PDA

View Full Version : Ozzie Said Roberto Clemente THIRD Greatest Puerto Rican Player Ever


Viva Medias B's
04-06-2008, 09:56 PM
As many of you saw, Ozzie Guillen told Joe Morgan that he believes Roberto Clemente was the third greatest Puerto Rican player ever. Ozzie believes that Ivan Rodriguez and Roberto Alomar were greater than Clemente. Do you agree or disagree?

WhiteSox5187
04-06-2008, 10:07 PM
Clemente was waaaay before my time, but that's a hard arguement to make based on the high lights I've seen. Roberto Alomar is one of the, if not the, best second basemen I have seen in my life time and I'm hard pressed to name many that were better than him (Nellie Fox comes to mind right away...maybe Bill Mazeroski? Never saw him play though...oh! Ryne Sandberg)...Ivan Rodriguez is a great great catcher, but I certainly think he had some "assistance" from outside sources with Texas. So that takes away a lot of points from him in my book. Even though I was only six when Fisk was forced to retire, I don't think I've seen a better catcher in my lifetime outside of the one true Pudge.

jabrch
04-06-2008, 10:15 PM
What I love most about Ozzie is that right or wrong, he doesn't give a damn what anyone thinks about what he says of does. As with many opinions, you can make an arguement to defend them. This one is a reach...at best...and I think the ESPN crew did a really good job discussing it, giving time to Guillen's arguement, but then expressing their opinions and backing them with reasonable fact.

Truth is, all three are great ballplayers - no team would have been hurting with any of them at their best.

Grzegorz
04-06-2008, 10:22 PM
An opinion is an opinion...

For the record I vehemently disagree with him.

jabrch
04-06-2008, 11:12 PM
An opinion is an opinion...

For the record I vehemently disagree with him.

That's very well said.

Let's put it this way - if there was a draft today, and you could have any one of those 3 guys, in their prime, with no steroids, I can't envision taking anyone but Clemente.

FedEx227
04-06-2008, 11:29 PM
He's entitled to his opinion, unfortunately it's wrong. Very, very, very wrong.

Not taking anything away from Pudge or Roberto.. but Clemente is in another category over them.

Lip Man 1
04-07-2008, 12:07 AM
Clemente was the finest all around outfielder I've ever seen play and I'm including Mantle, Mays and Aaron.

No disrespect to Rodriguez or Alomar but Clemente was in a class by himself.

Lip

ksimpson14
04-07-2008, 12:35 AM
I wouldn't say below Rodriguez. I never saw Clemente play so I don't feel right trying to compare him with Alomar.

Wasn't it Ozzie who was obsessed with Clemente? Like dedicating a room/shrine to him? Tearing up when there was a pregame celebration in his honor?

goon
04-07-2008, 12:43 AM
Never saw Clemente play, but Ivan was a pretty amazing catcher. Great bat, even better defense, not too many catchers better than him, Johnny Bench, but I can't think of anyone else.

FedEx227
04-07-2008, 12:48 AM
Never saw Clemente play, but Ivan was a pretty amazing catcher. Great bat, even better defense, not too many catchers better than him, Johnny Bench, but I can't think of anyone else.

Oh no doubt, but as Lip and I said. Pudge and Clemente are almost incomparable, they are two different worlds.

WhiteSox5187
04-07-2008, 01:12 AM
Never saw Clemente play, but Ivan was a pretty amazing catcher. Great bat, even better defense, not too many catchers better than him, Johnny Bench, but I can't think of anyone else.

What about Carlton Fisk????

TDog
04-07-2008, 01:50 AM
Clemente was the finest all around outfielder I've ever seen play and I'm including Mantle, Mays and Aaron.

No disrespect to Rodriguez or Alomar but Clemente was in a class by himself.

Lip

I have to agree. I have never seen a hitter punish a baseball the way Clemente did. I've never seen a better rightfielder. I've never see a stronger and more accurate throwing arm.

I don't think any Rodriguez or Alomar stacks up to Clemente. But that's just my opinion.

harwar
04-07-2008, 04:40 AM
My dad used to drag me over to Wrigley just when he came to town.His favorite ballplayer became mine and i still think he's the best outfielder i have ever seen play.
Infielders and outfielders can look at things differently sometimes.If Ozzie had played in the outfield i have a feeling that his opinion might have been different.
just my opinion ..

LITTLE NELL
04-07-2008, 05:14 AM
Ive seen the whole careers of all 3, Ozzie you are wrong on this one. Lets put it this way; if I was starting a franchise and had my pick of any player it would be hard to pass up Clemente. He had all 5 attributes of a super star; Hit--- Hit with Power---Run---Field---- and Throw.

Over By There
04-07-2008, 08:24 AM
Wasn't it Ozzie who was obsessed with Clemente? Like dedicating a room/shrine to him? Tearing up when there was a pregame celebration in his honor?

On the game broadcast last night they mentioned that Ozzie carries a Clemente baseball card around in his wallet next to a picture of his family, so his opinion is certainly not out of disrespect.

champagne030
04-07-2008, 08:32 AM
This may help explain some lineup decisions.

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 09:18 AM
Alomar was a wonderful 2B, but tailed off immensely at the end of his career.

I-Roid was a fine defensive catcher, but by all accounts called a ****ty, selfish game, and was nowhere near the best catcher of all time.

Clemente could very easily be considered the best defensive RF of all time, and was certainly one of the better hitting ones. He died with plenty of years left and already had 3,000 hits.

I don't know what Ozzie's smoking.

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 09:20 AM
Just for kicks---Ivan has more stolen bases, home runs and has completely shut down the opponents running game.'

Consider the era the two played in.

I-rod: Juiced ball era pt. deux (in fact, he never had more than 16 HR in a single season until the Sammy/McGwire HR spree year of 1996)

Clemente: The years of the raised mound and widened strike zone.

