Joe Posnanski's Top 100 Players in Baseball

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (431 of them)

I did it...Raced through it--you'd go insane trying to weigh each group carefully. That one towards the end that more or less had the eight greatest hitters was funny. If Mays turned up, I always ranked him #1 ahead of Ruth or anyone else. I don't think Jackie Robinson turned up once for some reason.

clemenza, Wednesday, 20 November 2019 14:03 (four years ago) link

four months pass...

He's up to #8--almost finished, so mea culpa over my skepticism that he ever would.

(I only skim certain entries; waiting to read the whole thing in book form.)

clemenza, Sunday, 29 March 2020 00:52 (four years ago) link

i haven't bought a baseball book in a while, but i'll be first in line

Karl Malone, Sunday, 29 March 2020 00:59 (four years ago) link

When you finish that, read Posnanski's book on the '75 Reds--excellent.

clemenza, Sunday, 29 March 2020 14:24 (four years ago) link

For anyone who doesn't have access, here's the list so far:

No. 100: Ichiro Suzuki
No. 99: Mike Mussina
No. 98: Carlos Beltrán
No. 97: Roberto Alomar
No. 96: Larry Walker
No. 95: Tony Gwynn
No. 94: Roy Campanella
No. 93: Ozzie Smith
No. 92: Bullet Rogan
No. 91: Mariano Rivera
No. 90: Max Scherzer
No. 89: Mike Piazza
No. 88: Curt Schilling
No. 87: Charlie Gehringer
No. 86: Gary Carter
No. 85: Sadaharu Oh
No. 84: Cool Papa Bell
No. 83: Phil Niekro
No. 82: Kid Nichols
No. 81: Ferguson Jenkins
No. 80: Carlton Fisk
No. 79: Derek Jeter
No. 78: Clayton Kershaw
No. 77: Miguel Cabrera
No. 76: Willie McCovey
No. 75: Justin Verlander
No. 74: Frank Thomas
No. 73: Brooks Robinson
No. 72: Robin Roberts
No. 71: Bert Blyleven
No. 70: Sandy Koufax
No. 69: Monte Irvin
No. 68: Gaylord Perry
No. 67: Hank Greenberg
No. 66: Robin Yount
No. 65: Ernie Banks
No. 64: Johnny Mize
No. 63: Steve Carlton
No. 62: Smokey Joe Williams
No. 61: Arky Vaughan
No. 60: Pete Rose
No. 59: Reggie Jackson
No. 58: Jeff Bagwell
No. 57: Rod Carew
No. 56: Joe DiMaggio
No. 55: Bob Feller
No. 54: Chipper Jones
No. 53: Buck Leonard
No. 52: Adrián Beltré
No. 51: Al Kaline
No. 50: Nolan Ryan
No. 49: Warren Spahn
No. 48: Ken Griffey Jr.
No. 47: Wade Boggs
No. 46: Eddie Mathews
No. 45: Bob Gibson
No. 44: Cal Ripken Jr.
No. 43: Yogi Berra
No. 42: Jackie Robinson
No. 41: Tom Seaver
No. 40: Roberto Clemente
No. 39: Nap Lajoie
No. 38: Carl Yastrzemski
No. 37: Pedro Martínez
No. 36: Christy Mathewson
No. 35: George Brett
No. 34: Cy Young
No. 33: Jimmie Foxx
No. 32: Mel Ott
No. 31: Greg Maddux
No. 30: Johnny Bench
No. 29: Eddie Collins
No. 28: Randy Johnson
No. 27: Mike Trout
No. 26: Grover Cleveland Alexander
No. 25: Pop Lloyd
No. 24: Rickey Henderson
No. 23: Albert Pujols
No. 22: Lefty Grove
No. 21: Joe Morgan
No. 20: Frank Robinson
No. 20 (tie): Mike Schmidt
No. 18: Tris Speaker
No. 17: Rogers Hornsby
No. 16: Alex Rodriguez
No. 15: Josh Gibson
No. 14: Lou Gehrig
No. 13: Roger Clemens
No. 12: Honus Wagner
No. 11: Mickey Mantle
No. 10: Satchel Paige
No. 9: Stan Musial
No. 8: Ty Cobb

Which leaves Mays, Ruth, Bonds, Williams, Aaron, Walter Johnson, and someone else.

clemenza, Sunday, 29 March 2020 20:17 (four years ago) link

I hope and predict Mays at #1.

clemenza, Sunday, 29 March 2020 20:19 (four years ago) link

Probably said this already: Posnanski was very clear that the rankings aren't meant to be taken that seriously, or even in some cases whether or not someone made the list. He was more interested in stories and who was a conduit to good writing.

clemenza, Sunday, 29 March 2020 20:28 (four years ago) link

The number one player of all time? you, the fan who makes it all possible.

