[Gammons] reporting Griffey to Astros trade talk happening

Torii Hunter...

 

I'll concede that Griffey contributed more than Bagwell on defense, because he played well at a more "defensive" position. But offensively, Bagwell has been consistantly better than Griffey, even playing most of his career at a stat-suppressing place like the Dome.

From 91 (Bag's rookie season) through 93, Griffey was better. But Bagwell has had a better offensive season in every season since. That's 11 seasons consecutive in which Bagwell has been better than Griffey. I don't see how superior defense in the first half of his career can make up for Bagwell's superior bat for over a decade.

I made the Bagwell-Griffey comparison as a negative one, because both are overpaid at this point of their careers, but I still admire the way Bags goes out and plays game after game with a shoulder that looks like it hurts him on every swing. He's a gamer and a role model, in every sense of the word.

 

I'd do this deal in a second. This is a time to gamble. Who knows...Griffey may pull a Grant Hill this year.

 

If he comes to the Astros I won't be able to laugh at him when he hits the ball hard, stands at home to admire what he just did, jog to first then try to run hard when he realizes the ball is going to bounce on the warning track only to pull a muscle (or something) while being thrown out at second by a mile. I'm going to have to get mad

I don't remember what game that was, maybe 2 or 3 seasons ago, but I laughed.

 

wasn't that this last season?? i'm pretty sure that was 2004. yeah..stopping to admire your shot...realizing it's not going out so you start sprinting...thus, hurting yourself and missing the rest of the season!!! i'm guessing that didn't go over real well in Cincy!

 

C'mon now. Bagwell's had a fantastic career, but Griffey was awesome throughout the 90s.

Griffey:
1994: .323, 40, 90
1995: injured, .258, 17, 42
1996: .303, 49, 140 (in 140 games?!?!!)
1997: .304, 56, 147
1998: .284, 56, 146
1999: .271, 48, 134
2000: .271, 40, 118

Bagwell:
1994: .368, 39, 116
1995: .290, 21, 87 (injured partly)
1996: .315, 31, 120
1997: .286, 43, 135
1998: .304, 34, 111
1999: .304, 42, 126
2000: .310, 47, 132

I give Bagwell the edge in 1994 and 2000, and I guess he was less injured in 95, but Griffey was simply awesome in 96-99, with 3 straight 140+ RBI years. 40+ homers every year from 1993 to 2000 except 1995.

Even in 2004- Griffey put up 20 bombs in 83 games. That's a 39 homer pace in a full season. Bagwell has seen his production decline. Griffey's production seems to still be there if he can stay healthy. Four straight unhealthy years doesn't seem to lend to that, though.

 

what are you basing that on? we haven't seen the guy play healthy in 4 years! and when he has been healthy in those seasons, like the beginning of last season, he was nowhere close to what he used to be.

 

I'd say there's a very good chance Griffey is still at the least a 30 homer guy if he's healthy. Possibly still even a 40 homer guy.

 

Remember, Bags was playing in the Dome in those years, so his numbers have to be park-adjusted. And yet his OPS numbers were still better than Griffey's, every one of those seasons (96-99) with the exception of 97. So maybe I give you 1997 as the one year after 93 that Griffey had the edge. Except that Bags stole 30 freaking bases that year to Griffey's 15, and drew 50 more walks. His OBP throughout that stretch never dropped below .420, which is a phenomenal number, and on-base numbers have a stronger effect on winning than slugging ones do. So I give 97 to Bagwell as well.

Don't let the homer number fool you, Griffey's in decline. He generates no steals, and a .253 average is very mediocre. His walk rate is about the same as his career average, but he's hitting 50 points less than he used to, resulting in a subpar OBP and put him on pace to score less than a hundred runs.

I remember reading a Bill James piece once about Biggio vs. Griffey, where James demonstrated that in a given season, think it was 97, Biggio outperformed Griffey by beating him at every "little stat", despite hitting 22 homers to Griffey's 56. Griffey was never a "little things" player. When he hit 50+ homers a year that was easy to overlook, but now that he's not doing that he becomes a more questionable addition. If Griffey had been healthy last year and had hit 40 home runs, he still wouldn't have amounted to half the player Beltran was. There's more to baseball than hitting home runs.

 

It was not my intention to belittle Griffey's incredible career. It's just that, IMO, Bagwell is a more complete player and his career is right up there with Griffey's--even better. Sam's post immediately above is outstanding.

How could I forget?? I miss the '90s Bagwell!

 

Junior Griffey's a washed up has been.

 

I think you're right. I don't know why I was thinking it could be 3 seasons ago. I guess I'm getting old and everything seems like it's anything but last year.

 

You know, I just disagree with this. Again, not to play Griffey down--but Bagwell was just that good. Everyone in the league talked about it. The other cities' papers wrote about it. The other teams' broadcast teams mentioned it. How soon we forget. Bagwell was a third-baseman's arm and third-baseman's range playing 1B. He was incredible.

It swings your perception more towards Griffey. Certainly CF defense is more valuable--far more valuable--but that does not by any means diminish the way Bagwell played the field at his position.

Name them. J.T. Snow would have made the same plays, but not more. Again, how soon we forget.

CF is *huge*. It's "easier" to distinguish oneself in CF than it is at 1B, as the greater demands of CF will separate the men from the boys. The differences between a good 1B and a great 1B are more subtle. For instance, SS's and 3B's who throw to Jeff Bagwell or Mientzasfajsldfjsalkfowqiuertz will have fewer errors than others with average 1B.

 

It's probably obvious, but I meant to say, "fewer throwing errors."