Save McCuddy's
04-07-2008, 09:21 AM
Clemente was the finest all around outfielder I've ever seen play and I'm including Mantle, Mays and Aaron.

No disrespect to Rodriguez or Alomar but Clemente was in a class by himself.

Lip

If Clemente were a better all around outfielder than Mantle or Mays, he'd have played center. I can't claim to have seen Roberto anywhere other than rain delay theater which was awesome, but when you look at the numbers the legend of Clemente far outweighs the raw data. He appears to have been a fantastic outfielder and great hitter for average but he's definitely not Mantle, Mays or Aaron as an offensive force. This is the problem with discussing Clemente. The persona is always greater than the

Not sure if Ozzie is right or anywhere close, but Alomar, Clemente and Pudge are hall of famers so the discussion isn't completely without merit.

russ99
04-07-2008, 09:24 AM
Unfortunately, Clemente passed on before I became old enough to be a huge baseball fan (75-76ish), so I didn't get to see him play, but what I've heard, he was second only in his era to Ted Williams in his prowess as a hitter.

Though I'd have to see how history treats Alomar and Rodriguez moving forward. In his prime, Roberto Alomar has to be considered one of the greats, but he faded a little early.

As far as Pudge, I guess there's a possibility that the steroid era may cloud his eventual status as an all-time great. Not to say there's evidence that he used or not...

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 09:27 AM
If Clemente were a better all around outfielder than Mantle or Mays, he'd have played center. I can't claim to have seen Roberto anywhere other than rain delay theater which was awesome, but when you look at the numbers the legend of Clemente far outweighs the raw data. He appears to have been a fantastic outfielder and great hitter for average but he's definitely not Mantle, Mays or Aaron as an offensive force. This is the problem with discussing Clemente. The persona is always greater than the

Not sure if Ozzie is right or anywhere close, but Alomar, Clemente and Pudge are hall of famers so the discussion isn't completely without merit.

well...Bill James and Rob Neyer agree that Clemente is one of the greatest defensive CF's ever to play the game...so it's not all about his "persona" or his "mystique"...

russ99
04-07-2008, 09:32 AM
well...Bill James and Rob Neyer agree that Clemente is one of the greatest defensive CF's ever to play the game...so it's not all about his "persona" or his "mystique"...

I guess the point is that we didn't get to see him get old and decline. Since he was taken away from us at a point where he was still producing at a top level, he's seen in a brighter light than some players we watched fall apart at the end.

doublem23
04-07-2008, 09:34 AM
well...Bill James and Rob Neyer agree that Clemente is one of the greatest defensive CF's ever to play the game...so it's not all about his "persona" or his "mystique"...

That's pretty amazing since he played over 90% of his career in RF.

Jurr
04-07-2008, 10:05 AM
This statement was most likely made due to the fact that Ozzie didn't have a long term personal relationship with Clemente. It's an understandable bias, but WAAAAYYYY off.

Jurr
04-07-2008, 10:07 AM
That's pretty amazing since he played over 90% of his career in RF.
Good call. :cool:

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 10:20 AM
That's pretty amazing since he played over 90% of his career in RF.

OOPS!!!!

I meant OF:redface::redface::redface::redface:

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 10:21 AM
I guess the point is that we didn't get to see him get old and decline. Since he was taken away from us at a point where he was still producing at a top level, he's seen in a brighter light than some players we watched fall apart at the end.

I guess...but he WAS 37 when he died...so....I mean...although he could have added to his total with 2-3 years, it was likely he would have been done sooner than later

Elephant
04-07-2008, 10:33 AM
If Clemente were a better all around outfielder than Mantle or Mays, he'd have played center. I can't claim to have seen Roberto anywhere other than rain delay theater which was awesome, but when you look at the numbers the legend of Clemente far outweighs the raw data. He appears to have been a fantastic outfielder and great hitter for average but he's definitely not Mantle, Mays or Aaron as an offensive force. This is the problem with discussing Clemente. The persona is always greater than the


Not sure if Ozzie is right or anywhere close, but Alomar, Clemente and Pudge are hall of famers so the discussion isn't completely without merit.

That's not necessarily true. Clemente's arm was so great that it would be wasting it to put him anywhere else. Kind of the same deal with Ichiro.

Alomar is one of the best 2B ever. All three players were five tool guys and are hall of famers. Rodriquez might have very well cheated to gain his power numbers and Alomar became very mediocre in his later years.

goon
04-07-2008, 10:47 AM
What about Carlton Fisk????

I respect Carlton a lot, but Ivan was better. Unless we want to get into the whole steroid thing...

Edit: You know what, it really is hard to compare players from different eras. I'll put Carlton in there, I think you could even go the route of Josh Gibson though he never played in MLB and none of us saw him play, but going off what I've read and statistics, a pretty amazing player.

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 10:52 AM
I respect Carlton a lot, but Ivan was better. Unless we want to get into the whole steroid thing...

Debatable at best.

Offensively, Fisk was probably better than or equal to Rodriguez. Fisk had a higher career OPS+, and had similar per-season #'s for RBI, HR, and SB (not that that should matter all that much).

On defense, Rodriguez may have had a better arm(a very debatable claim), but Fisk was by far the better catcher at fielding his position and calling games. Just to mention one deficiency: Pitchers complained about Rodriguez calling too many fastballs on SB counts to inflate his CS #'s. This is not just an isolated Brett Tomko-like incident. Tons of Rangers pitchers have leveled this complaint against Rodriguez.

At any rate, Berra and Bench blow Rodriguez away

BainesHOF
04-07-2008, 10:56 AM
I'm 41. Alomar is the best second baseman I've seen by a wide margin. He's light years ahead of Joe Morgan and Ryne Sandburg in my opinion. Alomar could be the best second baseman ever to play the game.

goon
04-07-2008, 11:09 AM
Debatable at best.

