PDA

View Full Version : Other Sports JoPo: 10 best pure hitters in baseball..since 1947


Deberg_1990
10-22-2009, 08:18 AM
Discuss...

10. Roberto Clemente
9. Paul Molitor
8. George Brett
7. Ted Williams
6. Hank Aaron
5. Pete Rose
4. Rod Carew
3. Wade Boggs
2. Stan Musial
1. Tony Gwynn

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_posnanski/10/17/pure.hitters/index.html

Saccopoo
10-22-2009, 08:19 AM
You could argue about the placement, but he's pretty much spot on in my opinion.

Sofa King
10-22-2009, 08:20 AM
didn't Tony Gwynn always say Ted Williams was the best... and actually i think Ted Williams said the same thing to Gwynn (that Ted was the best)...


i guess my list starts with Ted...

rockymtnchief
10-22-2009, 08:26 AM
i guess my list starts with Ted...

Mine would also. After that, you could make an argument for any of the others.

blaise
10-22-2009, 08:31 AM
I realize that using the 1947 cutoff takes out some of Williams's career, but I don't see how he's not above pretty much everyone else on that list. Had he wanted a higher average I have little doubt that Williams could have done that, but if you've read about him you know that part of his hitting philosophy was that you shouldn't just be trying to get hits and get on base, but you should be trying to hit for power. He had great power numbers and had he not missed time for military service I think it's safe to say he would have had around 600 career HR.
I would have Williams #1, and I would have Bonds at #2. I know he did steroids which inflated his numbers, but he was also a great hitter. I can't stand Bonds because I would have liked to see his career without the steroids. It would have been great to be able to include him without any reservations, but you can't do that unless you're just blind.

Deberg_1990
10-22-2009, 08:33 AM
You could make an argument to add A-Rod right now.

Pujols and Suzuki in a few years if they stay healthy.

blaise
10-22-2009, 08:41 AM
You could make an argument to add A-Rod right now.

Pujols and Suzuki in a few years if they stay healthy.

Manny Ramirez, too. I think sometimes people see guys that hit a lot of singles for high average and say he's a pure hitter and discount guys with power numbers as home run hitters. Manny Ramirez is as much a "pure hitter" as Paul Molitor or Rod Carew, I think. He's a pure hitter with power. Carew hit like 100 career homers, Manny hits for high average and power. Which guy has more impact on his team with the bat? It's Manny.

Amnorix
10-22-2009, 08:42 AM
As others have noted, you have a huge Ted Williams problem here.

