After this whole A-Rod thing, it hurts so much more knowing that the guy who could have broken these records that guys like Bonds, and soon to be arod, is almost forgotten. As far as we know, he is clean, and did it on pure talent. Its a shame that a guy who me may find out was one the few "pure" guys in th 90's, may never reach the greatness that he was reaching for early in his career. Even with injuries, he still hit 600+. My hats off to you Griff, and thank you. What you have done surpasses in my eyes what Arod has done. Do you guys think he's clean, and where should he rank?
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ken Griffey Jr.....truly the greatest player of our time?
- Thread starter KillBill
- Start date
Junior Griffey is the best player of today's generation, and one of the greatest ever, and it has nothing to do with steroids hurting so many others.
Before Griffey went to the Reds, he was the best defensive CF, and it wasn't close. Edmonds was a distant 2nd, and Andruw Jones was a distant 3rd. Griffey was also among the best hitters in the game, whether it was for power or not. Even with all the time he's missed in Cincinatti, he's still among the active leaders in so many categories, and can still play fairly well defensively, although not to the level he played in Seattle.
He's always been fan friendly, and has never had any problems with the law, so that definitely helps him out during the "Steroid Era". His swing is among the sweetest in history, and one that any left-hander would be wise to imitate.
There's not another player, during Griffey's career, that comes close to what he's done on and off the field. He's almost assured of being a first ballot hall of famer, especially with seemingly everyone else embroiled in scandal.
Before Griffey went to the Reds, he was the best defensive CF, and it wasn't close. Edmonds was a distant 2nd, and Andruw Jones was a distant 3rd. Griffey was also among the best hitters in the game, whether it was for power or not. Even with all the time he's missed in Cincinatti, he's still among the active leaders in so many categories, and can still play fairly well defensively, although not to the level he played in Seattle.
He's always been fan friendly, and has never had any problems with the law, so that definitely helps him out during the "Steroid Era". His swing is among the sweetest in history, and one that any left-hander would be wise to imitate.
There's not another player, during Griffey's career, that comes close to what he's done on and off the field. He's almost assured of being a first ballot hall of famer, especially with seemingly everyone else embroiled in scandal.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
The problem is, are you sure he's clean? People's names keep dropping off the list left on right and it's getting to the point where you don't know who you can trust. As for Griffey over A-Rod, I'd think it's an interesting argument. He had so much power it was unbelievable, he could run, he was a great defender, good average, and just the sweetest swing ever.
However, the injuries stopped him cold. He simply couldn't stay healthy once he left Seattle and that's sad. It was painful to watch him go out for months at a time on plays where he was just trying to make something happen. I could easily see him being put against A-Rod for best this generation though. If he's clean, that might put him even higher.
However, the injuries stopped him cold. He simply couldn't stay healthy once he left Seattle and that's sad. It was painful to watch him go out for months at a time on plays where he was just trying to make something happen. I could easily see him being put against A-Rod for best this generation though. If he's clean, that might put him even higher.
agentmichaelscarn
Old School
Assuming Griffey is clean my hats off to him and I respect him for that, he was also one of my favorite players growing up as a kid but he is not the best player of this era. In fact he is a bit overrated. He had the priviledge of hitting in the bandbox known as the King Dome. His numbers were severely inflated due to that, he also was lucky enough to have A-Rod, Edgar Martinez and Jay Buhner all hitting around him. With that type of protection around him he got to see plenty of good pitches and pitchers couldnt pitch around him like they did for Bonds and McGwire.
As far as his defense goes that is another overrated factor of his game. People think that just cause he made spectacular catches that he was a good defender but there is more to defense than that. Look up Griffey's sabermatic defensive stats like his range factor, they're not very good. For every highlight reel catch he made 2 or 3 balls would drop in that centerfielders with more range would have gotten to. He had to make spectacular diving catches because his range wasnt great. And his arm was nothing to write home about either. Im not saying he was a liability defensively but he wasnt as good as people think.
If you put Bonds in that Seattle lineup and playing at the King Dome even without steroids he would smash any numbers that Griffey put up. Bonds was in the 40/40 club and already amassed over 500Hrs before any mention of him and steroids. He played in one of the biggest parks in the league and had no protection around him yet is the home run king. He basically got 2 or 3 good pitches to hit an entire game and thats it and when he got them he would do damage with them. With most hitters if a pitcher falls behind 2-0 or 3-1 the batter gets a nice fastball right over the plate to do damage with, not Bonds when he was in that count pitchers would just throw 2 more balls and put him on first because nobody behind him could hit. Pitchers actually intentionally walked him at times with the bases loaded, that's how feared he was up there. The guys BA, OBP and OPS dwarf Griffey's. So steroids or not Bonds is the best baseball player this generation. The disadvantages he had playing where he played and who he played with far outweigh any advantages that he got with steroids.
As far as his defense goes that is another overrated factor of his game. People think that just cause he made spectacular catches that he was a good defender but there is more to defense than that. Look up Griffey's sabermatic defensive stats like his range factor, they're not very good. For every highlight reel catch he made 2 or 3 balls would drop in that centerfielders with more range would have gotten to. He had to make spectacular diving catches because his range wasnt great. And his arm was nothing to write home about either. Im not saying he was a liability defensively but he wasnt as good as people think.
If you put Bonds in that Seattle lineup and playing at the King Dome even without steroids he would smash any numbers that Griffey put up. Bonds was in the 40/40 club and already amassed over 500Hrs before any mention of him and steroids. He played in one of the biggest parks in the league and had no protection around him yet is the home run king. He basically got 2 or 3 good pitches to hit an entire game and thats it and when he got them he would do damage with them. With most hitters if a pitcher falls behind 2-0 or 3-1 the batter gets a nice fastball right over the plate to do damage with, not Bonds when he was in that count pitchers would just throw 2 more balls and put him on first because nobody behind him could hit. Pitchers actually intentionally walked him at times with the bases loaded, that's how feared he was up there. The guys BA, OBP and OPS dwarf Griffey's. So steroids or not Bonds is the best baseball player this generation. The disadvantages he had playing where he played and who he played with far outweigh any advantages that he got with steroids.
I was actually thinking of starting this thread after seeing all the news about A-Rod over the weekend. Now amidst all the steroid allegations and rumors, who's to say who has and who has not used them. In another thread, I gave my views on McGwire and Sosa..neither of whom have ever tested positive. But it appears unlikely that they are getting in the Hall anytime soon if ever. And with the unfoldings in the A-Rod case, I am at an utter loss. I was hoping that he hadn't done anything and that he would be that savior to maybe guide MLB away from these scandals that we've been constantly dealing with for 10 years. With him coming out as having taken steroids, I don't know that I'd be surprised by many people at all.
Now on to Griffey. Like I said, I kind of thought A-Rod hadn't done anything but if there is anyone at all that I believe 100% has NEVER taken any kind of performance-enhancer it is the Kid, Ken Griffey Jr. I don't want to sound biased because of this, but he was my favorite growing up and still is...but that's not why I don't think he did anything. Now I of course don't know him personality, but in seeing countless interviews and articles about him he seems like a stand-up guy that is very people-friendly and loves the fans and the game. Also, he didn't have a sudden spike in numbers like some of these guys in the steroid allegations had..his was more gradual and then sustained at a pretty constant rate before all the injuries in Cincy. He also never had just a gigantic season like McGwire, Sosa, or Bonds. The most homers he ever hit in a season was in the 50s which coincidently was during that '98 season but obviously overshadowed by the race. My final thoughts on him not using steroid is his body size. He never did get bulky like the rest of them did..he did get bigger as he got older as anyone would but it wasn't a huge difference like McGwire and Bonds..it looks more natural.
Alright, now that I've made those points, on to the big question. I truly believe Ken Griffey Jr. is among the 5 or 10 best to EVER play the game of baseball and is the best home run hitter there ever was. It's all coulda, woulda, shoulda talk now, and we will never know, but I think it's pretty clear that had he not been hurt so much he would have had many more home runs and would have completely obliterated the recording by getting to 800-850 career at least. You can argue with all these things, but the one thing that I think you can't really argue against is that he has the prettiest and smoothest swing ever. Aside from just home runs, Griffey was also a great hitter in general and an amazing center fielder.
So do all these things make me the greatest ever? Maybe not quite that far, but he is definitely up there and should be a first ballot hall of famer. The only other player I think who could make a claim to being the best of his generation is Bonds and we see where that is..though Bonds was a great player before the steroid allegations, but again who's to say when he started using. If Griffey truly never did use anything, I commend him for the courage to do so when everyone else was and for being a true role model.
Now on to Griffey. Like I said, I kind of thought A-Rod hadn't done anything but if there is anyone at all that I believe 100% has NEVER taken any kind of performance-enhancer it is the Kid, Ken Griffey Jr. I don't want to sound biased because of this, but he was my favorite growing up and still is...but that's not why I don't think he did anything. Now I of course don't know him personality, but in seeing countless interviews and articles about him he seems like a stand-up guy that is very people-friendly and loves the fans and the game. Also, he didn't have a sudden spike in numbers like some of these guys in the steroid allegations had..his was more gradual and then sustained at a pretty constant rate before all the injuries in Cincy. He also never had just a gigantic season like McGwire, Sosa, or Bonds. The most homers he ever hit in a season was in the 50s which coincidently was during that '98 season but obviously overshadowed by the race. My final thoughts on him not using steroid is his body size. He never did get bulky like the rest of them did..he did get bigger as he got older as anyone would but it wasn't a huge difference like McGwire and Bonds..it looks more natural.