Offensively, Fisk was probably better than or equal to Rodriguez. Fisk had a higher career OPS+, and had similar per-season #'s for RBI, HR, and SB (not that that should matter all that much).

On defense, Rodriguez may have had a better arm(a very debatable claim), but Fisk was by far the better catcher at fielding his position and calling games. Just to mention one deficiency: Pitchers complained about Rodriguez calling too many fastballs on SB counts to inflate his CS #'s. This is not just an isolated Brett Tomko-like incident. Tons of Rangers pitchers have leveled this complaint against Rodriguez.

At any rate, Berra and Bench blow Rodriguez away

Eh, I mean then your getting into the whole "baseball intelligence" vs. talent argument which are two completely different things. Yes, a catcher's main focus should be handling the pitching staff, but since I was only really alive to see Carlton's last few years with the Sox and even then, was a little to young to evaluate on how well he called a game, I'm gonna have to go with your assessment.

I will say this though, Ivan Rodriguez's accomplishments are EXTREMELY impressive. The 1999 AL MVP, 11 All Star appearances, 6 Silver Sluggers, 13 GG Awards (GG is kinda lame though), a career .302 hitter, 1 World Series ring... not too mention maybe the best arm behind the plate since Bench. I haven't seen too many clips of Carlton's but I bet Ivan's was better, I can't imagine it being any worse. I also don't really buy that he was a sloppy fielder, anytime I watched him he seemed more than adequate. It's hard to compare him to Fisk who played the best years of his career in a different era, but Ivan was something special.

Edit: And I agree, Johnny Bench was better, as I said before. I don't know how I forgot about Yogi, but throw him in there, too.

Gary Carter was pretty good, too.

Paulwny
04-07-2008, 12:22 PM
Bench > IRod
Alomar > Mazerowski
Clemente -- no one better in rf

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 01:02 PM
Bench > IRod
Alomar > Mazerowski
Clemente -- no one better in rf

Joe Morgan would be the one to put at second since defensively Maz>>>Alomar and offensively Alomar>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mazeroski

Paulwny
04-07-2008, 01:18 PM
Joe Morgan would be the one to put at second since defensively Maz>>>Alomar and offensively Alomar>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mazeroski

I think Alomar had a wider fielding range than either Maz or Morgan.

Billy Ashley
04-07-2008, 01:35 PM
Some names mentioned in this thread:

Ivan:
Career WARP3: 119.6
OPS+: 111

Stupid other crap: 14 time All Star, 1 MVP (Pedro was robbed), 13 Gold Gloves, 7 Silver Sluggers

----------

Fisk:
Warp 3: 112
OPS+: 117
Other crap: 11 time All Star, ROY, 1 Gold Glove, 3 time silver slugger.

Fisk was a tremendous player, but if you take steroids out of the conversation, Rodriquez was slightly better. Both are on the short list for greatest living catcher, that’s not too bad.
----------

Clemente:

Warp 3: 128. 8
OPS+ : 130
Other crap: 15 time All Star, 1 MVP, 12 time gold glove winner
What always amazes me about Clemente was that unlike most other truly great players he was a well below average hitter until he turned 25. He pretty much went from Aaron Rowand to Gary Sheffield. He died at 37, so he likely could have added 1-3 more seasons to his counting stats.
--------


Alomar:
Warp3: 134.1
OPS+: 116
Other crap: 12 time All Star, 10 gold gloves, 4 silver sluggers
Alomar’s defense was unreal. Take for instance that he posted all star level WARP 3s in seasons in which he was only average with the bat. Sick sick second basemen.

I’d rank them: Alomar, Clemente (so close that there’s very little distinction) followed by a wide margin by Ivan Rodriquez and Carlton Fisk. It should be noted that all these players are among the best ever at their respected positions.

* and if someone wanted to argue that Clemente should have overtaken Alomar if not for his trajic death I could understand that. Clemente was still a well above average player when he died.

fquaye149
04-07-2008, 02:06 PM
I think Alomar had a wider fielding range than either Maz or Morgan.

Well, Neyer and James both claim Mazeroski to be the best fielding 2B of all time....so there's that. Me personally, I don't have the numbers nor the means to make an argument either way

SI1020
04-07-2008, 02:07 PM
He's entitled to his opinion, unfortunately it's wrong. Very, very, very wrong.

Ozzie is often very wrong.

asindc
04-07-2008, 04:20 PM
That's very well said.

Let's put it this way - if there was a draft today, and you could have any one of those 3 guys, in their prime, with no steroids, I can't envision taking anyone but Clemente.

This pretty much sums it up for me. In fact, Clemente is still the best player I've seen in my lifetime (for the record, I started watching baseball in the late 60s).

santo=dorf
04-07-2008, 04:26 PM
What I love most about Ozzie is that right or wrong, he doesn't give a damn what anyone thinks about what he says of does. As with many opinions, you can make an arguement to defend them. This one is a reach...at best...and I think the ESPN crew did a really good job discussing it, giving time to Guillen's arguement, but then expressing their opinions and backing them with reasonable fact.

Truth is, all three are great ballplayers - no team would have been hurting with any of them at their best.
Why am I not suprise with this response? I bet you would be saying the exact same thing if Ozzie call Clemente a "British cigarette."


Ozzie is wrong.

Lip Man 1
04-07-2008, 07:10 PM
Fquaye:

Maz very well could have been the best fielding 2nd baseman ever. Had a chance to meet and interview him in the mid 80's. His son played second at Northeast Louisiana. Maz did something I've never seen any other player ever do or attempt to do. On a double play pivot he'd take the relay from the shortstop and catch it on the outside of his glove. He'd cradle it between the flat outside surface and his hand and then make the throw to first. It saved split seconds with him not having to take the ball out of his mit. Simply amazing.

