 times.
He was basically one of the first power hitting SS that still was able to play above average defense.
He was top 3 in defensive WAR at his position 9 times.
He was basically one of the first power hitting SS that still was able to play above average defense.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:37 am to ThePerkins927
Why do you use Jeter as a guy to build around but aren't sure if Ripken was a franchise guy? They had respective strengths but one doesn't blow away the other. If you take Jeter's career production and apply it to Ripken's AB Jeter had the following:
Runs - 337 More
Hits - 391 More
2B - 42 Less
3B - 24 More
HR - 163 Less
RBI - 342 Less
SB - 333 More
BB - 13 Less
SO - 594 More
Also, Ripken only played about a season and a half longer than Jeter in total games. It isn't like Ripken played 5+ seasons more than Jeter.
Runs - 337 More
Hits - 391 More
2B - 42 Less
3B - 24 More
HR - 163 Less
RBI - 342 Less
SB - 333 More
BB - 13 Less
SO - 594 More
Also, Ripken only played about a season and a half longer than Jeter in total games. It isn't like Ripken played 5+ seasons more than Jeter.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:42 am to Tigerfan56
In Jeter's prime, he didn't have "little power"
Might have just seemed that way comparatively because it was right in the middle of the steroid era.
Might have just seemed that way comparatively because it was right in the middle of the steroid era.
This post was edited on 2/15/17 at 10:46 am
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:42 am to Waffle House
quote:
They had respective strengths but one doesn't blow away the other
Well, Ripken kind of does blow Jeter away, but you do have to factor in the Ripken played his final years at 3B rather than SS. Jeter was a huge liability at SS.
WAR -
Ripken - 95.5
Jeter - 71.5
Jeter is a lot closer to Barry Larkin than he is to Ripken.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:42 am to Waffle House
Perhaps Jeter was the wrong one to use. Who is someone that was a centerpiece? Maybe like a Kris Bryant modern day. Can Ripken be the best player on a team that also wins championships?
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:51 am to ThePerkins927
quote:
Can Ripken be the best player on a team that also wins championships?
I think you answered that in your OP. he was the AL MVP on a team that won the World Series. He also won another MVP in 1991. He won 8 silver sluggers in an 11 year span during his prime. It's hard to win the world series and one player cannot "lead" his team to a title in baseball like one can in other sports. A lot of the best players in baseball history have never won a world series at no fault of their own, including but not limited to, Ty Cobb, Ken Griffey Jr, Ichiro, Ernie Banks, Tony Gwynn, Harmen Killebrew, Carl Yastrzemski, and Ted Williams.
This post was edited on 2/15/17 at 10:55 am
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:00 am to ThePerkins927
He was better than Jeter, by a considerable margin.
Ripken was a plus defender at a premium defensive position with plus power. A very rare commodity. That is definitely something you can build a team around.
Defensively, he's underrated. People just assume he wasn't a great defender b/c he was a big slugger. But, he had soft hands, a great arm, and plenty of range (for most of his career).
He wasn't an elite hitter; not a guy you build a lineup around, but remember he was a shortstop. Having the best hitting SS in baseball on your team is a huge advantage.
Ripken was a plus defender at a premium defensive position with plus power. A very rare commodity. That is definitely something you can build a team around.
Defensively, he's underrated. People just assume he wasn't a great defender b/c he was a big slugger. But, he had soft hands, a great arm, and plenty of range (for most of his career).
He wasn't an elite hitter; not a guy you build a lineup around, but remember he was a shortstop. Having the best hitting SS in baseball on your team is a huge advantage.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:06 am to ThePerkins927
To me, Billy Ripken was better than Cal or Jeter because he had a frick face bat.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:06 am to Speedy G
quote:
He wasn't an elite hitter; not a guy you build a lineup around, but remember he was a shortstop. Having the best hitting SS in baseball on your team is a huge advantage.
I'd say he was an elite hitter for the first 10-12 years of his career. He tailed off a bit towards the end, but you don't win 8 silver sluggers over 11 years and not be an elite hitter. You can't really compare what he did in the 80s to what players did in the 90s. But from 1981-1991, Ripken hit .280 and averaged 26 HRs and 98 RBIs and had a .820 OPS. In that era of baseball, that was elite IMO. In 1991, when he hit 34 home runs, that was 4th in major league baseball.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:18 am to dnm3305
quote:
He's ranked 37th all time in career WAR in between Carl Yaz and Bert Blyleven. He's in the same group as Eddie Mathews, Al Kaline, and Roberto Clemente.
He was top 3 in defensive WAR at his position 9 times.
He was basically one of the first power hitting SS that still was able to play above average defense.