Alright, now that I've made those points, on to the big question. I truly believe Ken Griffey Jr. is among the 5 or 10 best to EVER play the game of baseball and is the best home run hitter there ever was. It's all coulda, woulda, shoulda talk now, and we will never know, but I think it's pretty clear that had he not been hurt so much he would have had many more home runs and would have completely obliterated the recording by getting to 800-850 career at least. You can argue with all these things, but the one thing that I think you can't really argue against is that he has the prettiest and smoothest swing ever. Aside from just home runs, Griffey was also a great hitter in general and an amazing center fielder.
So do all these things make me the greatest ever? Maybe not quite that far, but he is definitely up there and should be a first ballot hall of famer. The only other player I think who could make a claim to being the best of his generation is Bonds and we see where that is..though Bonds was a great player before the steroid allegations, but again who's to say when he started using. If Griffey truly never did use anything, I commend him for the courage to do so when everyone else was and for being a true role model.
agentmichaelscarn
Old School
Like I said in my first post I love Griffey but I just dont see how anybody could make a case against Bonds unless you think he did roids for most of his career or you're the type of person that dismisses everything he accomplished because he was on them. Because simply put his numbers dwarf Griffey's and its not really even close.
Bonds has him beat in EVERY offensive category from Batting average, On base percentage, slugging, HRs, RBIs, stolen bases, runs, walks, fewer Ks, OPS and OPS+. Bonds' career OPS+ is a 182. That is simply mind boggling only Ruth and Ted Williams have a higher one and alot experts agree that that is the most important batting stat since it combines power, average, onbase and takes into account where you play. Griffey's is high at a 138+ but nowhere close to Bonds. Bonds won 8 silver slugger awards before 01(which is when the steroid allegations started), Griffey only won 7 his entire career. Bonds has drawn 688 intentional walks and 2558 total. That is over 400 more intentionals than Griffey and twice as many total walks. Could you imagine the damage he would have done if he didnt walk so much? Bonds' eye at the plate was uncanny, nobody's was better. This is the all time home run king yet only struck out more than 92 times in a season once. That is mind boggling from a power hitter.
Each of his last 7 seasons Bonds led the league in on base percentage all the while leading in HRs many of those years and at the age of 41(after the steroid allegations so its pretty obvious he was off of them) he still was one of the lead leaders in HR per AB and hit 28 for the season. Bonds' was also a beast on the basepaths swiping almost 400 more bags than Griffey. And as I mentioned originally no great player had less around him than Bonds did. Outside of Kent and Matt Williams earlier in his career he didnt play with any other All stars in the lineup. This was a man that had Benito freakin Santiago batting after his final years of his career. The guy had absolutely no protection around him. Lets also not forget he played at Pac Bell and Candlestick which had two of the farthest right field alley's in the league, he didnt play at the King Dome or Great american ball park like Griffey did, 2 parks that are known for HRs. So even if you take away some of Bonds' HRs due to steroids you cant take away his plate discipline and eye at the plate. Griffey could never touch Bonds' in either of those categories, he could never hit for average or draw walks like Bonds could and was no where near the beast on the base paths Bonds was. Simply put there was nothing Griffey did better than Barry did.
Bonds has him beat in EVERY offensive category from Batting average, On base percentage, slugging, HRs, RBIs, stolen bases, runs, walks, fewer Ks, OPS and OPS+. Bonds' career OPS+ is a 182. That is simply mind boggling only Ruth and Ted Williams have a higher one and alot experts agree that that is the most important batting stat since it combines power, average, onbase and takes into account where you play. Griffey's is high at a 138+ but nowhere close to Bonds. Bonds won 8 silver slugger awards before 01(which is when the steroid allegations started), Griffey only won 7 his entire career. Bonds has drawn 688 intentional walks and 2558 total. That is over 400 more intentionals than Griffey and twice as many total walks. Could you imagine the damage he would have done if he didnt walk so much? Bonds' eye at the plate was uncanny, nobody's was better. This is the all time home run king yet only struck out more than 92 times in a season once. That is mind boggling from a power hitter.