<TABLE class=boxed width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=banner noWrap>Yr</TD><TD class=banner noWrap>Team</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>G</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>AB</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>R</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>H</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>2B</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>3B</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>HR</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>GS</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>RBI</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>BB</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>IBB</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>SO</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>SH</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>SF</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>HBP</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>GIDP</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>AVG</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>OBP</TD><TD class=bannerR noWrap>SLG</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1939 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1939a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1939&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>149</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>565</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>131</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>185</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>44</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>11</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>31</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>145</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>107</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>64</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.327</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.436</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.609</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1940 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1940a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1940&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>144</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>561</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>134</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>193</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>43</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>14</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>23</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>113</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>96</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>54</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>13</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.344</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.442</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.594</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1941 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1941a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1941&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>143</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>456</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>135</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>185</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>33</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>37</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>120</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>147</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>27</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.406</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.553</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.735</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1942 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1942a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1942&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>150</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>522</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>141</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>186</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>34</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>5</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>36</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>137</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>145</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>51</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>4</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>12</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.356</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.499</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.648</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1946 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1946a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1946&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>150</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>514</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>142</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>176</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>37</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>8</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>38</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>123</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>156</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>44</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>12</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.342</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.497</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.667</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1947 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1947a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1947&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>156</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>528</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>125</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>181</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>40</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>9</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>32</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>114</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>162</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>47</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.343</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.499</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.634</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1948 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1948a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1948&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>137</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>509</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>124</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>188</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>44</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>25</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>127</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>126</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>41</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.369</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.497</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.615</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1949 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1949a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1949&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>155</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>566</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>150</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>194</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>39</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>43</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>159</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>162</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>48</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>22</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.343</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.490</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.650</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1950 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1950a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1950&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>89</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>334</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>82</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>106</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>24</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>28</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>97</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>82</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>21</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>12</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.317</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.452</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.647</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1951 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1951a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1951&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>148</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>531</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>109</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>169</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>28</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>4</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>30</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>126</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>144</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>45</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.318</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.464</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.556</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1952 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1952a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1952&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>6 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1952)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>4</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.400</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.500</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.900</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1953 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1953a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1953&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>37 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1953)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>91</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>17</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>37</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>6</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>13</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>34</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>19</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.407</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.509</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.901</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1954 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1954a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1954&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>117 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1954)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>386</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>93</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>133</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>23</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>29</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>89</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>136</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>-</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>32</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.345</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.513</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.635</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1955 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1955a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1955&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>98 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1955)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>320</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>77</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>114</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>21</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>28</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>83</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>91</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>17</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>24</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>4</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>8</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.356</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.496</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.703</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1956 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1956a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1956&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>136 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1956)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>400</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>71</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>138</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>28</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>24</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>82</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>102</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>11</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>39</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>13</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.345</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.479</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.605</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1957 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1957a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1957&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>132 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1957)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>420</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>96</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>163</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>28</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>38</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>1</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>87</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>119</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>33</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>43</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>5</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>11</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.388</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.526</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.731</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1958 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1958a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1958&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>129 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1958)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>411</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>81</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>135</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>23</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>26</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>85</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>98</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>12</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>49</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>4</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>4</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>19</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.328</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.458</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.584</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1959 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1959a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1959&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>103 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1959)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>272</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>32</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>69</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>15</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>10</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>43</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>52</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>6</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>27</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>5</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>7</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.254</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.372</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.419</TD></TR><TR><TD class=datacolBoxC noWrap>1960 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/yearly/yr1960a.shtml)</TD><TD class=datacolBox noWrap>Red Sox (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=1960&t=BOS)</TD><TD class=datacolBoxR noWrap>113 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/hittinglogs.php?p=willite01&y=1960)</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>310</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>56</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>98</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>15</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>29</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>72</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>75</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>7</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>41</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>0</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>2</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>3</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>7</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.316</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.451</TD><TD class=datacolR noWrap>.645</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Deberg_1990
10-22-2009, 08:44 AM
Manny Ramirez, too. I think sometimes people see guys that hit a lot of singles for high average and say he's a pure hitter and discount guys with power numbers as home run hitters. Manny Ramirez is as much a "pure hitter" as Paul Molitor or Rod Carew, I think. He's a pure hitter with power. Carew hit like 100 career homers, Manny hits for high average and power. Which guy has more impact on his team with the bat? It's Manny.

Yep, forgot about him.

Hes going to get to 3000 hits too...unlike Bonds.

Deberg_1990
10-22-2009, 08:45 AM
Yep, forgot about him.

Hes going to get to 3000 hits too...unlike Bonds.

Umm....maybe not....i just looked at his stats again....hes farther away from 3000 than i thought.

thecoffeeguy
10-22-2009, 08:47 AM
Ted Williams, the man.

Good list though. I used to love George Bretts stance and how he would finish his swing. very smooth.

Amnorix
10-22-2009, 08:49 AM
The main things to note are that he missed a huge hunk of time due to the Korean War during this period (and as you can see he missed 3 full seasons due to WWII. Someone noted that he would have had "about 600 hrs" if he hadn't done the wartime service.

It would've been alot more than 600. Even in that pre-steriod era, he was averaginga bout 35 home runs per year, and he missed something like 5 full yeasr, that's 175 lost home runs. Added to the 521 he did hit, and you get to 696. More than Mays and second only to Ruth until the advent of the changes in the rules to favor hitters, and the advent of the steroid era.

Check out the '47 and after on base percentages and slugging percentages. His OPS is remarkably consistent at 1100'ish every year 'til the back problems got him '59.

Unless by "pure hitters" you mean "guys who don't hit home runs", then there's no way you put the lightweights ahead of him that you have (Boggs, Gwynn, Carew).

blaise
10-22-2009, 08:50 AM
Umm....maybe not....i just looked at his stats again....hes farther away from 3000 than i thought.

He'll get there if he cares enough to. You never know with him. Jeter's going to get over 3,000 hits, too and he hits over .300. You never look at him as a "pure hitter" though for some reason, at least I don't. I don't really know why. Maybe I just see the World Series titles first.

Nixhex
10-22-2009, 08:51 AM
Great list. A young Ken Griffey Jr. is up there in my opinion.

Demonpenz
10-22-2009, 08:51 AM
Fun list, although some of these "pure hitters" I suspect don't help you win as many game as the power hitters and hitters that take a shitload of walks. I once heard boggs took the ball up the middle, gaps and to LF so much he only pulled a ball to the right side foul once in 10 year span.