Ripken might have the strongest arm for a shortstop ever. His defensive metrics were outstanding even though his foot speed was well below average because his positioning and instincts were superb and he could make every throw on the diamond. His offensive inconsistency was due to the physical toll of playing so many games in a row. I don't think it's a coincidence that he hit .340 at age 39 when he had a shortened season and got a lot of rest due to a prolonged DL stint. It was the freshest his body had been in many, many years.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:18 am to Speedy G
Thank you
Don't insult Ripken by comparing him to jeter
Don't insult Ripken by comparing him to jeter
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:19 am to LSUballs
quote:
To me, Billy Ripken was better than Cal or Jeter because he had a frick face bat.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:29 am to lsufball19
quote:
I'd say he was an elite hitter for the first 10-12 years of his career. He tailed off a bit towards the end, but you don't win 8 silver sluggers over 11 years and not be an elite hitter. You can't really compare what he did in the 80s to what players did in the 90s. But from 1981-1991, Ripken hit .280 and averaged 26 HRs and 98 RBIs and had a .820 OPS. In that era of baseball, that was elite IMO. In 1991, when he hit 34 home runs, that was 4th in major league baseball.
He won silver sluggers b/c he was a SS. He was an elite hitter for a shortstop. You can definitely win silver sluggers at SS (or C) w/o being an elite hitter. Barry Larkin won 9. Derek Jeter won 5. Ian Desmond and Edgar Renteria each won 3. There have been very few elite hitters that played primarily SS in baseball history.
Finishing fourth one year in HRs does not make you an elite hitter. He finished top 10 in OPS only three times (a 3rd, a 5th, and a 9th). Same for AVG and SLG (same years). Never OBP. That's not elite. His counting stats look a little better, b/c he played every game and nearly every inning. He's tied for 613th all-time in OPS+. Even if you count just his prime 10 years, his OPS+ is tied for 207th. If Ripken played first base, he would have been an average player.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:30 am to ThePerkins927
2nd best SS ever behind A-Rod.
One of if not the greatest ever fielding the position but gets hurt because people over value range in the infield
One of if not the greatest ever fielding the position but gets hurt because people over value range in the infield
Posted on 2/15/17 at 11:50 am to Speedy G
quote:
He finished top 10 in OPS only three times (a 3rd, a 5th, and a 9th). Same for AVG and SLG (same years).
what was his average finish in OPS? So there are only 10 elite hitters in all of baseball?
quote:
Even if you count just his prime 10 years, his OPS+ is tied for 207th.
So in nearly 150 years of the sport, finishing in the top 200ish hitters in OPS all time is just average?
How mahy of those top 200 in career OPS have played since the 1990s? Do we just discount all other eras of baseball because the advanced metrics of baseball now devalue the value of players 30+ years ago? I can assure you there were plenty of elite hitters of any given era that, statistically speaking, wouldn't appear to be compared to players playing today. That doesn't mean they weren't elite hitters while they were playing.
I honestly hate (and this goes for all sports) when people compare career numbers for players across a wide range of eras to "prove" player A was better than player B.
This post was edited on 2/15/17 at 11:57 am
Posted on 2/15/17 at 12:02 pm to lsufball19
quote:
I'd say he was an elite hitter for the first 10-12 years of his career. He tailed off a bit towards the end, but you don't win 8 silver sluggers over 11 years and not be an elite hitter. You can't really compare what he did in the 80s to what players did in the 90s. But from 1981-1991, Ripken hit .280 and averaged 26 HRs and 98 RBIs and had a .820 OPS. In that era of baseball, that was elite IMO. In 1991, when he hit 34 home runs, that was 4th in major league baseball.
All of this. 80s players are wildly underrated due to the offensive explosion in the 90s. It threw our expectations of offense all out of whack. Ripken's numbers for a shortstop were literally unheard of. (The prime victim here is Alan Trammel, who should also be in the Hall of Fame).
Ripken was also a terrific defender who didn't get credit for it until well late into his career. It's because he was so different than shortstops before him, who tended to be small fireplug types.
But it's also true that he was a shell of the hitter he was in the second half of his career. He tailed off significantly, and he wasn't providing quite as much defensive value at third base. But he's one of the few players in sports history who literally changed how the game is played. He redefined the shortstop position.
He's the greatest shortstop ever except A-Rod and maybe Honus Wagner.
Posted on 2/15/17 at 12:38 pm to lsufball19
quote:I don't know. I can tell you that over his 10 year prime, he ranked outside the top 20 in OPS, behind guys like Alvin Davis and Brian Downing. And he was the second best hitter on his own team, behind Eddie Murray.
what was his average finish in OPS?
quote:There aren't many. 10 is probably a pretty good number. Maybe 15. Most teams don't have one.
So there are only 10 elite hitters in all of baseball?
quote:
So in nearly 150 years of the sport, finishing in the top 200ish hitters in OPS all time is just average?
OPS+. Did you miss the part where I wrote he ranks 613th alltime in OPS+? Come on, man. He's 207th if you compare his best consecutive 10 years (i.e. his prime) against everyone else's entire career (including their decline years, but not including his). And that would certainly not be exceptional if he were a first baseman. For reference, his career OPS+ is tied with Tino Martinez.
quote:
How mahy of those top 200 in career OPS have played since the 1990s? Do we just discount all other eras of baseball because the advanced metrics of baseball now devalue the value of players 30+ years ago? I can assure you there were plenty of elite hitters of any given era that, statistically speaking, wouldn't appear to be compared to players playing today. That doesn't mean they weren't elite hitters while they were playing.
I honestly hate (and this goes for all sports) when people compare career numbers for players across a wide range of eras to "prove" player A was better than player B.
Do you not know what OPS+ is? It is relative to your league's averages.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News