Hose:

Clemente was faster and a better base runner then Aaron and Mantle (although in Mickey's defense he never had the chance to really run anymore after he tore up his knee stepping in a drainage hole in Yankee Stadium...)

And his arm was by far better then any other of the Superstar outfielders of that decade. I saw him at Wrigley (I was watching in 71 I think) take a ball off the deepest part of the wall near the right field foul line and throw an absolute strike to 3rd base to get the runner easily. An incredible throw from the deepest part of the park and it was on a line, very little arc to it.

Lip

Billy Ashley
04-07-2008, 07:44 PM
Mantle Career Warp 3: 149.3
Mays Career warp 3: 200.9

I adore Clemente but he wasn't as good as Mantle who was a superstar at a younger age and better during his peak than Clemente. Mays on the other hand may be the best over all time.

Lip Man 1
04-07-2008, 08:50 PM
Hose:

I'm simply saying what I saw, and I saw them all. Clemente never made a mistake on the bases. This is a case (and I'm not coming down on you for it) where stats are misleading (again).

In stolen bases for example, Pittsburgh wasn't much of a running club in the 60's and early 70's (until Chuck Tanner got there later in the decade) they were a power type team, so I'd imagine Roberto never really got the go ahead to run much.

So much about stolen bases for example depends of the team (or manager's) philosophy. It's not as cut and dried as the numbers make it out to be.

Clemente's career was cut short by a few years which also has to be factored. Mantle as well (and I met Mickey and liked him) had the benefit of playing half his games in Yankee Stadium with an obscenely short right field porch which distorted numbers like home run's, and OBP when he was hitting left handed.

And defensively Clemente was superior to Mantle and Aaron, only Mays was his equal and he didn't have anywhere near the arm strength.

Lip

Lip Man 1
04-07-2008, 08:54 PM
Billy:

I have no idea what "warp three" is outside of Star Trek and not to put to fine a point on it, I don't want to know what it is.

This is baseball, not theoretical physics, advanced algebra or quantum mechanics. The stat-geeks need to stay in their basement's.

Lip

Billy Ashley
04-07-2008, 08:57 PM
Billy:

I have no idea what "warp three" is outside of Star Trek and not to put to fine a point on it, I don't want to know what it is.

This is baseball, not theoretical physics, advanced algebra or quantum mechanics. The state-geeks need to stay in their basement's.

Lip


Who is to say that I'm not in my basement? :D:

That said, I only used WARP 3 because that removes the impact of a ball park and factors defense into the equation.

I admire your love of Clemente and wish I could have seen him play. That said, he's likely "only" one of the top 30 position players of all time while Mantle and Mays are in the top ten. Mays maybe number 1. (I wouldn't make that case, but it can be made well)

additionally, it's always great to be called a nerd by someone who references Star Trek... I must be the nerdest nerd who ever nerded.

JoeClutch24
04-07-2008, 09:15 PM
1)Alomar
2)Clemente
3)Pudge

Viva Medias B's
04-07-2008, 10:43 PM
"Titulares y Más" on Telemundo is talking about this, but I do not know what they are saying.

Lip Man 1
04-07-2008, 10:50 PM
Gee Hose the way you're trotting out all these "stats" you'd think Clemente was some second rate outfielder akin to oh, Nyls Nyman.

That's for proving my point about stats being misleading.

Lip

Billy Ashley
04-07-2008, 11:05 PM
Gee Hose the way you're trotting out all these "stats" you'd think Clemente was some second rate outfielder akin to oh, Nyls Nyman.

That's for proving my point about stats being misleading.

Lip

1st of all, those stats hose used are worthless.

2nd of all, most MVP winners are borderline Hall of Fame or enshrined. I don't see how belittling can make a case for Clemente. He was one of the best OF to ever play, but Mantle and Mays were better.

How is that a slight against Clemente? Gee Stan Musial was good, but he was no Babe Ruth... I guess that means we can't celebrate Musial career.

HomeFish
04-07-2008, 11:07 PM
I think Lip is placing a lot more value on defense than you guys are.

Billy Ashley
04-07-2008, 11:11 PM
more stats Lip

HR's
Hank- 755
Mays- 660
Mantle- 536
Clemente- 240

Am I missing something here?''

Or more neutral measures:

Hank Aaron: OPS+ 155
Mays: OPS+ 156
Mantle: OPS+ 172
Clemente: OPS+ 130

Look at these players most similar comps according to baseball reference. Clemente compares to greats like Tony Gwynn, Enos Slaughter and other Hall of Famers. Those other guys compare to Ted Williams, Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds.

Billy Ashley
04-07-2008, 11:16 PM
I think Lip is placing a lot more value on defense than you guys are.

Defense matters a whole lot, but it's not as if Mays, Mantle and Aaron were there eras versions of Manny Ramirez or Miguel Cabrera. These were excellent fielders who also happened to hit significantly better than Clemente.

Again, Clemente is likely one of the best RFs to ever play the game. Mays, Mantle and Aaron are just as good and if not better though. Stats that take defense into account show that (Warp 3) stats that eliminate ball park factors do that (OPS+).

Roberto Clemente was an OK hitter until he turned 26. At 26 he became stellar. He had always been a fantastic fielder and with the addition of the bat, became something even more special. His career was cut short by an accident that was a result of him being a damn fine human being. However, even if he continued to play at the same level his career offensive statistics would not approach those other players named.

Clemente, wonderful human being and a deserving hall of famer. Best ever, not close.

Billy Ashley
04-07-2008, 11:21 PM
Barry Bonds-----take cover Ashley , you just opened up a hornets nest.:duck:

I'm taking my useless stats and getting out of here.:cool:

Say what you will about Bonds but those statistics are hard to argue with. Did he cheat? Of course so. Still doesn't change the fact that I wouldn't mind having my stats compare favorably with a guy who's career looks like one had on my playstation.

