25 Greatest of All Time

[Senser81]

I mean, I think he's reaching with a few guys (Schmidt & Brett, for example...especially Schmidt IMO), but he's got a bunch of era's represented, a good mix of pitcher/hitter, etc.

I was a big fan of George Brett, but he wasn't that good of a fielder and he had injury problems. I would probably leave him out of the top 25 even though he was great.

Schmidt on the other hand was IMO the best 3rd baseman of all-time. He was a great fielder and a great hitter who hit with power. He led the entire MLB in HRs 6 different times, and led the NL in HRs 8 different times...I don't know how many players can make that claim, much less Gold-Glove winning 3rd basemen.

I don't know how a person could say Schmidt was especially a reach. Which 3rd basemen would you rank above him?

[PNovak]

if the list was based on What-If's? I could see your point.

What if's? Even with his injuries he is one of the greatest ballplayers to ever play the game. 600+ HR's, Gold Gloves out the ass, MVP, silver sluggers. Decent AVG.

No wonder he made the all century team when he was still in his 20's.

[PNovak]

I don't think Griffey is one of the best 25 players in MLB history, and no sir, I have never done crack.

From 1999-present, he's been painfully mediocre.

He's a great player, and a HOF'er obviously, but not one of the 25 best players ever.

From 1999 til now he has 250+ HR's and has missed three seasons worth of games in that span. He would be top 3 in HR by now.

And I know, you cant use the what if card. IMO, he is still top 25 without a doubt.

[dell71]

Nice writeup. However, I will say starting with "Deciding who should be in the top 25 was easy" is one of the more ridiculous statements you could've made. There's at least 25 more guys who deserve some sort of consideration.

That said, it wasn't too bad. The only guys I would've definitely left off are Yaz & Rose. And I could quibble about the order (I would've went with Gehrig over Williams & bumped Aaron up a few notches) but that's basically minor.

The huge omissions for me is Bonds. Before the steroid era of his career allegedly began, he was already the only player in baseball history with at least 400 homers and 400 steals and already had a ton of gold gloves.

BTW, you undersold Ty Cobbs in the power department. To make people understand you should've pointed out that he played during the dead ball era when hitting 5 HRs was a big deal. He finished in the top 3 7 times.

Others to consider (some have already been mentioned):

Lefty Grove
Eddie Murray
Cal Ripken Jr.
Mariano Rivera
Bob Gibson
Nolan Ryan
Steve Carlton
Randy Johnson

Pedro Martinez...yes, I know what you're thinking. Many historians rank him as one of the best pitchers ever. If you're not convinced, think about this: he ranks 13th or better all time in WHIP, Winning%, Hits Allowed/9 IP, BB/9 IP, SO/9 IP, Strikeouts, SO/BB and Adjusted ERA+. He's also played through the steroid era, has a career ERA of 2.91 and has never lost more than 10 games in any season. Had he not had arm troubles he'd very likely be really close to 300 wins by now.

Roger Clemens??? I could see leaving him off because of the cloud hanging over many of his accomplishments. He's different from Bonds in that he was borderline at best for the HOF before he allegedly began using roids. Yes, he had 3 Cy Youngs & an MVP but was mediocre by the time he turned 30 & spent his last 4 years in Boston as an average pitcher. He left there at age 33 with less than 200 wins & roughly 2600 strikeouts. He was well liked at the time & had he quit he'd likely be in but the case could be made that he shouldn't. Tacking on his numbers from the time he went to Toronto & you nearly double his win total, add about 2000 strikeouts and an astounding 4 more Cy Youngs.

and my trifecta of catchers: Bench, Yogi Berra & Mike Piazza. Piazza isn't the defensive player the others are but he's more than arguably the best offensive player ever at the position.

[nflman2033]

Not having Bonds is... questionable at best.

lol, not having that joke is probably the best part about the list

[nflman2033]

I was a big fan of George Brett, but he wasn't that good of a fielder and he had injury problems. I would probably leave him out of the top 25 even though he was great.

Schmidt on the other hand was IMO the best 3rd baseman of all-time. He was a great fielder and a great hitter who hit with power. He led the entire MLB in HRs 6 different times, and led the NL in HRs 8 different times...I don't know how many players can make that claim, much less Gold-Glove winning 3rd basemen.

I don't know how a person could say Schmidt was especially a reach. Which 3rd basemen would you rank above him?

again senser is dead on, people want to look at Schmidt's BA. and balk, but look at everything else, especially in that he is no doubt the 2nd best fielding 3B of alltime, sure not the glamour of being a SS, but combine that with his hitting, he is the best all around 3B of alltime(I guess I could throw ARod in there but the roid era guys just have too many question marks

[trojan49er]

Not having Bonds is biased at best. Yes, the steroids inflated his power numbers, etc etc etc. His pre-steroid numbers alone merit being on this list. The steroids arent what gave him stats deserving of the top 25, theyre what gave him stats deserving of top 3 discussion. Steroids or not, Bonds was one of the best to ever put on a uniform

[Warner2BruceTD]

I was a big fan of George Brett, but he wasn't that good of a fielder and he had injury problems. I would probably leave him out of the top 25 even though he was great.

Schmidt on the other hand was IMO the best 3rd baseman of all-time. He was a great fielder and a great hitter who hit with power. He led the entire MLB in HRs 6 different times, and led the NL in HRs 8 different times...I don't know how many players can make that claim, much less Gold-Glove winning 3rd basemen.

I don't know how a person could say Schmidt was especially a reach. Which 3rd basemen would you rank above him?

Well, Arod for sure is a better player than Schmidt. But even if you consider Arod a SS, which is fine, I think a better question would be, is there a 3B who deserves to be on the list, period? I say no.

I just think I can find 25 guys better than Schmidt (and Brett, and Yaz for that matter, the other guy included that for sure wouldnt make my list), with minimal effort. Arod & Bonds are definately better players than Schmidt. Stan Musial, Manny Ramirez, Lefty Grove, Clemens, Pedro, you get the idea.

I'm just not as high on Schmidt as most, part of that due to my bias of that entire era. I think that era was a down period for baseball in general in terms of great players. Particularly pitchers, considering a guy like Jack Morris is one of the guys who you can talk about as the best the era had to offer.

EDIT-Musial is on his list, I missed that.

[Senser81]

Well, Arod for sure is a better player than Schmidt. But even if you consider Arod a SS, which is fine, I think a better question would be, is there a 3B who deserves to be on the list, period? I say no.

Schmidt was the better fielder, and ARoid obviously has benefited from the steroids. That said, ARoid has only led the majors in HRs 3 times compared to Schmidt's 6, and he's won 2 Gold Gloves compared to Schmidt's 10.

I just think I can find 25 guys better than Schmidt (and Brett, and Yaz for that matter, the other guy included that for sure wouldnt make my list), with minimal effort. Arod & Bonds are definately better players than Schmidt. Stan Musial, Manny Ramirez, Lefty Grove, Clemens, Pedro, you get the idea.

Well, then you are splitting hairs. No way a one-dimensional player (Ramirez) and a guy who had 6 good seasons (Pedro) are better than Schmidt. Sorry.

I'm just not as high on Schmidt as most, part of that due to my bias of that entire era. I think that era was a down period for baseball in general in terms of great players. Particularly pitchers, considering a guy like Jack Morris is one of the guys who you can talk about as the best the era had to offer.

LOL at not being high on Schmidt's 'era', then completely ignoring the effect of steroids on guys like ARoid, Bonds, Clemens, and Ramirez.

[Warner2BruceTD]

LOL at not being high on Schmidt's 'era', then completely ignoring the effect of steroids on guys like ARoid, Bonds, Clemens, and Ramirez.

I already praised the OP for leaving off the steroid guys. I can see the argument either way, myself personally, I would include them if I made up a list. I can't ignore 15 years like they never happened.

The 80's were weird. Cookie cutter stadiums all with similar dimentions, astro turf carpets that either led to groud balls flying up the gaps all the way to the wall, or true consistant hops that made fielding easier, and for whatever reason, a lack of dominant pitchers in comparison to other eras.

[dell71]

Well, then you are splitting hairs. No way a one-dimensional player (Ramirez) and a guy who had 6 good seasons (Pedro) are better than Schmidt. Sorry.

Agreed on Manny. However, I have to say if Koufax can be included, who only had 5 good seasons then so can Pedro.

[Senser81]

Agreed on Manny. However, I have to say if Koufax can be included, who only had 5 good seasons then so can Pedro.

I wouldn't include Koufax over Lefty Grove.

[dell71]

I wouldn't include Koufax over Lefty Grove.

I wouldn't either, but he's on the OP's list & no one's quarrelled with that selection.

[Senser81]

I wouldn't either, but he's on the OP's list & no one's quarrelled with that selection.

He's had so many bad lists in the past, I didn't want to quarrel on everything. I'd put Steve Carlton before Koufax, too.

[dell71]

Makes sense.