Each of his last 7 seasons Bonds led the league in on base percentage all the while leading in HRs many of those years and at the age of 41(after the steroid allegations so its pretty obvious he was off of them) he still was one of the lead leaders in HR per AB and hit 28 for the season. Bonds' was also a beast on the basepaths swiping almost 400 more bags than Griffey. And as I mentioned originally no great player had less around him than Bonds did. Outside of Kent and Matt Williams earlier in his career he didnt play with any other All stars in the lineup. This was a man that had Benito freakin Santiago batting after his final years of his career. The guy had absolutely no protection around him. Lets also not forget he played at Pac Bell and Candlestick which had two of the farthest right field alley's in the league, he didnt play at the King Dome or Great american ball park like Griffey did, 2 parks that are known for HRs. So even if you take away some of Bonds' HRs due to steroids you cant take away his plate discipline and eye at the plate. Griffey could never touch Bonds' in either of those categories, he could never hit for average or draw walks like Bonds could and was no where near the beast on the base paths Bonds was. Simply put there was nothing Griffey did better than Barry did.
Monkey_Mania
I Am The One Who Knocks
I myself absolutely love Griffey. He also very might well be the only player to not have used steroids. But in this day and age we never know. Most are on them and they want to be the absolute best they can. Hell, if A-Rod was on them then anyone can be. It wouldn't surprise me if Griffey told the masses tomorrow that he was on them. But I do agree that he might be the best player of our generation. From a hitting, and a fieding perspective. He's definitely a future hall of famer. But with or without steroids he is still one of the best to ever pick up a bat.
The point is, is that he did steriods, we don't know how much it helped him, but it did. And if Griffey had stayed healthy, his numbers would be better than bonds, he'd be the home run king, and baseball would be better off.Like I said in my first post I love Griffey but I just dont see how anybody could make a case against Bonds unless you think he did roids for most of his career or you're the type of person that dismisses everything he accomplished because he was on them. Because simply put his numbers dwarf Griffey's and its not really even close.
Meh, Ya'll can have Griffey Jr, give me Manny Ramirez.
Since 2001 Griffey has been plagued with the injury bug. Griffeys last 150 game season came in 1999, when he played in 160. Griffey hasn't hit more than 35 homers in a single season since 2000.
Manny Ramirez on the other hand is phenomenal. The man hits for AVG, and for power, something you don't really see out of baseball players any more, unless your name is Albert Pujols.
Comparing Manny to Griffey is pretty simple,Ramirez has a higher Batting Average, I believe he has a higher RBI total. He also has more doubles, and he also has a higher slugging percentage. Manny also has a higher on base percentage and he's done all of this in less at bats.
Manny wasn't the best fielder, but he got the job done. Yes, he does clown around, but when it matters the most he usually can make a play. If i remember correctly he is always pretty high up on the outfield assist list, and i believe his arm is a little underrated.
So no, I don't think Griffey Jr is the best player of this ERA.
Since 2001 Griffey has been plagued with the injury bug. Griffeys last 150 game season came in 1999, when he played in 160. Griffey hasn't hit more than 35 homers in a single season since 2000.
Manny Ramirez on the other hand is phenomenal. The man hits for AVG, and for power, something you don't really see out of baseball players any more, unless your name is Albert Pujols.
Comparing Manny to Griffey is pretty simple,Ramirez has a higher Batting Average, I believe he has a higher RBI total. He also has more doubles, and he also has a higher slugging percentage. Manny also has a higher on base percentage and he's done all of this in less at bats.
Manny wasn't the best fielder, but he got the job done. Yes, he does clown around, but when it matters the most he usually can make a play. If i remember correctly he is always pretty high up on the outfield assist list, and i believe his arm is a little underrated.
So no, I don't think Griffey Jr is the best player of this ERA.
Manny Ramirez? No. Hes a great hitter, not a great player. I'm a Red Sox fan, I've seen him for many years. As great as he is, and even with Griffey hurt, Manny will not even come close to his hr numbers. Thats amazing, seeing as how Griff has barely played. I'll take a hurt Griff over the punk ass manny anyday.
Manny Ramirez? No. Hes a great hitter, not a great player. I'm a Red Sox fan, I've seen him for many years. As great as he is, and even with Griffey hurt, Manny will not even come close to his hr numbers. Thats amazing, seeing as how Griff has barely played. I'll take a hurt Griff over the punk ass manny anyday.
what do you mean punk ass Manny? All as Griffey did was strike out, or hit a dinger, there is a lot more to baseball than homeruns. Manny beats him in almost every statistical category except for homeruns. And why is that? Because Manny hits for average and power. He gets his share of singles, and doubles, and some triples. Manny is a complete baseball player. Especially when it comes to hitting. Griffeys played in more games, and Manny is close or has more than him in almost every meaningful statistical category. What does that tell you? I'll tell ya, it means Manny was simply better. Please, back up your statement, I beg you.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Brian, what are you talking about? He only hits home runs? Then how do you explain the over 2000 non home run hits that he has? He's equal in doubles, 20 more triples, has more RBIs, he blows Manny away in stolen bases, and the only thign Manny really is ahead in are average and RBIs. Manny is a complete ball player? No. manny is a complete hitter. His defense is absolutely frightening. He just looks lost out there. Griffey is one of the best centerfielders of all time. Yes Manny is indeed a better offensive player, but he's not so far ahead that it makes up for his terrible defense. Griffey is far more well rounded than Manny, and it's not even close.