Karl Malone, Sunday, 29 March 2020 20:37 (four years ago) link

Or, if Posnanski needs medical assistance right now, Donald Trump.

clemenza, Sunday, 29 March 2020 20:40 (four years ago) link

#1 will be JoePos. you have to be an idiot not to vote for yourself on election day

℺ ☽ ⋠ ⏎ (✖), Sunday, 29 March 2020 21:07 (four years ago) link

which player is missing, though? that is kind of a conundrum

Karl Malone, Sunday, 29 March 2020 21:18 (four years ago) link

I assume that Buck Leonard and Josh Gibson already listed rule out a Negro League player.

clemenza, Sunday, 29 March 2020 22:46 (four years ago) link

#7, Walter Johnson.

clemenza, Monday, 30 March 2020 13:43 (four years ago) link

i know you can do this for any ancient ballplayer vs modern, but if Walter Johnson was a SP today, do you think he would have an ERA > or < 5.00?

Karl Malone, Monday, 30 March 2020 15:24 (four years ago) link

(not quibbling with old timers being up at the top of the list, either. continual improvement is the name of the game. some day there will be a league full of prime era pujols cyborgs)

Karl Malone, Monday, 30 March 2020 15:25 (four years ago) link

As I've said many times in connection to Coors field, I think there's a limit as to how much adjusting you can do for various factors. I don't know about Johnson, but I know that if were doing something similar, my default would be to always give close calls to the modern player. Which is one of the reasons I hope Mays finishes ahead of Ruth for #1 (and why someone else might hope Bonds finishes ahead of both).

clemenza, Monday, 30 March 2020 15:38 (four years ago) link

"if I were doing"

clemenza, Monday, 30 March 2020 15:38 (four years ago) link

also, as you've pointed out, he's made it clear that it's not really a straight up "ranking" - it's also about extra-baseball things, who has a good story, etc.

otherwise, i have no idea why trout is in the upper 20s on the list. but yes, he is boring as hell and has pretty much no story other than how good he is and how pujols made a pact with the devil to prevent the angels from making the playoffs

Karl Malone, Monday, 30 March 2020 15:51 (four years ago) link

"No, it’s true, you can’t really compare the pitching Johnson did during Deadball — or even in those early years after Deadball — with baseball 100 years later. Different games. Different times. We have nothing at all to compare with Johnson’s pitching from 1910-1915, when he went 174-80 with a 1.51 ERA, 1,494 strikeouts, 390 walks and 24 homers allowed in more than 2,100 innings.

In 1916, Johnson pitched 369 innings and gave up zero home runs. Zero.

There’s no conversion chart that can tell us how Johnson’s stuff would hold up today. All we have are the stories and the quotes — and from those, you can understand the awe that people felt when seeing how impossibly hard Johnson threw."

The thing is, in 1916, Wally Pipp (!) led the league in HR with 12. So not giving up any is impressive, but...

Anyway, Posnanski knows this.

clemenza, Monday, 30 March 2020 16:04 (four years ago) link

yeah, the fact that he was so much better than his peers, and so consistently, is enough for me. it's funny how inner-circle hall of famers are on the outsiden edges of the bell curve distribution, looking in

Karl Malone, Monday, 30 March 2020 16:55 (four years ago) link

*outside edges

Karl Malone, Monday, 30 March 2020 16:55 (four years ago) link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSyxhRP-DL8

℺ ☽ ⋠ ⏎ (✖), Tuesday, 31 March 2020 00:00 (four years ago) link

Forgot all about that...posted a link in the comments section.

clemenza, Tuesday, 31 March 2020 02:24 (four years ago) link

#6, Ted Williams of the MFL.

clemenza, Wednesday, 1 April 2020 12:10 (four years ago) link

Think I've encountered this elsewhere, too:

DiMaggio during the streak: .408/.463/.717, 1.180 OPS
Williams all of 1941: .406/.553/.735, 1.288 OPS

clemenza, Wednesday, 1 April 2020 12:43 (four years ago) link

Gleaned this from the comments: Oscar Charleston is the missing player. I always thought Gibson/Leonard were considered #1/2 among Negro League players, but I guess that's changed.

clemenza, Wednesday, 1 April 2020 12:45 (four years ago) link

otherwise, i have no idea why trout is in the upper 20s on the list.