Regarding the worthless comment, forgive me if it sounds harsh but FP% means very little and MVP voters have a history of being wrong almost as often as they are right. Check out Ted Williams' career or Albert Belle vs Mo Vaughn back in the 90's. Pedro vs Ivan when Martinez had perhaps the greatest season ever by a pitcher. Or A-Rod vs Tejada.

jabrch
04-07-2008, 11:41 PM
Say what you will about Bonds

Ok - I will.

He is a CHEATER. He doesn't belong in that list of players you mentioned.

http://www.blackstate.com/images/barrybonds.jpg

monkeypants
04-08-2008, 01:01 AM
Before my dad died, I remember asking him who was the greatest player he had seen in his lifetime. Without much hesitation he said Mays and Clemente were at the top of his list and he couldn't decide between the two. He mentioned how both of them were so good at everything they did, as if they were near perfect ballplayers. He had such a high regard for #21 that it is one of the many reasons why Pittsburgh is my second favorite team. Also keep in mind that Clemente played in Forbes Field the majority of the time which had enormous outfield dimensions. One of the reasons why Clemente and Stargell didn't have as high of home run numbers as they could have was because of their home park during their peak performing years.

While Alomar and IRod are the best second baseman and catcher respectively that I have seen since I've been alive, I'm going to take my dad's opinion on Clemente and say he is the best.

Mohoney
04-08-2008, 04:30 AM
Maybe Ozzie said this because he instinctively would consider IF defense to be a higher priority than OF defense? Maybe he said it because he was a contemporary of Alomar and Rodriguez and actually competed against them? Maybe he wants more power out of RF than Clemente had?

fquaye149
04-08-2008, 07:08 AM
Fquaye:

Maz very well could have been the best fielding 2nd baseman ever. Had a chance to meet and interview him in the mid 80's. His son played second at Northeast Louisiana. Maz did something I've never seen any other player ever do or attempt to do. On a double play pivot he'd take the relay from the shortstop and catch it on the outside of his glove. He'd cradle it between the flat outside surface and his hand and then make the throw to first. It saved split seconds with him not having to take the ball out of his mit. Simply amazing.



Didn't Ozzie Smith used to do that? I remember when my high school ball team was warming up, we would sometimes **** around, trying to catch the ball on the outside of our glove, and we would say it was "The Ozzie Smith" move.

That's cool to know Maz pprobably started that

asindc
04-08-2008, 10:31 AM
I'm curious to why you say Clemente is the best player you have ever seen. I've been watching baseball from the late 60's also.

What exactly did Clemente have over Mays, Aaron, and Mantle ? ( ...just to name 3 guys off the top of my head that were in his era.)

I'm not trying to be a wiseass or snarky but I would really like you to elaborate on your comment.

All three guys you mentioned were past their primes by the time I started watching baseball. Aaron was still very good, of course, but by the late 60s, Clemente was better than all of them.

When I said he was the best I have seen, I mean the best I have seen play live, whether watching live on TV or actually at a game. Historical game footage does not factor into my assessment in this case.

Lip Man 1
04-08-2008, 12:34 PM
Billy:

I think something is getting lost in the translation here. I never said Clemente was the best player ever, I do think he was by far, better then Rodriguez or Alomar coming from his country.

I'm disagreeing with Ozzie's point, not trying to claim he was the "best" ever.

Clemente was one of the finest outfielders to ever play MLB no question. Best ever? That's up to the eye of the beholder.

Lip

Billy Ashley
04-08-2008, 10:13 PM
Billy:

I think something is getting lost in the translation here. I never said Clemente was the best player ever, I do think he was by far, better then Rodriguez or Alomar coming from his country.

I'm disagreeing with Ozzie's point, not trying to claim he was the "best" ever.

Clemente was one of the finest outfielders to ever play MLB no question. Best ever? That's up to the eye of the beholder.

Lip


My bad if I made any comments about you saying that... someone brought up Mantle Mays and the rest.... I must have gotten confused and thought it was you.

Clemente very well may be the best PR ever, I think I value Alomar a tad more than you but Clemente was just as good.

the1tab
04-08-2008, 10:24 PM
Lip I was responding to Asindc's comments about Clemente being the best ever he saw because both of started watching baseball at about the same time.

I would love to see a thread on something like DiMaggio or Williams, Mays or Mantle, Koufax or Randy Johnson, Vizquel or Smith, Alomar or Joe Morgan.

It's all good !!!

If there was a thread involving Joe Morgan, he would find his way on here and spend the next 6 days telling us how good he was and how great the Reds were back in the day. He makes my ears cry on nationally televised games.

In the same ways that my father cries about Mickey Mantle not being able to stay healthy and fulfill his incredible promise, it pains me to think that Ken Griffey Jr's legs may have robbed us of the finest, smoothest player the game may have ever seen.

ode to veeck
04-09-2008, 09:22 AM
An opinion is an opinion...

For the record I vehemently disagree with him.

I 2nd this opinion. Roberto Clemente had the greatest OF arm I ever saw; he regularly threw several players out at multiple bases in a single game, invariably a perfect strike to precisely thespot to make the tag. It was only one of his many outstanding skills.

ode to veeck
04-09-2008, 09:32 AM
I guess the point is that we didn't get to see him get old and decline. Since he was taken away from us at a point where he was still producing at a top level, he's seen in a brighter light than some players we watched fall apart at the end.

he was 38 when he died and still hitting over .300 legging out tons of 2 and even 3 baggers, with no signs of slowing, he would have likely continued similar numbers for at least a few more years

ode to veeck
04-09-2008, 09:38 AM
MVP:

Mantle
3 MVP's
3 #2 finishes
1 #3 finish
.985 lifetime fielding

Mays
2 MVP's
2 #2 finishes
2 #3 finishes
.981 lifetime fielding

Hank
1 MVP
6 #3 finishes
.982 lifetime fielding

Clemente
1 MVP
1 #3 finish
.972 lifetime fielding

A perfect example of how sabremetricians just totally miss the sport of baseball. You'd think they don't even see the game even when they're watching it.