All of Jrs stats are based off of more at bats. Therefore he should have more.
According to baseball reference Manny has more doubles, higher RBI's, higher on base percentage, and a higher slugging percentage. Define fielding? It's not like Manny is an errors machine, Manny's career FP is .978. Ken Griffeys is .985.
Manny's 162 game average consists of 39 doubles, 41 homeruns, 133 RBi's, a .314 BA, a .411 OBP, and a slugging percentage of .593.
Griffeys 162 game average is 32 doubles, 39 Homeruns, a 288 BA, 114 RBi's, a .373 OBP, and .547 Slugging Percentage.
According to baseball reference Manny has more doubles, higher RBI's, higher on base percentage, and a higher slugging percentage. Define fielding? It's not like Manny is an errors machine, Manny's career FP is .978. Ken Griffeys is .985.
Manny's 162 game average consists of 39 doubles, 41 homeruns, 133 RBi's, a .314 BA, a .411 OBP, and a slugging percentage of .593.
Griffeys 162 game average is 32 doubles, 39 Homeruns, a 288 BA, 114 RBi's, a .373 OBP, and .547 Slugging Percentage.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Let's see, what would I define as bad fielding. He throws to the wrong people, he cut off a throw to the infield, he's often in the wrong spot and the center fielder has to back him up. He's made soemthing like one nice looking play ever, he has no arm, and he plays a much easier defensive position.
You know what I see in all those stats? A pair of comparable hitters, which is pretty much what I said. Factor in Manny having the solid Cleveland lineup or Boston lineup around him and it gives him a lot more chances. Griffey had hitters around him but not that many good oens. Comparable offense, including the stolen bases that you left off, and light years better on defense make this a no brainer: Griffey in a run away.
You know what I see in all those stats? A pair of comparable hitters, which is pretty much what I said. Factor in Manny having the solid Cleveland lineup or Boston lineup around him and it gives him a lot more chances. Griffey had hitters around him but not that many good oens. Comparable offense, including the stolen bases that you left off, and light years better on defense make this a no brainer: Griffey in a run away.
Manny isn't suppose to steal bases. His job is to drive in runs and hit the ball, which he has, at a higher rate. this thread wasn't about who had a shitty supporting cast with a shitload of statistics, it was a thread about the best baseball player of our time. Which i proved and brought up facts, something everyone is ignoring. Griffey has 20 years of experience. You want to bring up stolen bases in a 162 game season griffey averages 12 stolen bases compared to Manny's 3. Big whoop. If i want a player that is going to hit for average, hit homeruns, get on base i want Manny Ramirez. His numbers are comparable, actually they are better. So i cant see how Griffey is better.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Yet again, all you're talking about is hitting. Manny is definitely the best hitter of our generation. However, in baseball it's about having 5 tools:
Speed
Throwing
Hitting for average
Hitting for power
Fielding
Let's see. Manny is fat and slow and as you've said never steals a base so speed is out.
He can't throw to save his life. He has both of the hitting down for sure, and his fielding is average at a bad postition.
Griffey can steal bases/run, at least much better than Manny. His throwing is clearly better, 600 home runs and over 2000 other hits means he is a solid hitter, and his fielding is some of the best of all time. So in other words, even giving that Manny is a better hitter, Griffey wins three to two, with the two he loses being close.
Speed
Throwing
Hitting for average
Hitting for power
Fielding
Let's see. Manny is fat and slow and as you've said never steals a base so speed is out.
He can't throw to save his life. He has both of the hitting down for sure, and his fielding is average at a bad postition.
Griffey can steal bases/run, at least much better than Manny. His throwing is clearly better, 600 home runs and over 2000 other hits means he is a solid hitter, and his fielding is some of the best of all time. So in other words, even giving that Manny is a better hitter, Griffey wins three to two, with the two he loses being close.
I already brought up the fielding percentage, give or take a little bit by Manny Ramirez. That is at least decent enough to get pass. Seeing as how he usually fields and not play DH, and for whatever mistake he makes in the outfield he's going to come back with a good play at the plate. Manny's biggest error season is 9. Griffeys is 10. Manny is capable of throwing out runners or at least assisting in throwing out runners which would indicate with his high assist rate.
