Replies

There are some statistical sources like Bill James that will break players down for comparison purposes by posting their career numbers in the form of a "162-game average."

In Rose's case, his average season was as follows:

639 at-bats
98 runs
194 hits
34 doubles
6 triples
7 home runs
60 RBIs
9 stolen bases (in 16 attempts)
71 walks
52 strikeouts
.303 batting average

Some of these numbers are good, but overall I'd say most people would be surprised to see his career numbers in this context. The 71 walks, 52 strikeouts and 9 stolen bases are particularly disappointing -- when you consider that he was a singles hitter who batted #1 or #2 in the lineup for most of his career.

A local radio host in New York summed it up very well last year when a caller asked why he considered Rose so overrated. The host replied that in his 23-year career, there was never a time when Rose was even the best player on his own team, let alone compared to the all-time greats.

I'm a regular at Baseball-Reference.com, so I'm aware of the 162-game average (why I'm a huge Jim Rice supporter). But even in Rose's case, how many players average 600 at-bats? How many come close to 98 runs? 194 hits? 34 doubles? Not many who aren't HOF'ers.

If the argument is over whether Rose is one of the top 25 players ever, I'd buy into that he's not. But he is a HOF'er (based upon his numbers). And whether he was the best on his own team when he played with Bench (arguably the best catcher of all time), Morgan, Foster, Schmidt (arguably the best 3B of all time), Carlton (arguably the best LP of all time), that's not really fair.