Demonpenz
10-22-2009, 08:52 AM
The main things to note are that he missed a huge hunk of time due to the Korean War during this period (and as you can see he missed 3 full seasons due to WWII. Someone noted that he would have had "about 600 hrs" if he hadn't done the wartime service.

It would've been alot more than 600. Even in that pre-steriod era, he was averaginga bout 35 home runs per year, and he missed something like 5 full yeasr, that's 175 lost home runs. Added to the 521 he did hit, and you get to 696. More than Mays and second only to Ruth until the advent of the changes in the rules to favor hitters, and the advent of the steroid era.

Check out the '47 and after on base percentages and slugging percentages. His OPS is remarkably consistent at 1100'ish every year 'til the back problems got him '59.

Unless by "pure hitters" you mean "guys who don't hit home runs", then there's no way you put the lightweights ahead of him that you have (Boggs, Gwynn, Carew).

ted's co pilot in korea was lance armstrong

jAZ
10-22-2009, 08:54 AM
Why 1947?

Demonpenz
10-22-2009, 08:54 AM
good place to show off the ted williams costume

Demonpenz
10-22-2009, 08:55 AM
Why 1947?

lowered the mound

wild1
10-22-2009, 09:07 AM
"There's nobody like Ichiro in either leagueŚnow or ever. He exists strictly within his own world, playing a game 100 percent unfamiliar to everyone else. The game has known plenty of 'slap' hitters, but none who sacrifice so much natural ability for the sake of the art. Maury Wills wasn't going to do anything but hit singles. Matty Alou wasn't a slugger in disguise. Ichiro, a man of wondrous strength, puts on impressive power-hitting displays almost nightly in batting practice. And he'll go deep occasionally in games, looking very much like someone who could do it again, often. Mostly, though, Ichiro is death by handkerchief. In the first inning, with lefty Mark Redman nibbling on the outside corner, Ichiro sliced a ground ball single between third and short. Next time up, with the A's perhaps leaning that way again, he singled through the other side of the diamond. The man lives for hits, little tiny ones, and the glory of standing atop the world in that category. Every spring, scouts or media types write him off, swearing that opposing pitchers have found the key, and they are embarrassingly wrong." - Bruce Jenkins in The San Francisco Chronicle (July 28, 2004)

"I wish you could put a camera at third base to see how he hits the ball and see the way it deceives you. You can call some guys' infield hits cheap, but not his. He has amazing technique." Detroit Third Baseman Brandon Inge in the New York Times (August 22, 2009)


Ichiro has 2,000 hits and he did it in under 8 full seasons, only one player has reached 2,000 hits faster.

He has had at least 200 hits for 9 years running. Pete Rose did this 10 times in 24 seasons.

And all of this started when he was 28, he wasn't playing in the US until then. If he plays until 40, which is definitely possible given that he's never missed more than 5 games in a season, he could get to 3,000 hits having gotten his first hit at age 28. That's incredible.

Most people don't like the idea, some people don't want to say it because power hitting is not what he is about. But he's the best pure hitter the game has ever seen. I don't think there's any question.

It's criminal for him to be off this list because he's right there with any of those guys. If Ichiro had began playing in the US when he was 21, this article would never have been written because he'd be so far ahead of these guys as to make it irrelevant.

Simply Red
10-22-2009, 09:09 AM
Discuss...

10. Roberto Clemente
9. Paul Molitor 8. George Brett
7. Ted Williams
6. Hank Aaron
5. Pete Rose
4. Rod Carew
3. Wade Boggs
2. Stan Musial
1. Tony Gwynn

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_posnanski/10/17/pure.hitters/index.html



I was sitting on that one, man, I would've went off, had he not been on the list.

penchief
10-22-2009, 09:13 AM
A healthy Don Mattingly was one of the best pure hitters I ever saw. Drove the ball hard to all fields. Hit for average and had good power in the pre-steroids era. He was nearly impossible to strike out. The most impressive thing was how hard he consistently hit the ball. He may also have been the best defensive first baseman to ever play the game. A bad back cut his career too short for the HOF, though.

blaise
10-22-2009, 09:17 AM
Ichiro has 2,000 hits and he did it in under 8 full seasons, only one player has reached 2,000 hits faster.

He has had at least 200 hits for 9 years running. Pete Rose did this 10 times in 24 seasons.

And all of this started when he was 28, he wasn't playing in the US until then. If he plays until 40, which is definitely possible given that he's never missed more than 5 games in a season, he could get to 3,000 hits having gotten his first hit at age 28. That's incredible.

Most people don't like the idea, some people don't want to say it because power hitting is not what he is about. But he's the best pure hitter the game has ever seen. I don't think there's any question.

It's criminal for him to be off this list because he's right there with any of those guys. If Ichiro had began playing in the US when he was 21, this article would never have been written because he'd be so far ahead of these guys as to make it irrelevant.

That shouldn't count for you, though, not hitting for power. He's a great, great hitter, but I just don't see how you can say he's a better "pure hitter" than Williams. There isn't one GM in the history of the game that would give up an outfield spot for Williams and put Ichiro there instead. I just think that had Williams wanted to get on base as his primary goal, and make sure he hit singles and walked to get on base his hit numbers and OBP would be higher, but the goal of the game is to score runs and he knew that. His job as a great hitter, as he viewed it, was to hit for average, but more than that- to take advantage when he could and drive the ball for power.
I don't see any way you could say Ichiro is a better than Williams. Because his hit totals were better? That's great, but overall, Williams was better.

Buck
10-22-2009, 09:24 AM
Finally, #1 in something.

YES!

Frazod
10-22-2009, 09:25 AM
good place to show off the ted williams costume

That's just wrong.... LMAO

blaise
10-22-2009, 09:27 AM
Finally, #1 in something.

YES!

Tony Gwynn is also the #1 buffet hitter on that list these days.

wild1
10-22-2009, 09:28 AM
Tony Gwynn is also the #1 buffet hitter on that list these days.

You have to credit Gwynn because you know that he didn't beat those hits out on the ground.

Demonpenz
10-22-2009, 09:35 AM
Gwynn wasn't slow for most his career, just fat,

wild1
10-22-2009, 09:42 AM
That shouldn't count for you, though, not hitting for power. He's a great, great hitter, but I just don't see how you can say he's a better "pure hitter" than Williams. There isn't one GM in the history of the game that would give up an outfield spot for Williams and put Ichiro there instead. I just think that had Williams wanted to get on base as his primary goal, and make sure he hit singles and walked to get on base his hit numbers and OBP would be higher, but the goal of the game is to score runs and he knew that. His job as a great hitter, as he viewed it, was to hit for average, but more than that- to take advantage when he could and drive the ball for power.
I don't see any way you could say Ichiro is a better than Williams. Because his hit totals were better? That's great, but overall, Williams was better.

Williams played 5 of his 17 productive years before 1947, including his .406 season, for the purposes of this discussion.

RJ
10-22-2009, 10:35 AM
Why 1947?


Jackie Robinson.

RJ
10-22-2009, 10:41 AM
I'd have Ichiro on the list. I was around to see most of those guys play and he's as good as any of them. Leaving Musial and Williams out - just slightly before my time - my top 5 would be.....

Carew
Rose
Boggs
Gwynn
Ichiro

I am taking "pure" hitter to mean a guy who doesn't necessarily hit for power but could roll out of bed at 4 AM with a hangover and drop a single over the second baseman's head.

Ari Chi3fs
10-22-2009, 10:45 AM
I bought The Science of Hitting by Ted Williams... and have been teaching his approach to my son.

I shit you not, he went 32-35 this year in machine pitch little league... he absolutely crushes them... for an 8 year old.

RJ
10-22-2009, 11:09 AM
This made me think of some guys who were great hitter hitters but didn't have the longevity, consistency or health of the guys on the list. Tony Oliva, John Kruk, Don Mattingly, Mark Grace, Ralph Garr......all excellent hiters but without the magic number 3000.

raybec 4
10-22-2009, 11:12 AM
I don't think Manny or Bonds belong in the top 25 much less the top 10. Ted has to be number 1 nobody will hit over .400 again until they thaw his head out.

KCCHIEFS27
10-22-2009, 12:02 PM
That shouldn't count for you, though, not hitting for power. He's a great, great hitter, but I just don't see how you can say he's a better "pure hitter" than Williams. There isn't one GM in the history of the game that would give up an outfield spot for Williams and put Ichiro there instead. I just think that had Williams wanted to get on base as his primary goal, and make sure he hit singles and walked to get on base his hit numbers and OBP would be higher, but the goal of the game is to score runs and he knew that. His job as a great hitter, as he viewed it, was to hit for average, but more than that- to take advantage when he could and drive the ball for power.
I don't see any way you could say Ichiro is a better than Williams. Because his hit totals were better? That's great, but overall, Williams was better.

I'll take Williams over Ichiro as a hitter, but as an overall player, give me Ichiro.

Demonpenz
10-22-2009, 12:13 PM
I'll take Williams over Ichiro as a hitter, but as an overall player, give me Ichiro.