Also, TBF I think you should add the ability to get on base which Manny does better and at a higher percentage. So it should be 3-3. With it still being relatively close in the Fielding percentage thing.
You can't go wrong with either one, but i am taking Manny for the simple fact, he produces a little more offensively.
Also, TBF I think you should add the ability to get on base which Manny does better and at a higher percentage. So it should be 3-3. With it still being relatively close in the Fielding percentage thing.
You can't go wrong with either one, but i am taking Manny for the simple fact, he produces a little more offensively.
First of all, the idea that Griffey didn't take steroids is just funny to me. At this point, I think it strange that people believe that Griffey didn't take steroids. While I'm always a "innocent until proven guilty" fan, for such a talented athlete like Griffey was, his body sure did deteriorate awful fast. I mean, Griffey should have been in the prime of his life, and yet, his body kept failing him. And, look at the injuries he was getting: repeatedly injuring his hamstrings and tendons, two classic steroid induced injuries. And all of that occurring between 2000-2005, the prime steroid years? Like I said, while I guess I'll still have to maintain that Griffey was steroid free, that doesn't mean I believe it.
But, as far as being a great player, Bonds pre-steroids, still is amazing. As far as natural talent goes, I think Bonds is every bit the player Griffey was, just with a worse attitude and the ability to turn media against him. I think that the biggest difference between Bonds and Griffey was their charm with the media. I think if it had been the other way around, then Bonds would be favored over Griffey, as far as "great players" go.
But yeah, Griffey not on steroids? Not buying it.
But, as far as being a great player, Bonds pre-steroids, still is amazing. As far as natural talent goes, I think Bonds is every bit the player Griffey was, just with a worse attitude and the ability to turn media against him. I think that the biggest difference between Bonds and Griffey was their charm with the media. I think if it had been the other way around, then Bonds would be favored over Griffey, as far as "great players" go.
But yeah, Griffey not on steroids? Not buying it.
agentmichaelscarn
Old School
As far as Manny and Griffey are concerned, Griffey was never the complete hitter Manny was. In fact it really isnt even that close unless you put a HUGE stock in HRs because thats about the only edge Griffey has. Griffey had about a 4 year stretch where is power numbers were higher than Ramirez but that's it. Griffey could never hit for average with power to all fields like Manny could or had an eye at the plate like Ramirez. Ramirez never batted under .294 in a full season, that's higher than Griffey's career average. Ramirez career average is .314 which is over 20 points higher than Griffeys. His on base percentage is almost 40 points higher and his slugging is almost 50 points higher. Their OPS(On base plus slugging) arent even in the same ballpark. Then we look at one of the more important stats and that is how you do in the clutch, those all important 2 out runs. With 2 outs and runners in scoring position Manny came through batting .314 in those situation with an amazing .463 on base percentage all the while hitting 71HRs in that time. As for Griffey lets just say he didnt perform so well batting a mere .270 in those but he did hit 56HRs so it wasnt a complete waste but not on par with Manny.
Ramirez played in great lineups but so did Griffey. When Griffey was at his best those Mariners teams had Buhner who routinely hit over 30Hrs, Edgar Martinez who was one of the best DHs ever, A-Rod nothing more needs to be said about him and even to a lesser extent Paul Sorrento who put up a couple 30Hr seasons while he was there so it wasnt like Griffey had scrubs around him. And of course look at the impact one has on their team, look at the impact Ramirez made on that Dodger team. They were below .500 and looked like garbage, a 36 year old Ramirez comes in and he changes everything and carries them to the playoffs.
So while Griffey may have had more natural talent(speed and power) he never turned out to be the all around offensive player Ramirez was even when Griffey was at his best. Griffey never could hit for average like him or get on base like him and that's the difference between Griffey and the all time great hitters. All Griffey did was manage to put up huge HR and RBI numbers in a few year stretch where many players were putting up huge numbers in those categories. Manny put up huge numbers across the board in all offensive stats and did it over a much longer stretch.
Ramirez played in great lineups but so did Griffey. When Griffey was at his best those Mariners teams had Buhner who routinely hit over 30Hrs, Edgar Martinez who was one of the best DHs ever, A-Rod nothing more needs to be said about him and even to a lesser extent Paul Sorrento who put up a couple 30Hr seasons while he was there so it wasnt like Griffey had scrubs around him. And of course look at the impact one has on their team, look at the impact Ramirez made on that Dodger team. They were below .500 and looked like garbage, a 36 year old Ramirez comes in and he changes everything and carries them to the playoffs.