JorgeFabregas
04-09-2008, 09:47 AM
A perfect example of how sabremetricians just totally miss the sport of baseball. You'd think they don't even see the game even when they're watching it.
What does that post have to do with sabremetrics?

Billy Ashley
04-09-2008, 10:03 AM
A perfect example of how sabremetricians just totally miss the sport of baseball. You'd think they don't even see the game even when they're watching it.

Actually saber people don't vote for the MVP or ALL star.... if they did, you'd likely see a lot of different MVP's over the course of baseball history.


I've been on a lot of boards for a lot of different teams and this one has by far the most incorrect comments. It makes NYYfans look like a thinktank at times.

Crash_Davis
04-09-2008, 10:23 AM
If there was a thread involving Joe Morgan, he would find his way on here and spend the next 6 days telling us how good he was and how great the Reds were back in the day. He makes my ears cry on nationally televised games.

In the same ways that my father cries about Mickey Mantle not being able to stay healthy and fulfill his incredible promise, it pains me to think that Ken Griffey Jr's legs may have robbed us of the finest, smoothest player the game may have ever seen.

No kidding everything Griffey did looked effortless out there, minus the injury he probably would of been closing in on 3000/700 this year.

ode to veeck
04-09-2008, 12:10 PM
What does that post have to do with sabremetrics?

you included the fielding percentage and didn't give much else just partial of mvp info so it was at least 50% of what you were trying to say

Billy Ashley
04-09-2008, 12:20 PM
you included the fielding percentage and didn't give much else just partial of mvp info so it was at least 50% of what you were trying to say

People into sabermetrics hate using fielding percentage... good god... why don't we attack something with out bothering to understand it a bit more shall we?

Here is a quick primer:

Saber people don't usually look at the following:

MVPs
Gold Gloves
Fielding percentage
RBIs
Wins
The stillness behind Joe Crede's eyes in a big at bat
Cy Youngs

Some stuff they do look at:

Warp
Vorp
BABIP
bell shaped curves
Computer screens
OPS+
ERA+
Run differntial
math

JorgeFabregas
04-09-2008, 03:09 PM
you included the fielding percentage and didn't give much else just partial of mvp info so it was at least 50% of what you were trying to say
In fact, I didn't do anything of the sort as it was not my post.

jabrch
04-09-2008, 03:17 PM
You can not ever use numbers to quantify "who is the better player" because there is no single number that can tell you that. I can tell you who hit more HRs. I can tell you who hit more HR per PA. I can tell you who drove in more runs, who drove in a higher % of their runs with RISP. I can tell you who had more OF assists. I can tell you a lot of things.

But you can absolutely not tell me that there is any way to prove via statistics that Alomar was "better" than Clemente or that Clemente was "better" than Alomar. It's just not doable. It is opinion - and it is subjective.

I respect Guillen's right to have an opinion - even though I disagree with him. If we had the opportunity to have any of those players, in their primes, the choice would be simple for me - Clemente. That said, I could build quite nicely around a young Robbie Alomar or a roided up Ivan Rodriguez.

JorgeFabregas
04-09-2008, 03:37 PM
Not ever? You can't use statistics to conclusively demonstrate that Roberto Alomar was a better player than Paco Martin?

fquaye149
04-09-2008, 04:31 PM
You can not ever use numbers to quantify "who is the better player" because there is no single number that can tell you that. I can tell you who hit more HRs. I can tell you who hit more HR per PA. I can tell you who drove in more runs, who drove in a higher % of their runs with RISP. I can tell you who had more OF assists. I can tell you a lot of things.

But you can absolutely not tell me that there is any way to prove via statistics that Alomar was "better" than Clemente or that Clemente was "better" than Alomar. It's just not doable. It is opinion - and it is subjective.

I respect Guillen's right to have an opinion - even though I disagree with him. If we had the opportunity to have any of those players, in their primes, the choice would be simple for me - Clemente. That said, I could build quite nicely around a young Robbie Alomar or a roided up Ivan Rodriguez.

Clemente was an objectively better hitter in an era when pitchers had an extreme advantage and you're saying there's no way to prove he was a better player?

ok dude....

jabrch
04-09-2008, 05:09 PM
Not ever? You can't use statistics to conclusively demonstrate that Roberto Alomar was a better player than Paco Martin?


If you are talking about a case that obvious, and you feel a need to use statistics to prove it, then you are wasting your time.

I have a feeling you know EXACTLY what I was saying.

FarWestChicago
04-09-2008, 07:51 PM
I've been on a lot of boards for a lot of different teams and this one has by far the most incorrect comments. It makes NYYfans look like a thinktank at times.

People into sabermetrics hate using fielding percentage... good god... why don't we attack something with out bothering to understand it a bit more shall we?Yet another self-proclaimed genius. My, we've never seen any of those before.

jabrch
04-09-2008, 07:54 PM
I've been on a lot of boards for a lot of different teams and this one has by far the most incorrect comments. It makes NYYfans look like a thinktank at times.

You know where the window is.

Billy Ashley
04-09-2008, 08:19 PM
Yet another self-proclaimed genius. My, we've never seen any of those before.

Nope I'm just a guy who gets annoyed when someone constantly bashes something with out knowing they are talking about.

For someone to slam saber like that guy due to the fact that Saber people rely too heavily on Fielding % and MVP awards clearly doesn't know what they are talking about.