Ted Williams helps you win more games because of his power, and although his arm and speed, and whatever you think puts ichiro as a better (baseball player) the fact remains Ted Williams helps you WIN MORE GAMES

Buck
10-22-2009, 12:17 PM
All I can really add is that I was spoiled to be able to watch a guy like Tony Gwynn play during my entire Childhood.

The man was a great player, and seemed like a Standup guy. Not selfish or anything.

Hes definitely my favorite player of all time.

RJ
10-22-2009, 09:18 PM
All I can really add is that I was spoiled to be able to watch a guy like Tony Gwynn play during my entire Childhood.

The man was a great player, and seemed like a Standup guy. Not selfish or anything.

Hes definitely my favorite player of all time.



My sons grew up in Baltimore watching Cal Ripken, he is their favorite player of all time. I"m guessing you're about the same age as them.

You could do worse with favorite baseball players that Ripken and Gwynn.

CoMoChief
10-22-2009, 09:21 PM
Pujols and Arod need to be on that list.

thurman merman
10-22-2009, 09:25 PM
http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/.e1d/img/4.0/global/baseball/mlb/players/7731.jpg

CoMoChief
10-22-2009, 09:27 PM
http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/.e1d/img/4.0/global/baseball/mlb/players/7731.jpg

ROFL

Marcellus
10-22-2009, 09:28 PM
I'd have Ichiro on the list. I was around to see most of those guys play and he's as good as any of them. Leaving Musial and Williams out - just slightly before my time - my top 5 would be.....

Carew
Rose
Boggs
Gwynn
Ichiro

I am taking "pure" hitter to mean a guy who doesn't necessarily hit for power but could roll out of bed at 4 AM with a hangover and drop a single over the second baseman's head.

Pujols has a better BA over the last 10 years so you need to rethink adding Ichiro over Pujols.

Hard to believe but true.

Home > Blog Zone > Bird Land > Bird Land > Albert Pujols’ claim to a Triple Crown, or two
01.22.2009 5:21 am
Albert Pujols’ claim to a Triple Crown, or two
By Derrick Goold
St. Louis Post-Dispatch

* Email this
* Share this
* Print this

Digg Yahoo! Del.icio.us Facebook Reddit Drudge Google Fark logo Fark Stumble It!

TOWER GROVE — As I waded through various research projects this offseason, a fluke of clutter provided a jolt of inspiration. There, nosed up against one another in the flotsam of loose and scattered legal pads and books, was my scorecard from Opening Day 2001 at Coors Field and a Cardinals encyclopedia-of-sorts opened to Rogers Hornsby’s page.

As a sidebar jockey for The Rocky Mountain News in 2001, I was at Coors Field to cover Mike Hampton’s brilliant debut with the Colorado Rockies. But really all of us in the press box had a much bigger moment in baseball history sneak right by. It’s there in the pencil swirls of the scorebook. Batting sixth for the Cardinals that day and starting in left field was a rookie, making his major-league debut. His name: Albert Pujols.

Cardinals Hall of Famer Rogers Hornsby won two Triple Crowns, in 1922 and 1925. (Source: National Baseball Hall of Fame)

We all know what Pujols has done for the Cardinals since that debut — having just capped the recent Winter Warm-up by receiving his second National League MVP — just as we all know what Horsnby did in the past for the Cardinals. But there’s something only Hornsby did that Pujols could be about to do by the end of 2009 and perhaps do better.

It has to do with the Triple Crown — and Pujols’ claim to one.

On the floor of my office, the two met, overlapped, and got me to wondering …

Hornsby won two Triple Crowns as a Cardinal, in 1922 (.401-42-152) and in 1925 (.403-39-143). He is the only National Leaguer to win two Triple Crowns, and the league hasn’t seen a Triple Crown since Joe “Ducky” Medwick did it with the St. Louis Cardinals in 1937. As I poked around for info on Horsnby beyond the encyclopedia page on the floor, I found references to his “decade Triple Crown.” He’s believed to be the only player to have led a league in batting average, home runs and RBIs over the span of an entire decade. (Subsequent research has shown the “belief” is misleading. Hornsby is the last NLer to do it. Others have also done it, per fact checks at Baseball-Reference.com) Hornsby did it in the 1920s:

* Batting Average: .382
* Home Runs: 250
* RBIs: 1,153

On the way to mining those statistics, I learned that Hornsby finished in the top three in batting average every year in the 1920s save 1926. (He won six consecutive batting titles in the 20s and seven total in the decade.) Hornsby, the Hall of Famer, finished in the top seven in homers every year in the Roarin’ Decade, and he ranked in the top 10 in RBIs every year but 1923. It was a remarkable run of consistent and dynamic performance and it produced something unique — the “decade” Triple Crown.
Cardinal great Joe Ducky Medwick, last National Leaguer to win the Triple Crow, in 1937.

Hall of Famer Joe "Ducky" Medwick, the last National Leaguer to win the Triple Crow, in 1937.

It also sounded so familiar.

Since that day in Coors Field, Pujols has become the first player in history to start his career with eight consecutive seasons of at least a .300 average, at least 30 home runs and at least 100 RBIs. A scan of his finishes in the National League reveals that he’s only finished first once in one category — that batting title in 2003 — but he’s also only finished out of the top 10 in two of the 24 categories (eight years, three triple-crown stats … 24). Each time he ranked 11th. In 17 of those 24 categories, he finished in the top five.

Pujols has nearly pulled off what Hornsby did. Only better.

It was seeing the scorecard so close to Hornsby’s bio on my office floor that got me thinking. I admit, the Triple Crown has always kept me curious. Hornsby’s “decade” Triple Crown is particularly fascinating, because what other Triple Crown spans are out there? Could a “decade” Triple Crown be done again? And could there be a “career Triple Crown”?

Sure enough, we are watching both.

Starting on April 2, 2001, and counting forward to the end of this most recent season, here are the standings in the Triple Crown statistics for the National League (all stats include only those while playing for a NL club):

BATTING AVERAGE

1. Albert Pujols … .334
2. Todd Helton … .326
3. Chipper Jones … .317
4. Lance Berkman … .303
5. Juan Pierre … .300

HOME RUNS

1. Albert Pujols … 319
2. Adam Dunn … 278
3. Barry Bonds … 268
4. Lance Berkman … 263
5. Andruw Jones … 255

RBIs

1. Albert Pujols … 977
2. Lance Berkman … 879
3. Aramis Ramirez … 815
4. Andruw Jones … 770
5. Todd Helton … 748

Others have more RBIs in their careers and certainly more home runs, but since he made his major-league debut Pujols leads the National League in all three Triple Crown categories. And it’s not like his challengers are really that close. Through eight seasons, he has a career Triple Crown. Two more years like this and he’ll do what Hornsby did in the 1920s — only Pujols will have done it in his first 10 years in the league.

Pujols is also in line to win the “decade” Triple Crown for the 2000s, even though he spotted the rest of te league the entire 2000 season. With Bonds out of the game in 2008, Pujols passed him in home runs for the decade lead, 319 to Bonds’ 317. Entering the final year of the decade, Pujols leads the National League in all categories, Hornsby-like, with a .334-319-977 line. See for yourself:

* BATTING AVERAGE in NL since 2000
* HOME RUNS in NL since 2000
* RBIs in NL since 2000

A typical year could clinch the Hornsby Crown.
Cardinals 1B Albert Pujols, one standard year away from a decade Triple Crown?

Cardinals 1B Albert Pujols, one standard year away from a "decade" Triple Crown?

Mining exact information from statistics decades old can be a dicey adventure. But using (really, exhausting) Baseball Musings and Baseball-Reference.com’s muscular Play Index, I went looking for other career Triple Crowns. I stuck with actual Triple Crown winners. The last three to lead their league in BA, HR and RBIs all came from the American League: Mickey Mantle in 1956 (.353-52-130), Frank Robinson in 1966 (.316-49-122), and Carl Yastrzemski in 1967 (.326-44-121). With a couple it’s difficult to get the exact rankings from the span of their careers, but all three had careers that mimicked the season — debut in April, last appear some time in September or October.

Not one of the three has a claim to a career Triple Crown. But it’s close.

From 1951 to 1968, Mantle was tops in the American League with his 536 home runs and 1,509 RBIs, but his .298 batting average ranked behind Hall of Famer Al Kaline. From 1961 to 1983, Yastrzemski was the only player to average enough plate appearances to qualify for a batting title (more than 10,000 PA), so his .285 was No. 1 in a Class of 1. But dial the PAs down to 9,000-plus and Rod Carew leapfrogs Yaz with a .331 average in that span. Yastrzemski ranked first in RBIs with 1,844, but was third in home runs with 452, trailing leader Harmon Killebrew’s 489.

From 1956 to 1976, Robinson split his time between both leagues, so comparing him against his league peers is hardly revealing. Against all of Major League Baseball, however, he does well. His .297 batting average ranks seventh — behind leader Roberto Clemente’s .321 and, say, Lou Brock’s .296. During the span of his career, Robinson ranks second in RBIs (1,812) and second in home runs (586), and he ranks second to the same guy in both. In fact, Hank Aaron almost has a career Triple Crown — just with Robinson’s career:


Those ranks are across all of Major League Baseball. Since his debut at Coors Field, Pujols does rank well in the overall numbers — almost Aaron-like. Well, actually, almost Robinson-like to Aaron. Pujols ranks second to Alex Rodriguez in both RBIs (1,011 to 977) and home runs (364 to 319). Pujols, however, has quite a lead when it comes to batting average since his debut.

1. Albert Pujols … 334
2. Ichiro Suzuki … .331
3. Todd Helton … .326
4. Vladimir Guerrero … .323
5. Magglio Ordonez … .317
6. Chipper Jones … .317

chiefzilla1501
10-22-2009, 09:31 PM
Ichiro has 2,000 hits and he did it in under 8 full seasons, only one player has reached 2,000 hits faster.

He has had at least 200 hits for 9 years running. Pete Rose did this 10 times in 24 seasons.

And all of this started when he was 28, he wasn't playing in the US until then. If he plays until 40, which is definitely possible given that he's never missed more than 5 games in a season, he could get to 3,000 hits having gotten his first hit at age 28. That's incredible.

Most people don't like the idea, some people don't want to say it because power hitting is not what he is about. But he's the best pure hitter the game has ever seen. I don't think there's any question.

It's criminal for him to be off this list because he's right there with any of those guys. If Ichiro had began playing in the US when he was 21, this article would never have been written because he'd be so far ahead of these guys as to make it irrelevant.

Yeah, but it's about quality, not quantity.

Ichiro is easily the most overrated player in baseball. He's a dinky singles hitter. He's going to get you a lot of infield singles and a lot of dinky bloops and a lot of bunt singles, but none of those are going to advance the runner in front by more than a base. All the while, he's going to swing at the first pitch and never walk. Ichiro isn't among the greatest pure hitters. He's just a really, really fast singles hitter.

Anybody who's ever seen a Wade Boggs at bat will tell you that Boggs was a far better hitter than Suzuki. Boggs was such a good hitter that if he found a pitch he didn't like, he would foul it off. Every time. I've never seen a hitter force more 10-pitch counts.

Another guy that I'm surprised isn't on here is Edgar Martinez. He was one of the most impossible hitters for a stretch. Maybe he's not there because he didn't have nearly the same kind of longevity as the other guys.

chiefzilla1501
10-22-2009, 09:33 PM
Pujols and Arod need to be on that list.

As pure hitters, no. Though, I would consider adding Bonds to the list. Probably not on the list because of steroids. Bonds never swung at a bad pitch.

Marcellus
10-22-2009, 09:35 PM
As pure hitters, no. Though, I would consider adding Bonds to the list. Probably not on the list because of steroids. Bonds never swung at a bad pitch.

You are wrong about Pujols see my last post.

thurman merman
10-22-2009, 09:35 PM
Pujols and Arod need to be on that list.

if we're talking about "pure" hitters, shouldn't a-rod be eliminated because of the steroid issues?

Marcellus
10-22-2009, 09:37 PM
Yeah, but it's about quality, not quantity.

Ichiro is easily the most overrated player in baseball. He's a dinky singles hitter. He's going to get you a lot of infield singles and a lot of dinky bloops and a lot of bunt singles, but none of those are going to advance the runner in front by more than a base. All the while, he's going to swing at the first pitch and never walk. Ichiro isn't among the greatest pure hitters. He's just a really, really fast singles hitter.

Anybody who's ever seen a Wade Boggs at bat will tell you that Boggs was a far better hitter than Suzuki. Boggs was such a good hitter that if he found a pitch he didn't like, he would foul it off. Every time. I've never seen a hitter force more 10-pitch counts.

Another guy that I'm surprised isn't on here is Edgar Martinez. He was one of the most impossible hitters for a stretch. Maybe he's not there because he didn't have nearly the same kind of longevity as the other guys.

FTW. I respect the fuck out of Ichiro but his OBS sucks ass.

Pujols has him beat in BA and OBPS since he came into the league.

CoMoChief
10-22-2009, 09:39 PM
if we're talking about "pure" hitters, shouldn't a-rod be eliminated because of the steroid issues?

Arod was great before and after the steroids thing.

There's no question Pujols needs to be on that list. He's probably the best hitter period. He hardly strikeouts, has the best eye for the ball I've ever seen.

Basically he's a great hitter with power.

thurman merman
10-22-2009, 09:40 PM
Arod was great before and after the steroids thing.

There's no question Pujols needs to be on that list. He's probably the best hitter period. He hardly strikeouts, has the best eye for the ball I've ever seen.

Basically he's a great hitter with power.

i do not disagree about pujols at all. but it doesn't seem right for "pure" and "steroids" to be used in the same sentence.

chiefzilla1501
10-22-2009, 09:42 PM
You are wrong about Pujols see my last post.

Sorry, did I say no to Pujols? Pujols is one of the best hitters I've ever seen.

I was commenting about ARod. He's a terrific power hitter, but he's a .300 hitter who strikes out not an obscene amount, but enough to not be in contention.

CoMoChief
10-22-2009, 09:48 PM
i do not disagree about pujols at all. but it doesn't seem right for "pure" and "steroids" to be used in the same sentence.

steroids doesnt help hand/eye coordination though.

MadMax
10-22-2009, 09:48 PM
I am dumbfounded!!! What, no Pena jr. ?

chiefzilla1501
10-22-2009, 09:51 PM
steroids doesnt help hand/eye coordination though.

It quickens your bat speed. Hitting a baseball is about split seconds, and when you're a pro, those extra split seconds give you extra time to eye a pitch and extra time to get around a blazing fastball.

thurman merman
10-22-2009, 09:51 PM
I am dumbfounded!!! What, no Pena jr. ?

uh, you obviously did not read the whole thread.

thurman merman
10-22-2009, 09:52 PM
steroids doesnt help hand/eye coordination though.

i'm not saying it does. i'm just saying it seems wrong to put a cheater on a list of the best pure hitters.

Pioli Zombie
10-22-2009, 09:55 PM
how did David DeJesus not make this list?

MadMax
10-22-2009, 09:56 PM
uh, you obviously did not read the whole thread.



Shit happens :( my bad LOL now I see I bypassed the pic jeez gj :)

chiefzilla1501
10-22-2009, 10:00 PM
The one interesting thing about Pujols, is that being a major deep threat hitter forces defenses to play back, which gives you a ton of space in the outfield to get hits in front of the outfielder. I think that's why you don't see many power hitters on that list. Over 25% of Pujols' hits were home runs. There's not much strategy about that. You see a pitch and you hit the crap out of it.

What makes guys like Gwynn and Boggs so interesting is that they worked with a lot less of a field and most of their hits were pure hits that had to be placed perfectly. When you don't hit a ton of home runs, outfielders can play in, so you have a lot less space to put the ball in. Those hitters were so good that they could practically put the ball exactly where they wanted to. Boggs did that because he never hit a ball into play unless it was exactly a pitch he liked. So as much as I think Pujols is one of the greatest hitters, if not the greatest hitter, I've personally ever watched, I think I understand the argument that he's not one of the greatest "pure" hitters.

thurman merman
10-22-2009, 10:02 PM
The one interesting thing about Pujols, is that being a major deep threat hitter forces defenses to play back, which gives you a ton of space in the outfield to get hits in front of the outfielder. I think that's why you don't see many power hitters on that list. Over 25% of Pujols' hits were home runs. There's not much strategy about that. You see a pitch and you hit the crap out of it.

What makes guys like Gwynn and Boggs so interesting is that they worked with a lot less of a field and most of their hits were pure hits that had to be placed perfectly. When you don't hit a ton of home runs, outfielders can play in, so you have a lot less space to put the ball in. Those hitters were so good that they could practically put the ball exactly where they wanted to. Boggs did that because he never hit a ball into play unless it was exactly a pitch he liked. So as much as I think Pujols is one of the greatest hitters, if not the greatest hitter, I've personally ever watched, I think I understand the argument that he's not one of the greatest "pure" hitters.

compelling argument.

BWillie
10-22-2009, 10:20 PM
I don't think Manny or Bonds belong in the top 25 much less the top 10. Ted has to be number 1 nobody will hit over .400 again until they thaw his head out.

Are you sh*tting me? Bonds is the best player to ever live. He's done it all except win the World Series, and when he was in the playoffs he completely tore it up.

He almost has 3000 hits and is #1 in walks - and it's not even close. Bonds should be up there over AROD or Manny.

Demonpenz
10-22-2009, 11:01 PM
Bonds played a seperate game. Those steriods and his armor he would have been an average player in BASEWARS FOR N.E.S.

KCChiefsMan
10-23-2009, 02:41 AM
you have to go with Ted Williams as the best, he was the best at that

old_geezer
10-23-2009, 05:50 AM
My top three:

1. Ted Williams
2. Stan Musial
3. Roberto Clemente
4. Everyone else in a bucket (with Aaron on top :))