So while Griffey may have had more natural talent(speed and power) he never turned out to be the all around offensive player Ramirez was even when Griffey was at his best. Griffey never could hit for average like him or get on base like him and that's the difference between Griffey and the all time great hitters. All Griffey did was manage to put up huge HR and RBI numbers in a few year stretch where many players were putting up huge numbers in those categories. Manny put up huge numbers across the board in all offensive stats and did it over a much longer stretch.
I've been reading this debate now about Griffey vs. Manny and it is interesting. If your going to debate these two it has to be about who was the better in the 90's, seeing as Griffey was hurt alot after that. If i'm starting a francise in the 90's, I'm taking Ken Griffey Jr. You have to consider Griffey is the definition of a five tool player. If you look at the numbers from 93 to 99 you get the following...
Griffey: 311hr....295avg....880rbi....957games
Manny: 198hr....287avg....682rbi....849games
Yes Griffey had more games to amass the numbers so i looked at it further. Griffey homered one every 3.1 games as opposed to Manny's one hr every 4.3 games. RBI's go to Griffey with one every 1.1 game as opposed to Manny with one rbi every 1.2. Factor in the fact all the gold gloves Griffey won proves he is far superior in the field. Another factor you have to look at is the lineups they were in. Manny had guys like Lofton, Alomar, Baerga, Belle, Thome all in their primes. Griffey had a very young ARod.
In my opinion the player of the 90's: Ken Griffey Jr.
Griffey: 311hr....295avg....880rbi....957games
Manny: 198hr....287avg....682rbi....849games
Yes Griffey had more games to amass the numbers so i looked at it further. Griffey homered one every 3.1 games as opposed to Manny's one hr every 4.3 games. RBI's go to Griffey with one every 1.1 game as opposed to Manny with one rbi every 1.2. Factor in the fact all the gold gloves Griffey won proves he is far superior in the field. Another factor you have to look at is the lineups they were in. Manny had guys like Lofton, Alomar, Baerga, Belle, Thome all in their primes. Griffey had a very young ARod.
In my opinion the player of the 90's: Ken Griffey Jr.
I've been reading this debate now about Griffey vs. Manny and it is interesting. If your going to debate these two it has to be about who was the better in the 90's, seeing as Griffey was hurt alot after that. If i'm starting a francise in the 90's, I'm taking Ken Griffey Jr. You have to consider Griffey is the definition of a five tool player. If you look at the numbers from 93 to 99 you get the following...
Griffey: 311hr....295avg....880rbi....957games
Manny: 198hr....287avg....682rbi....849games
Yes Griffey had more games to amass the numbers so i looked at it further. Griffey homered one every 3.1 games as opposed to Manny's one hr every 4.3 games. RBI's go to Griffey with one every 1.1 game as opposed to Manny with one rbi every 1.2. Factor in the fact all the gold gloves Griffey won proves he is far superior in the field. Another factor you have to look at is the lineups they were in. Manny had guys like Lofton, Alomar, Baerga, Belle, Thome all in their primes. Griffey had a very young ARod.
In my opinion the player of the 90's: Ken Griffey Jr.
I agree with everything you said, except that Griffey had no line-up around him. He had Edgar Martinez, Tino Martinez, and Jey Buhner hitting around him as well.
Edgar was a doubles machine, and could hit in the clutch. Tino wasn't quite the player he was with the Yankees, but he was still a good hitter, and solidified the line-up. Buhner may not have had a Hall of Fame career, but for 94-96, he was a feared power hitter, and had a heck of an arm in Right Field.
The line-up was also rounded out with guys like Luis Sojo, Alex Cora, and Dan Wilson, who, again, weren't excellent hitters, but held their own for where they hit in the line up.
Yea I have to agree with you there my mind must have been slipping esp on Edgar Martinez. Guy could flat out hit..prob the second best DH of all time.
Tino and Buhner were power hitters. Tino was not the Tino from the yankee years but still a quality hitter.
Tino and Buhner were power hitters. Tino was not the Tino from the yankee years but still a quality hitter.
I've been reading this debate now about Griffey vs. Manny and it is interesting. If your going to debate these two it has to be about who was the better in the 90's, seeing as Griffey was hurt alot after that. If i'm starting a francise in the 90's, I'm taking Ken Griffey Jr. You have to consider Griffey is the definition of a five tool player. If you look at the numbers from 93 to 99 you get the following...
Griffey: 311hr....295avg....880rbi....957games
Manny: 198hr....287avg....682rbi....849games
Yes Griffey had more games to amass the numbers so i looked at it further. Griffey homered one every 3.1 games as opposed to Manny's one hr every 4.3 games. RBI's go to Griffey with one every 1.1 game as opposed to Manny with one rbi every 1.2. Factor in the fact all the gold gloves Griffey won proves he is far superior in the field. Another factor you have to look at is the lineups they were in. Manny had guys like Lofton, Alomar, Baerga, Belle, Thome all in their primes. Griffey had a very young ARod.
