MLB Network's Top 9 First Basemen Ever
Collapse
X
-
-
Even the OPS+ is 143-147 (in Thome's favor, by the way) which kind of negates the different time periods.
And just like Thome, Killebrew came up as a 3B, was really bad at it, moved to 1B and was really bad it, and then finished up as a DH.
The only difference between the two is Killebrew hit RH.
It's almost as if Killebrew was born all over again 30 years later.Comment
-
I have no gripe if you think Killebrew is better. But the two players are so strikingly similar is almost every way, statistical, style of play, body type, position, etc etc, that 'far better' is a bit strong, no?
Even the OPS+ is 143-147 (in Thome's favor, by the way) which kind of negates the different time periods.
And just like Thome, Killebrew came up as a 3B, was really bad at it, moved to 1B and was really bad it, and then finished up as a DH.
The only difference between the two is Killebrew hit RH.
It's almost as if Killebrew was born all over again 30 years later.Comment
-
Originally posted by MVPete1982Frank Thomas should be somewhere on this list, slightly ahead of Bagwell and Thome and the historical greats in between. I'm drunk right now but I thought about the big hurt on the way home even though he spent a lot of time at DH.
Thomas played 971.
They did a list of best DH's ever and he was on that one. If Thomas was on this list he'd most likely be #3 or #4Comment
Comment