If that makes me a self promoting want a be genius, then I guess anyone who who only somewhat knows what they are talking about is as well.

santo=dorf
04-09-2008, 08:34 PM
Clemente was an objectively better hitter in an era when pitchers had an extreme advantage and you're saying there's no way to prove he was a better player?

ok dude....You can't prove to me that Willie Mays was better than Erstad. That's just your opinion man. I'd like to see Willie Mays handle the same pitchers Erstad had to face.

the1tab
04-09-2008, 11:14 PM
You can't prove to me that Willie Mays was better than Erstad. That's just your opinion man. I'd like to see Willie Mays handle the same pitchers Erstad had to face.

There is absolutely zero basis for an argument that pitchers are better now than they were back in the dead ball era, when teams couldn't score 3 a game. Are pitchers better trained now? Sure. Will you ever see a pitcher throw as many pitches in a game as Nolan Ryan used to, or as many innings in a season as a guy like Whitey Ford did? No. Erstad would fill his pants if he had to face Drysdale and Koufax on back-to-back days. Heaven forbid we even mention Fergie Jenkins, Tom Seaver, or Bob Gibson.

And for all the discourse about Alomar vs Clemente on the field, let us never question which was one of the two great gentlemen and heroes this game has ever seen (with Jackie Robinson). Clemente lost his life trying help others... Alomar lost the beginning of a season because he spat in the face of an umpire. When all the Sabregeeks' dust settles, I'll take Clemente's intangibles any day of the week.

Billy Ashley
04-09-2008, 11:36 PM
There is absolutely zero basis for an argument that pitchers are better now than they were back in the dead ball era, when teams couldn't score 3 a game. Are pitchers better trained now? Sure. Will you ever see a pitcher throw as many pitches in a game as Nolan Ryan used to, or as many innings in a season as a guy like Whitey Ford did? No. Erstad would fill his pants if he had to face Drysdale and Koufax on back-to-back days. Heaven forbid we even mention Fergie Jenkins, Tom Seaver, or Bob Gibson.

And for all the discourse about Alomar vs Clemente on the field, let us never question which was one of the two great gentlemen and heroes this game has ever seen (with Jackie Robinson). Clemente lost his life trying help others... Alomar lost the beginning of a season because he spat in the face of an umpire. When all the Sabregeeks' dust settles, I'll take Clemente's intangibles any day of the week.

Given the fact that dead ball pitchers pitched up to 400 IP a year I think we can assume pitching was easier to hit back then. Can you imagine what 400 IP in a season would do to the vast majority of pitchers now?

Pitchers today throw harder, throw a wider array of pitches (Ted Williams claimed the first time he saw a slider he felt that the pitch would change baseball forever, that was in the 50's) and would blow their arms out if forced to have the workloads of the dead ball era pitchers.

The reason why? The game has changed and pitchers are now forced to challenge hitters more. Smaller ball parks, regimented weight lifting, armor, lower mounds, tighter baseballs... its a whole lot harder to pitch these days. The game has changed so much over the years.

Oh and back on topic... While I think Clemente and Roberto are pretty much equals in terms of baseball, you're absolutely right about the quality of human being Clemente was. Good man. Sad, yet inspirational story.

On the topic of pitching in different eras, look at the career leaders in K/ per 9 over the course of history. If that doesn't tell you something about how pitching has changed, I don't know what does. With smaller parks and all those other factors I've mentioned the goal of a pitcher has changed a ton. Pitchers can't induce bad contact and hope to be good unless they are extreme ground ball pitchers, you gotta get a decent amount of K's to survive. In the top 20 for K per 9, only 3 didn't pitch in the 1990s or later.

fquaye149
04-10-2008, 08:40 AM
There is absolutely zero basis for an argument that pitchers are better now than they were back in the dead ball era, when teams couldn't score 3 a game. Are pitchers better trained now? Sure. Will you ever see a pitcher throw as many pitches in a game as Nolan Ryan used to, or as many innings in a season as a guy like Whitey Ford did? No. Erstad would fill his pants if he had to face Drysdale and Koufax on back-to-back days. Heaven forbid we even mention Fergie Jenkins, Tom Seaver, or Bob Gibson.

And for all the discourse about Alomar vs Clemente on the field, let us never question which was one of the two great gentlemen and heroes this game has ever seen (with Jackie Robinson). Clemente lost his life trying help others... Alomar lost the beginning of a season because he spat in the face of an umpire. When all the Sabregeeks' dust settles, I'll take Clemente's intangibles any day of the week.

To be fair, that ump had to know the spit was coming when he called Alomar, who had been dogged by rumors of homosexuality his whole career, a ********er

Paulwny
04-10-2008, 10:54 AM
You can't prove to me that Willie Mays was better than Erstad. That's just your opinion man. I'd like to see Willie Mays handle the same pitchers Erstad had to face.


One big difference, batters are now able to dig in and get comfortable in the batter's box, before it was, "you dig in, you go down ". Also, players didn't have all the body armor todays players have to absorb the force of the ball.
The fear factor has been diminished.

jabrch
04-10-2008, 11:16 AM
One big difference, batters are now able to dig in and get comfortable in the batter's box, before it was, "you dig in, you go down ". Also, players didn't have all the body armor todays players have to absorb the force of the ball.
The fear factor has been diminished.


THere are a lot of differences...which is why you can't compare two great hitters and tell me which one is better using numbers to prove it a fact.

You can tell me that Hank Aaron is a better hitter than Jose Valentin - but that doesn't take a spreadsheet and a stats course to figure out. But you can't tell me who is a better player between HOFers or HOF To-Be guys and be sure - using statistics to prove it. There are just to many variables.