In my opinion the player of the 90's: Ken Griffey Jr.
I don't get how you can hold longevity against a certain individual. Ramirez can't help it that Griffey couldn't stay healthy for the better part of this decade. Everyone goes through some injuries. Manny Ramirez was putting up stellar numbers while staying healthy. If i want someone to lead my team it is going to be Manny, Why? Because he is capable of staying healthy while hitting over 300, you can expect at least 35+ homeruns, 100 RBIs and a very high OBP and Slugging percentage. Griffey is a health risk, I am not willing to pay him the big bucks because who is to say on a fly ball he isn't going to pull a groin. Manny Ramirez is a fucking beast, he is a more consistent ball player, and imo the best baseball player of my time.
Wow, my thread has become manny vs Griffey. Damn. If Griffey had stayed healthy, this arguement wouldnt exist since he would hit 800 hrs. As a great player I'm taking into consideration power, hitting, defense, but alsp personality and reputation. Manny has not fared well in the rep dept lately. Sure, Griffs injured a lot, but hes still put up amazing numbers. No matter what, this a great discussion, I just don't want Griff to be forgotten for for what he was. There was a poll on a local sports show i watched about a year ago, and it was asked who the best player was in the past 20 yrs. The options were bonds, Arod or Griffey. And Griff won by a small margin. What could have been maybe should have been.
agentmichaelscarn
Old School
There is simply no way anybody can make a case for Griffey being a better all around hitter than Manny. Manny was a complete hitter, Griffey wasnt. Griffey could never hit for average or had an eye at the plate like Manny had. Griffey's splits were also pathetic, Griffey only batted .270 against left handed pitching where as Manny batted .306 against righties and .340 against lefties, so it didnt matter who you threw out there Manny was hitting them. Where as with Griffey you could put in a lefty specialist late in the game to neutralize him. I will concede that Griffey did put up more power numbers in the late 90s than Manny but besides that Manny destroys him in every offensive category. You can say "well if Griffey stayed healthy" but the fact is he didnt. Even if he did stay healthy chances are he would have broken the HR record but that would be it. Sure that is a great accomplishment but that still wouldnt change the fact that he was never the complete hitter Bonds or Ramirez were. Both of those guys could hit 40+ Homers while batting .320+, being able to hit against lefties and righties and drawing a shit load of walks. Griffey could never do that even at his best.
If you want to bring defense into the discussion then things may change but even so Griffey was an overrated defender. Was he bad? Of course not, but he was not this all world defender people think he was. His zone rating was barely above the league average at his position most years he played. For those of you that dont know that stat measures the percentage of balls that a fielder gets in his "zone", most analysts consider that the most important fielding stat because it shows how much ground you can cover. Same thing with fielding percentage, most years he was right at or just above or below the average for centerfielders. So you're talking about the two biggest defensive stats and he is right around the league average in both of them yet people think he is a spectacular defender. Why because he made some fancy catches here and there? There's more to being a great defender than that. And dont bring up the gold gloves because that is the most flawed stat/award in all of sports. That is completely based off of reputation and that's it. Derek Jeter always wins that award and he is one of the worst defensive SS in the league. The guy's range is pathetic, he has to do that jump throw of his because he is so out of position when he gets to the ball because of his range. All the voters look for when they vote on that is reputation, highlight plays and how good your season was all around including offensively. Anyway with all that said I will still give the edge defensively to Griffey but he was still overrated there.
If you want to bring defense into the discussion then things may change but even so Griffey was an overrated defender. Was he bad? Of course not, but he was not this all world defender people think he was. His zone rating was barely above the league average at his position most years he played. For those of you that dont know that stat measures the percentage of balls that a fielder gets in his "zone", most analysts consider that the most important fielding stat because it shows how much ground you can cover. Same thing with fielding percentage, most years he was right at or just above or below the average for centerfielders. So you're talking about the two biggest defensive stats and he is right around the league average in both of them yet people think he is a spectacular defender. Why because he made some fancy catches here and there? There's more to being a great defender than that. And dont bring up the gold gloves because that is the most flawed stat/award in all of sports. That is completely based off of reputation and that's it. Derek Jeter always wins that award and he is one of the worst defensive SS in the league. The guy's range is pathetic, he has to do that jump throw of his because he is so out of position when he gets to the ball because of his range. All the voters look for when they vote on that is reputation, highlight plays and how good your season was all around including offensively. Anyway with all that said I will still give the edge defensively to Griffey but he was still overrated there.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 1K
Users who are viewing this thread
Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)