I had to start this because I believe the batting title tracker is a good thread, and I allowed myself to pull that thread off track. Somebody was running down Biggio and it was pissing me off. I posted these numbers Blind comparison from age 25 to 35, using per 650 PA numbers .390 OBP .448 Slg 118 Runs 71 RBI 5.3 WAR .389 OBP .445 Slg 111 Runs 65 RBI 5.5 WAR And yet some people seem to insist that Rose was on a completely higher level than Biggio and I for one don't see it. Now Rose had the better career, nobody is arguing that, but I maintain that Biggio was every bit the player Rose was during their primes. Now I admit that I am not a Rose fan, many people from the 70's put him on a pedestal with the game luminaries because of the hit record, when in fact he wasn't on the same level. Combine that with the criminal under appreciation of Biggio, this particular issue really gets under my skin.
Coming from a guy who is also annoyed at the criminal underappreciation of Biggio (and Bagwell, for that matter); and who even once did a statistical comparison between Bidge, Alomar, and the top 10 2B in the HoF: Biggio isn't on Rose's level. I'm not trying to be combative (promise), but did you ever see Rose play? Similar to the case with Biggio, the numbers don't tell the entire story. Watching him play was like watching Peyton Manning play: I want to hate him, but damn! he's so good! Just a pleasure to watch play. The older Rose got, the more his d******d side came out, and that made it easier to hate him. But saying Biggio wasn't on Rose's level is like saying he wasn't on Hornsby's level or Mays's level (although Mays was even a notch or three above Rose). Not an insult in the least.
Rose wasn't close to Hornsby or Mays. Rose got more hits, but Biggio hit more HR & SB. The gap really isn't that large. Rose was far more successful in the postseason though.
msn, to answer your question to OP "did you ever see Rose play"? The answer to this is quite obvious. Not just "no" but "HELL NO" he didn't see him play, because if he did he wouldn't be making such a crazy statement. I'm an Astros fan since '68, and I'm certainly a big fan of Biggio as well. However, there is NO WAY IN HELL HE WAS THE PLAYER THAT PETE ROSE WAS. Saying this is NOT a knock on Biggio, because Rose was one of the greatest players to EVER play the game. Let me also say that I hated Pete Rose, but that certainly never clouded the fact that he was to be respected and feared. OP wants to claim that Biggio was equal to Rose during their prime yrs (25-35 yrs old). Did Biggio ever win an MVP award during that time frame? You know, the award they give to the BEST player in a given yr. We all know the answer to that, and it would be a resounding NO. Pete Rose did. In fact during the ages 25-35 yrs old Pete Rose was voted in the top 10 for MVP eight out of the eleven yrs (10th, 10th, 2nd, 4th, 7th, 1st, 5th and 4th). As far as MVP voting Biggio made the top 10 three times during that time frame (10th, 4th & 5th). Keep on believing what you want to believe seaclubber, but I would ask you what color is the sky in your world?
agreed (and said so originally) Rose played defense--and played it well--at 2B, 3B, 1B, and LF. Rose's post-prime decline wasn't as steep. Yeah; probably shouldn't make it sound like comparing Eddie Murray to Lou Gehrig, but there *is* a clear gap, at least to me. So, everyone in the HoF is on the same level?
MVP awards are so arbitrary and random, based on so many additional factors (team success, league strength, etc.) Not to mention, it assumes the BBWAA - a group of dying dinosaurs who long for baseball as it was played in the 19th century - never gets anything wrong which, as Jeff Bagwell's failing HoF candidacy will assert, is patently untrue. Biggio posted a 9.4 WAR in 1997, a shade behind Larry Walker's 9.8 and higher than AL MVP Ken Griffey's (9.1). And Biggio not only finished 4th in MVP voting, but the (granted, rightful) winner - Walker - more than doubled Biggio's vote total. (Biggio's 9.4 WAR was also higher, FYI, than Rose's 8.2 in his MVP year.) In 1998, Biggio actually bested MVP Sammy Sosa's WAR (6.5 to 6.4) but you might remember Sosa hitting a bunch of home runs that year so Biggio again inexplicably languished in 5th place, behind Greg freaking Vaughn and his 50 home runs. Altogether, Biggio did not receive a single first place vote in 1997 or 1998 despite hitting a combined .317/.409/.502/.911 with a 141 OPS+, 269 runs scored, 88 doubles, 42 home runs and 97 stolen bases. I'm not suggesting Biggio was better; I'm suggesting there are better methods for making that determination than an MVP award, batting average, or All-Star game appearances, which seem to be your only metrics.
MVP can be a difficult way to measure a player. Mike Trout hasn't won an MVP, but was the best player in baseball his first 2 seasons. Biggio put up numbers in 1997 & 1998 that could win MVPs some years. The year Pete Rose won, Joe Morgan was arguably the best player on his team. Neither have ever been clearly the best player in the league. Well, you really only said Mays was better. Biggio played defense too, though his defense declined with his speed after the knee injury (and didn't belong in CF). Rose's sharp decline was 5 years later in life than Biggio's.
When somebody says you had to watch them play it does cause me to roll my eyes. These are the same people who rave about Jeter's defense because he makes those amazing jump throws. As for MVP votes, I really don't care about them because they are very frequently chosen poorly, much like the recent Trout/Cabrera votes, and I have watched those 2. As for defense Rose did have a few great years as an OF, but whenever he was asked to play CF or the infield he wasn't very good at all. But then again I didn't see him play so I'm sure those numbers lie to me as well. Rose had a better career, I acknowledged that in my OP, but at the top of their games I still don't see how Rose was on a different level.
I'd like to extend an apology to seaclubber. One of the things that makes baseball so awesome (and unique) is being able to compare different players from generations. So many different intangibles and numbers to delve into, and by being able to do this helps spark debates like the one comparing Rose and Biggio. There's not another sport that you can truly compare a player from the 1920"s to say another player from the 1970's for example. Again this is part of baseball that truly makes it unique and special in my opinion. So my apologies seaclubber. Let's just hope that Biggio gets into the HOF this yr, and that Baggy will be following him soon. Everyone have a good weekend.
(per seaclubber1016's request, I'm responding to this in the Biggio/Rose thread...) I respect that a batted ball forces defensive action; but if the net result is a single base - as it is far more often than not - why is one better than the other? A single with nobody on base is *better*? A single with the bases loaded that scores one run is *better*? IMO, you judge a player based on the number of times he doesn't make an out; if Biggio is doing that at a rate at or above the same rate as Rose... it makes him as valuable, if not more so. And given Biggio's excellence as a baserunner, especially during the 10-year stretch we're comparing, I don't really care how he gets on base. I could argue that a walk/stolen base - which Biggio did far more often than Rose - negates the single being *better* than the walk.