I'm assuming it's because 27 is his uniform number

k3vin k., Wednesday, 1 April 2020 15:20 (four years ago) link

Hey! You've unlocked the key that opens some (if not all) of the doors: Seaver's uniform number was 41, Gibson's was 45...

clemenza, Wednesday, 1 April 2020 16:38 (four years ago) link

As I've mentioned at least once, someone at a national SABR convention -- I recall it being Kevin Goldstein, tho it may not have been -- suggested that by objective standards, Adam Jones is probably a better baseball player than Willie Mays, to great consternation. That's just evolution.

All-time player lists can only measure an individual against his era.

brooklyn suicide cult (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 1 April 2020 16:46 (four years ago) link

I have received that suggestion with great consternation.

clemenza, Wednesday, 1 April 2020 16:57 (four years ago) link

Gleaned this from the comments: Oscar Charleston is the missing player. I always thought Gibson/Leonard were considered #1/2 among Negro League players, but I guess that's changed.

I almost mentioned this, I swear! But then I thought “higher than satchel Paige and Josh Gibson, though?”

Karl Malone, Wednesday, 1 April 2020 17:21 (four years ago) link

james ranked him #4 all time behind ruth wagner and mays in 01

℺ ☽ ⋠ ⏎ (✖), Wednesday, 1 April 2020 17:51 (four years ago) link

wow! i don't know all that much about charleston, i should figure my shit out!

Karl Malone, Wednesday, 1 April 2020 18:25 (four years ago) link

#5, Oscar Charleston.

That’s what the rankings are...they are here to give this project shape and to spark a few feelings. Yes, they’re in the basic order of a formula I used, one based on five things in no particular order:

Wins Above Replacement
Peak Wins Above Replacement
How multi-dimensional they were as players
The era when they played
Bonus value — This might include postseason performances, leadership, sportsmanship, impact on the game as a whole, if they lost prime years to the war and numerous other possibilities.

But I have no illusions about the formula. It is as flawed as anything so, whenever possible, I attached the player and a number that fits. So, for instance, Mariano Rivera is 91 for Psalm 91, the Psalm of Protection. Gary Carter is 86 for his role on the 1986 Mets. Joe DiMaggio is 56 for the hitting streak. Grover Cleveland Alexander is 26 because that was his magical year, 1926.

Bob Gibson, Tom Seaver, Jimmie Foxx, Greg Maddux, Mike Trout, Jackie Robinson, Frank Robinson and Mike Schmidt, among others, were all given a ranking based on their uniform numbers. I would say at least two-thirds of the numbers have some sort of connection to the ballplayer.

I even skipped No. 19 because of the ’19 Black Sox, the biggest single-year scandal in baseball history.

The Psalm of Protection?

clemenza, Friday, 3 April 2020 12:39 (four years ago) link

that does make me wonder who ranks #666

who WAS the most evil baseball player?

let me be your friend on the other end! (Karl Malone), Friday, 3 April 2020 14:41 (four years ago) link

I'm also suddenly intrigued about the sexual life of Monte Irvin at #69.

clemenza, Friday, 3 April 2020 16:20 (four years ago) link

Assuming there are no more hidden-meanings to the rankings at this point, I'll guess Aaron 4th, Bonds 3rd, Ruth 2nd, then Mays at #1--that, or switch Bonds and Ruth. I think Joe is an err-on-the-side-of-contemporaneity kind of guy, so I don't think Ruth will be first. If not for the complicating PED factor, which I don't think he'll ignore altogether, I could even have seen Bonds at #1.

clemenza, Friday, 3 April 2020 16:29 (four years ago) link

#4, Hank Aaron.

And then there’s his absurd, almost laughable, breakaway lead in career total bases. If you want to call Henry Aaron the king of something, call him the King of Total Bases. He had 6,856 total bases in his career — 700 more than anyone else.

Musial could have hit 350 more doubles and not had as many total bases as Aaron.

