Comments on Newsday’s Top 100 Greats and Legends List

During the summer Newsday posted a piece titled: Newsday’s 100: The Super Elite Hall of Fame . (The article seems to be archived at this point, so to see their list, you can visit this page at Baseball Fever ). The idea was to grant that the MLB Hall of Fame’s criteria for choosing players has not been consistent over the years (a case made by Bill James and many other writers before), so what would a list of only the truly cream of the crop look like? They decided to go for a list of just the very best 100 “greats and legends”, with another 18 players listed who are not eligible for the Hall of Fame (Pete Rose and Joe Jackson plus players who have retired recently or are still active).

Since I love projects like this, I of course would like to comment on their selections. I don’t have comments on the players included from the Negro Leagues, as I just don’t know enough about them to have an opinion one way or the other. That said…

Players that I question being in the top 100:

• Lou Brock — Borderline. Lots of steals, and performed great in three World Series, but also struck out a lot, had a low OBP, and was a rather poor fielder considering his speed.
• Buck Ewing — A great 19th century catcher, but not one of the greats of all-time. In fact, he only played 100+ games in a season four times. A few years ago Bill James ranked him 17th amongst catchers.
• Bill Dickey, Carlton Fisk, Gabby Hartnett — Borderline. They are three of the top-10 catchers of all time, so the question then becomes how many catchers do you want in your top-100 “greats” list? Obviously Bench and Berra, plus Josh Gibson from the Negro Leagues. I say Cochrane and Campanella are in, and maybe Dickey, Fisk, and Hartnett are too, but I’m open to arguments against them here as well. And if these guys are in, why not Gary Carter? Where do you draw the line?
• Lary Doby — A good player, but not a great one. His career numbers of .283, 253 HR, and 970 RBI don’t merit being in this top 100 list. And no, he didn’t lose much MLB time to the Negro Leagues early in his career, since he was only 24 when he played his first full season for the Indians.
• Jim Galvin — No way. He lost almost as many games as he won.
• Ozzie Smith — Borderline. Not sure someone who was as two-dimensional as Ozzie should be in a top-100 list of “greats”. Superior defense at SS, and lots of SB too, but is that enough?
• King Kelly — One of the first 19th century stars who split time between OF and C, but I don’t think he is a top-100 all-time great. He led the league in batting twice, and runs scored three times, and was usually amongst the leaders in other categories, but that isnt’ enough for me here.
• Bob Lemon — Borderline. Yes, he had seven 20-win seasons in a span of 10 years. But he only won 207 in his career, and his first name isn’t Sandy, so I question him being called a “great”.
• Red Ruffing — Definitely not a top-100 “great”. He pitched for powerful Yankees clubs, so that helped him win 20 games twice and 21 games twice. But a lifetime 273-225 record, and a 3.80 ERA, doesn’t qualify him for this list.
• George Sisler and Bill Terry — Their career batting averages look worthy, but you have to consider the eras in which they played. Bill James has done that, and a few years ago ranked Sisler as only the 24th best 1B of all-time, and Terry as the 26th best. So that would keep them far outside of a top-100 “greats” list.
• Pie Traynor — Definitely not. Similar to Sisler and Terry, you have to consider Traynor’s .320 average relative to his era. Again, Bill James a few years ago ranked Traynor as the 15th best 3B of all time, behind the likes of Darrell Evans, Sal Bando, Ken Boyer, and Graig Nettles — and while I consider these guys underrated, none of them are all-time “greats”.
• John Ward — A very interesting, versatile career, but is he an all-time great?
• Dave Winfield — Borderline. My main problem with including Winfield is that Newsday did not also include Eddie Murray. I don’t see how that makes sense.
• Early Wynn — Definitely not. He held on a long time to get that 300th win. But a lifetime 300-244 record, and a 3.54 ERA (compared with a league ERA of 3.77) doesn’t make him an all-time “great”. I’d go with Jenkins, Niekro, Perry, and others before Wynn.

Here are ones Newsday considered close that I might prefer over some of the above:

• Eddie Murray — See my comments on Winfield.
• Al Simmons — He had 12 seasons of 100+ RBI, including his first 11 seasons. And some of those were really high totals: 151, 157, 165. True his .334 average is like Terry and Sisler and must be considered in light of his era, but I think Simmons did more than they did to earn a spot in a top 100 list.
• Paul Waner — Similarly, I think Paul Waner probably belongs in the top 100 list. He had nine seasons of 100+ runs and while not a HR hitter, did hit 605 doubles and 191 triples. I much prefer Simmons and Waner to Sisler, Terry, and Traynor.
• Some pitchers from Newsday’s “near-miss” list that I prefer over Galvin, Wynn, and Ruffing are Ed Walsh, Robin Roberts, Hoyt Wilhelm, and Fergie Jenkins.

Next, here is a list without commentary of some players who I think are at least as deserving, if not more so, of being included on the “near miss” list they provided, and perhaps a few of these would properly be considered top-100 “greats” (in alphabetical order):

• Frank Baker
• John Clarkson
• Sam Crawford
• Ed Delahanty
• Dennis Eckersley
• Rollie Fingers
• Johnny Mize
• Kid Nichols
• Phil Niekro
• Gaylord Perry
• Arky Vaughn

I particularly think that Nichols belongs in the top 100 way ahead of Galvin, and that Delahanty and Crawford likely should have been in the list of top-100 “greats”. Bill James makes a pretty good case for Vaughn as the second-best SS of all-time, so perhaps he should be as well. The others I’m just suggesting were omissions from the “near-miss” listing that Newsday provided.

As for current and recent players, a few names that probably also should be mentioned in this discussion are Frank Thomas, Jeff Bagwell, Roberto Alomar, Chipper Jones, Vladimir Guerrero, and Craig Biggio.

Comments?

(This post is re-printed, with only slight edits, from its original location at Philosopher Stone on July 28, 2008 .)