That's the problem with the propellerheads. They are so sold on their ethos that they fail to see limitations to it. I love statistics - up to a point. Once you drag past that point, their value decreases significantly.

fquaye149
04-10-2008, 01:18 PM
THere are a lot of differences...which is why you can't compare two great hitters and tell me which one is better using numbers to prove it a fact.

You can tell me that Hank Aaron is a better hitter than Jose Valentin - but that doesn't take a spreadsheet and a stats course to figure out. But you can't tell me who is a better player between HOFers or HOF To-Be guys and be sure - using statistics to prove it. There are just to many variables.

That's the problem with the propellerheads. They are so sold on their ethos that they fail to see limitations to it. I love statistics - up to a point. Once you drag past that point, their value decreases significantly.

Yeah, it's impossible to prove that Hank Aaron is a better hitter than Raffy Palmeiro, unless you just, like, can tell, like, man :rolleyes:

Save McCuddy's
04-16-2008, 09:43 AM
Clemente was an objectively better hitter in an era when pitchers had an extreme advantage and you're saying there's no way to prove he was a better player?

ok dude....

Other than '68 when the mound was raised and pitching dominated, how do you quantify this extreme advantage that you claim that pitchers had?

fquaye149
04-16-2008, 10:08 AM
Other than '68 when the mound was raised and pitching dominated, how do you quantify this extreme advantage that you claim that pitchers had?

Look at the league ERA, how bout? Compared to the 90's and 00's, the league ERA in the 1960's was more than a full point lower :shrug:

If you want anecdotal evidence, we can talk about the fact that the strike zone was understood to be wider in the 1960's.

Nellie_Fox
04-16-2008, 11:18 AM
Other than '68 when the mound was raised and pitching dominated, how do you quantify this extreme advantage that you claim that pitchers had?I don't know if it's just the way you wrote this sentence, but you don't think the mound was 15" just for the '68 season, do you? That's what it had been for decades before being lowered to 10" after the '68 season.

Save McCuddy's
04-16-2008, 06:47 PM
I don't know if it's just the way you wrote this sentence, but you don't think the mound was 15" just for the '68 season, do you? That's what it had been for decades before being lowered to 10" after the '68 season.

I did actually think that '68 was unique in terms of mound height.

Save McCuddy's
04-16-2008, 06:54 PM
Look at the league ERA, how bout? Compared to the 90's and 00's, the league ERA in the 1960's was more than a full point lower :shrug:

If you want anecdotal evidence, we can talk about the fact that the strike zone was understood to be wider in the 1960's.


Your original point was that Clemente was objectively a better hitter in an era when pitchers had an extreme advantage.

My response was quizzical -- What advantage are you talking about? Are you suggesting that the league average ERA being a run lower means that the pitching was advantaged greater than it is today? I'd argue that it was a much different game in which fewer home runs were hit and scores were generally lower. I don't feel that Clemente's numbers would have been better if he were hitting in today's game.

fquaye149
04-16-2008, 07:03 PM
Your original point was that Clemente was objectively a better hitter in an era when pitchers had an extreme advantage.

My response was quizzical -- What advantage are you talking about? Are you suggesting that the league average ERA being a run lower means that the pitching was advantaged greater than it is today? I'd argue that it was a much different game in which fewer home runs were hit and scores were generally lower. I don't feel that Clemente's numbers would have been better if he were hitting in today's game.

If League ERA is lower, that means pitchers are giving up less runs. That means it is more difficult for teams to score.

Whether that comes from better pitching, a higher mound, a wider strike zone, a smaller league with less talent dilution, or any combination of that is irrelevant. The point is, in the 60's, it was harder to be a great hitter. Clemente was a great hitter in an era when pitchers dominated. Alomar was a great hitter in an era full of great hitters.

That doesn't prove anything 100%, but you can pretty safely, objectively say that Clemente was a better hitter than Alomar since not only are his numbers better, but he also excelled more compared to the rest of the league

Oblong
04-16-2008, 07:12 PM
Simply put, Clemente's OPS+ is 130. Alomar's is 116. You may think that stat is bunk but it does claim to adjust for parks and for era. Clemente was 30% better than his peers, Alomar 16% better. It was designed for such arguments as this one.

I've actually seen it suggested by several people that Alomar's defensive brilliance was overrated. I'll have to dig around for the arguments made. I thought the guy was nuts but he backed it up with numbers and said he only got the numbers because someone else suggested he was overrated defensively and wanted to prove him wrong. He couldn't.

fquaye149
04-16-2008, 07:16 PM
Simply put, Clemente's OPS+ is 130. Alomar's is 116. You may think that stat is bunk but it does claim to adjust for parks and for era. Clemente was 30% better than his peers, Alomar 16% better. It was designed for such arguments as this one.

I've actually seen it suggested by several people that Alomar's defensive brilliance was overrated. I'll have to dig around for the arguments made. I thought the guy was nuts but he backed it up with numbers and said he only got the numbers because someone else suggested he was overrated defensively and wanted to prove him wrong. He couldn't.

I would suggest that elite defense in RF is more important than elite defense at 2B, but I can't really back that up with stats (though I suspect they'd back me up)

Oblong
04-16-2008, 07:22 PM
You probably are right. Put another way, a superior RF who can also hit is probably worth more than a superior 2B who can also hit.

I had my wording wrong, it's not that Clemente was 30% better than his peers, he was 30% better than the average player in his time. Alomar, 16% better.

fquaye149
04-16-2008, 07:30 PM
You probably are right. Put another way, a superior RF who can also hit is probably worth more than a superior 2B who can also hit.

I had my wording wrong, it's not that Clemente was 30% better than his peers, he was 30% better than the average player in his time. Alomar, 16% better.

Yeah it's hard to say.

On the other side of the coin, Alomar is probably better by a wider margin than most 2B's than Clemente is better than most RF's.

But then again :shrug: