In Response to Re: WHERE DOES JETER RANK AMONGST HIS PEERS IN THE 3000 HIT CLUB?
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WHERE DOES JETER RANK AMONGST HIS PEERS IN THE 3000 HIT CLUB? : Sorry 571, but this is one of the few times I disagree. While I was a big Yaz fan, even Bob Ryan (which surprised me) and some RS posters here said Jeter was better than Yaz (who had his own ballpark advantages, and BOTH had to deal with a tough power pull field). While I'm not ready to conclude that, and while I'm aware of Jeter's range limitations defensively, there are things he does on the field that are absolutely fabulous (for example, an overlooked facet; his supreme ability on the relay; remember that play in the '99 PS vs the RS? Also, let's not forget the flip play vs Oak); and while Yaz won 7 GGs, Jeter won 5, spurious or not, plus he has 5 Rings, largely in part to him and his impressive PS stats, while Yaz has none. Also, his seasons in '97 and '09 were off the charts; I would find it surprising if he wasn't the best SS in those yrs (Perhaps ARod in '97). And, while normalized stats are a helpful metric, they are not the be all and end all; raw stats still do count for something. Finally, while he's not Ruth, Williams, etc, to call him Very Good is mind boggling ridiculous; it can be argued, for example that Ripken (with his .270-ish lifetime BA, in a similar era) was a compiler who was only very good, but not Jeter, who yes, is a compiler (and Yaz wasn't?), but a great one (who had a .317 BA entering 2010; higher than Mays/.302 & Aaron/.305, although admittedly in a different era); ditto Molitor & Murray. Finally, this needs to be viewed in the context of the SS position; several surveys has him ranked in the top 5, and have him as the #6 or 7 Yankee.
Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]
I can absolutely respect if you want to disagree on this, but I certainly would like to see a little more hard evidence. I'll address your points:
-I don't care what Bob Ryan thinks...everyone can be right or wrong. Arguments stand on their own or they don't independent of who makes them
-Yaz did have a ballpark advantage too, which is why OPS+ is so nice, as it includes that. Also, while both ballparks were tough pull parks for each hitter, Jeter didn't pull for power
...few players have ever been more perfectly matched with the ballpark they played in. I have zero doubt that Jeter benefitted more from his ballpark than Yaz did from his
-The "little things" Jeter does on the field have been and always will be overrated. He even admitted his "flip play" was something the entire team had practiced before, so it's not like it was the result of some above and beyond type of instinct. Until someone can actually make some attempt at measuring what Jeter added through this, it doesn't give him any special credit (and I would bet if it could be quantified that we'd all be surprised that Jeter wasn't even all that special in those areas)
-At this point, it's beyond silly to even tentatively present that Jeter was anything more than an average fielder. His range was crap, but he helped offset that some with a good arm, lack of mistake, and some good hustle plays. But range is still by far the most important aspect of playing SS...after all, your fielding percentage on every ball you don't get to is always .000
-Jeter earned, at most, 1 GG. He can thank the NY media for the rest
-Normalized stats are absolutely not the be all, end all, and in fact I'd be first in line to question the absolute precision of stats like OPS+. But are you honestly prepared to say the error range for OPS+ makes up the huge gap between Jeter and Yaz? I've always felt you can question metrics, but the clearer the result, the more certain you can be in its relative truth
-Likewise, raw stats taken alone mean absolutely nothing. Everything is relative...the only reason raw stats are ever used for anything is because the average baseball fan has a strong enough understanding of the "adjustments" that need to be made that they know how the numbers properly compare. At least, I used to think so, before people started propping Jeter up to Yaz's level...
-Ripken had plenty of compiling too...again, I didn't say compiling is BAD (as most people use it), but the issue with Jeter is that he's ONLY a compiler...Ripken was awesome at his peak...of course, since so much of his career came in the '80s, his perception suffers along with the rest of the poor buggers who played then. As I already showed, Yaz played half this career as among the best in the game, then aged and settled into a Jeter level compiler AFTERWARD
, this is not meant to insult or criticize Jeter...I'm only stating the facts. For his career, Jeter is without a doubt a HOFer AND one of the best SS's ever...largely because most of the SS hitters at or above Jeter's level had nowhere near the bulk career Jeter had (*cough* Nomar Garciaparra *cough*). But this thread didn't ask about Jeter the HOFer...it asked to place Jeter among the 3000 hit club. The thing about the 3000 hit club is it's full of great, great players, and a few where were very good for a long enough time. Derek Jeter, a man who had every advantage you could ask for as a hitter, who was a hits specialist, is "only" just getting to 3000 hits at age 37, and likely with only a few years left on his career. Many of the other members of the club were not on great team, didn't play in great ballparks, offered other offensive advantages (power being the biggest)...he's a worthy member of the club, and worthy member of The Hall...but Yankee fans, as is always the case, don't want to settle for "HOF SS". They want, they NEED, him to be the best ever, and will do whatever they can to make him such.
To properly investigate an issue like this, you chose the proper criteria, see how the chips fall, and then analyze...Yankee fans WANT to paint Jeter as the best ever, so they adjust the criteria being analyzed until it "shows" that he is.
News flash: he isn't. And I don't blame people from hearing so many tainted and biased arguments from the NY media and fans that they've started buying into them...it's only natural. But it doesn't make it right.
When I heard someone on NY talk radio say that Jeter was possibly better than Yaz, I set out NOT to prove them wrong, but to see if it were true or not. Knowing that they played in completely different eras, I set the criteria first...OPS+ will get me started quite easily. It's a quick and dirty way to compare players from different eras. If Jeter had had a higher career OPS+, that wouldn't be the end of the argument (largely because Yaz's career OPS+ is lower than it should be, given that he played for so long, whereas Jeter's career isn't done yet), but at that point I'd have to be ready to conceed the point. But I was actually surprised to find that Yaz was not only better than Jeter in the stat, but was actually WAAAAAY better...undeniably better. Without having to factor ANYTHING else in, almost all of which would likely prove to Yaz's advantage, it's already clear that Yaz was at least a step above Jeter. Hence my conclusion...not because I set out to prove Yaz was better, but because the criteria clearly says he is.
If you want to question the criteria chosen, be my guest, but I have a very hard time seeing how that bridge can be gapped. I'll give you one hint though: doing so has NOTHING to do with rings. My god, using team accomplishments to judge individual players...the NY media has won another victory...