Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: dangus
Rose had a thoroughly mediocre on-base percentage. Bench was actually LESS likely to drive in runs because Rose batted in front of him. THAT’S a statistical fact.

I dispute your fact. Rose played for I think 48 seasons, more or less. I may be off but it was lots and lots anyway. His numbers in his first few years weren't stellar and not in the last several seasons either. That waters down his career numbers for sure. But in his peak years, mostly with the Reds, Rose won three batting titles, came in second twice, and finished in the top ten a total of 13 times. Rose led the league in on-base percentage twice, and finished in the top-five eight times. He led the NL in hits seven times, and finished in the top five an 15, yes 15 seasons. Plus he led the league in doubles and finished in the top 5 14 times. He was on base and in scoring position a lot.

It is a fact that Rose was not a thoroughly mediocre hitter.

149 posted on 06/06/2019 2:14:20 PM PDT by pepsi_junkie (Often wrong, but never in doubt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]


To: pepsi_junkie
The Philles sure didn't think so when the signed him. I think it was the biggest contract ever at the time.
They wanted his bat and more so his attitude to bring home a world series; which they did.
160 posted on 06/06/2019 2:57:23 PM PDT by fungoking (Tis a pleasure to live in the 0zarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

To: pepsi_junkie

48 seasons!? Good one!


162 posted on 06/06/2019 3:08:31 PM PDT by bobby.223 (Retired up in the snowy Mountains of the American Redoubt and it's a great life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

To: pepsi_junkie

>> Rose played for I think 48 seasons, more or less. <<

I’m not sure what you meant to write, but given my ranting that Rose broke the hits record simply because he played so long, that’s kinda funny.

>> It is a fact that Rose was not a thoroughly mediocre hitter. <<

For a starting first baseman, yes he was. He had a ton of singles. It takes three singles to score a run. (I find that kind of baseball much more exciting than today’s home-run contests, even as a Yankees fan!) The ONLY thing he excelled at was hitting singles, and even so, he had a career on-base pct of .373. For comparison, Joey Votto’s is .424. Fifty one points higher! Pete Rose’s OBP is closer to that of a second-string shortstop than to Joey Votto!

And Joey Votto will probably end up with about three times as many home runs.

(Actually, the more I look at this, the more I’m ready to see Joey Votto as a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer.)

First basemen who played in 1985 with better careers than Pete Rose:
Don Mattingly
Cecil Fielder
Tony Perez
Eddie Murray
Cecil Cooper
Rod Carew
Kent Hrbek
Hal McRae
and Dave “Screw the 400 HR rule, he’s not a Hall of Famer” Kingman

Not even in the top 9. That’s mediocre.


182 posted on 06/06/2019 5:08:47 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson