or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › ESPN's MLB 'Hall of 100' - A new ranking on the greatest players ever
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ESPN's MLB 'Hall of 100' - A new ranking on the greatest players ever

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
Anyone seen this today? I'm not exactly sure what the fuck they're up to but it seems like its gonna make for interesting discussion, to say the least.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/feature/video/_/id/8652210/espn-hall-100-ranking-all-time-greatest-mlb-players
Quote:
This story appears in ESPN The Magazine's Dec. 24 Hall of Fame Issue. Subscribe today!

THE TIME IS NOW. With some big PED-era names facing Judgment Day next month in the Baseball Hall of Fame voting, and with the everlasting cacophony over who belongs in Cooperstown and who doesn't, The Mag teamed with our online and TV partners to take a fresh look at the greats of the game. Out with conventional wisdom and hidebound opinions, in with a new analysis of which players really are the best of the best.

And so we present the ESPN Hall of 100: the top 100 players of all time. Period. Our panel of experts -- editors, writers, reporters, on-air personalities -- was given a list of more than 300 names: players already in the actual Hall of Fame or on the ballot as well as past and active players who surpassed certain seasonal and career benchmarks in Wins Above Replacement (WAR), a measure of how many wins a player contributes to his team compared to a readily available minor leaguer. The voters were asked to rate the players on a scale of 0 (the least worthy to be on the list) to 100 (most worthy) by increments of 5. They were advised to not factor in steroids use (real or suspected) or off-field conduct detrimental to the game. They were encouraged to look at advanced metrics, not just the same old numbers.

The result is a roster based purely on performance (well, plus some performance enhancement) and a judgment-free zone where Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and even Pete Rose are welcome. An expanded version of the Hall of 100 can be found on ESPN.com (search for "Hall of 100"). The rankings will no doubt be hotly debated -- Buster Olney, Tim Kurkjian, Keith Law and others start some of the arguments on these pages. But the results are also fascinating from a historical perspective: Every decade of baseball history from the 1890s to the 2000s is represented in our top 10, and if you go down a few more spaces, you'll find active players.

That's one of the great things about baseball: the flow of time that enables us to compare Walter Johnson to Randy Johnson, Stan Musial to Albert Pujols. With that in mind, we'll update our Hall of 100 after every season -- and for every player added, someone will fall off the list. Watch your back, Phil Niekro.
post #2 of 25
Very interesting. I hope they go down another 25 tomorrow instead of 10 by 10.
post #3 of 25
Thread Starter 
I was very surprised to see Ron Santo on the list. Phil Niekro too.
post #4 of 25
We'll see if this is legitimate if theyre willing to put Bonds in the top 5.
post #5 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pennglock View Post

We'll see if this is legitimate if theyre willing to put Bonds in the top 5.

At least the top 10. Who's better- Aaron, Ruth, Cobb, Williams?
post #6 of 25
Thread Starter 
My prediction of their top 5 (in order): Ruth, Williams, Mantle, Bonds, Mays
post #7 of 25
Thread Starter 
75-25 is up.

Chipper Jones up at 49? Jeter at 38?

YES! to Pete Rose at 37!!!
post #8 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambo View Post

75-25 is up.
Chipper Jones up at 49? Jeter at 38?
YES! to Pete Rose at 37!!!
+1 was glad to see Rose up there

But Ripken at 31? He was good but he wasn't great, at least not top 50 of all time great. Never hit 30hr, lowest avg and obp of all the guys who hit 3000. No way he should be above Gibson, Griffey, etc.
post #9 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meis View Post

+1 was glad to see Rose up there
But Ripken at 31? He was good but he wasn't great, at least not top 50 of all time great. Never hit 30hr, lowest avg and obp of all the guys who hit 3000. No way he should be above Gibson, Griffey, etc.

Mr. October got dissed too.

1-5 I think will be Ruth-Bonds-Aaron-Mays-Williams. I don't see Mantle cracking it.
post #10 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meis View Post

+1 was glad to see Rose up there
But Ripken at 31? He was good but he wasn't great, at least not top 50 of all time great. Never hit 30hr, lowest avg and obp of all the guys who hit 3000. No way he should be above Gibson, Griffey, etc.

You know, in the scheme of things, I really have no problem with Ripken being that high. Think about it - his is the ONE record that's probably NEVER going to get broken. No one's even going to come close IMO. And its an impressive one to boot. That's a long time to go without ever missing a day of work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post

Mr. October got dissed too.
1-5 I think will be Ruth-Bonds-Aaron-Mays-Williams. I don't see Mantle cracking it.

I had Aaron at 6. We're pretty much on the same page here.
post #11 of 25
I have a weird feeling they're gonna sneak Gehrig into the top 5. Not sure why.

Edit - shows what I know. shog[1].gif
Edited by dcg - 12/13/12 at 10:54am
post #12 of 25
Looks like Ruth and Mays are 1 and 2. Sounds about right.
post #13 of 25
Thread Starter 
No. 25 -- Tris Speaker | No. 24 -- Tom Seaver | No. 23 -- Randy Johnson | No. 22 -- Frank Robinson | No. 21 -- Joe DiMaggio

No. 20 -- Joe Morgan | No. 19 -- Albert Pujols | No. 18 -- Alex Rodriguez | No. 17 -- Cy Young | No. 16 -- Mike Schmidt

No. 15 -- Rogers Hornsby | No. 14 -- Rickey Henderson | No. 13 -- Greg Maddux | No. 12 -- Walter Johnson | No. 11 -- Lou Gehrig

No. 10 -- Honus Wagner | No. 9 -- Mickey Mantle | No. 8 -- Stan Musial | No. 7 -- Roger Clemens | No. 6 -- Ty Cobb

No. 5 -- Hank Aaron | No. 4 -- Ted Williams | No. 3 -- Barry Bonds | No. 2 -- Willie Mays | No. 1 -- Babe Ruth
post #14 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quick thoughts on these: No way should Clemens have been that high. Frank Robinson and JoeD should switch spots with Pujols and Rodriguez. I suppose I'm just biased for all the advantages players have these days that the guys back then didn't. And Rickey Henderson, the best leadoff hitter of ALL TIME, most definitely should have been in the top 10.
post #15 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambo View Post

Quick thoughts on these: No way should Clemens have been that high. Frank Robinson and JoeD should switch spots with Pujols and Rodriguez. I suppose I'm just biased for all the advantages players have these days that the guys back then didn't. And Rickey Henderson, the best leadoff hitter of ALL TIME, most definitely should have been in the top 10.

I'd agree with most of those, except while I like Ricky I think they've got him ranked correctly. He'd probably do a bit better if he would've retired at 40 instead of hanging on so damn long

Only issue, Joe Morgan- I'm sorry I just don't see him as a top 25 all time guy.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › ESPN's MLB 'Hall of 100' - A new ranking on the greatest players ever