Ruth could have hit 250 more home runs and not has as many total bases as Aaron. (Bonds would have needed 220 more homers just to tie Aaron.)

Pete Rose could have cracked another 1,100 singles and not had as many total bases as Aaron.

clemenza, Monday, 6 April 2020 11:53 (four years ago) link

Unrelated to this, a Facebook baseball group I'm on has been doing one of those bracketed greatest-hitter-ever (hitter, not player) polls. I've decided I'll go with Ted Williams right till the end, if he makes it.

clemenza, Monday, 6 April 2020 12:48 (four years ago) link

i think every time i've ever had to make a decision on that, i went with ted williams, too. the thing that always does it for me is realizing he missed all of 1943-45, his prime years, and still came out so far ahead of everyone. also, his 1957, as a 38-39 year old. amazing.

let me be your friend on the other end! (Karl Malone), Monday, 6 April 2020 14:32 (four years ago) link

Exactly my thinking--plus what he did in those two (very) partial Korean War seasons. He did have a big Fenway advantage, but when you look at his career road stats (.328/.467/.615), that seems less important.

clemenza, Monday, 6 April 2020 16:54 (four years ago) link

yeah it’s williams without hesitation for me too. underrated in this countdown imo

k3vin k., Monday, 6 April 2020 17:26 (four years ago) link

I can't speak to Oscar Charleston, but #5 seems fair to me for Williams as a player rather than just a hitter. Mays was, from all accounts, one of the greatest fielders ever, Bonds was great, and I think Aaron was viewed as solid, at least. Ruth, probably not, but you've got to credit him with his pitching. I've read different opinions about Williams, but he did seem to be quite indifferent to fielding until late in his career. And with Mays and Bonds, speed also factors in.

clemenza, Monday, 6 April 2020 18:58 (four years ago) link

Actually forgot all about this...From yesterday: #3, Bonds.

Probably the longest entry yet, divided into "For Bonds Fans"/"For Bonds Critics" arguments and counter-arguments.

clemenza, Thursday, 9 April 2020 16:32 (four years ago) link

Another reason I think Mays will be #1: he's still alive. Someone, I'm sure, will get word to him that a prominent baseball writer has been counting down his greatest-players-ever, and he was picked as the greatest. Towards the end of life, I think that's something anybody would appreciate.

clemenza, Friday, 10 April 2020 06:58 (four years ago) link

#2, Ruth. (Didn't think there'd be a post today, but there is.)

clemenza, Friday, 10 April 2020 11:13 (four years ago) link

I hardly ever read online comments--irony: I'm on ILX--but I thought I'd take a glance after the Ruth entry. 15 minutes after posting, there are about 20 already. Only one seems negative:

"Say it ain't so Joe! The logic that would NOT make Ruth hands down, no argument #1, should not even make him top 100. We get it Joe: you're woke, but...no, the Bambino is of course #1."

Happily, someone called this idiot out on the "woke" part.

clemenza, Friday, 10 April 2020 11:21 (four years ago) link

wonder how many times that commenter saw ruth play?

gotta give it up for the #1, Pete Kozma

let me be your friend on the other end! (Karl Malone), Friday, 10 April 2020 14:36 (four years ago) link

#1, yes.

Sounds a little apocryphal, but...

That year, 1954, was an incredible one for Mays. He’d missed almost all of the previous two seasons while serving in the Army, and he looked rusty for the first three or four weeks of the season. And then, on May 6, things kicked in. Over the next 24 games, he hit .424 with 13 homers. Later in June, he had a seven-game stretch where he went 15-for-26 with seven home runs.

At the All-Star Break, he had 31 home runs. He was ahead of Babe Ruth’s 60-home run pace. The press kept asking Mays if he thought he had a shot at the record, but at the end of July, he stopped even trying. Durocher had asked him to give up home runs and to, instead, get on base more and spark more rallies.

Here’s how good Willie Mays was: He did just that. He hit only five homers the rest of the season. But he also hit .379/.442/.601 with 16 doubles and seven triples.

clemenza, Monday, 13 April 2020 15:44 (four years ago) link

He has a post up today about the death of his 95-year-old grandmother--not directly COVID-related (though she was tested), but related in that his own mother was only allowed to communicate with her over the phone.

clemenza, Sunday, 19 April 2020 17:16 (four years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.