Is it time to put Jose Altuve up with Rogers Hornsby as the greatest second basemen of all time?

Sally Vix wrote:

asurfhjkna wrote:ro

Rogers Hornsby is the GOAT second baseman in the same way as Paavo Nurmi is the GOAT distance runner. If you add up everything in a certain way and make absolutely no adjustment for era or level of play, he comes out on top. But the level of play has changed so much over the past century as to make the comparison nearly meaningless. Unlike times in track, baseball has no (pseudo-)objective way to compare across eras, and so people generally take the WAR numbers at face value.

I don't know who the GOAT second baseman is. The consensus modern choice seems to be Joe Morgan (although even he played 50 years ago). Could possibly be Altuve, especially if you weight the modern era heavily. Could be Roberto Alomar, Chase Utley, Rod Carew, Craig Biggio, Lou Whitaker, or *maybe* even Jackie Robinson.

A modern Rogers Hornsby might have been like Altuve/Morgan/Biggio/etc. just the way that a modern Nurmi might have been Cheptegei/Ingebrigtsen. But in any reasonable sense, the real Hornsby wasn't.

After some thought, Altuve certainly doesn't belong in the top 10. Rogers Hornsby should be number 1. People are forgetting Nap Lajoie. He has the 23rd best WAR of all time. I am/was a huge Joe Morgan fan. I would include him in the top 5 but maybe at 5. Hornsby has to be 1 with Eddie Collins, Lajoie rounding out top 5. Roberto Alomar was pretty dang good. Jackie Robinson also in the conversation.

king999 wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

After some thought, Altuve certainly doesn't belong in the top 10. Rogers Hornsby should be number 1. People are forgetting Nap Lajoie. He has the 23rd best WAR of all time. I am/was a huge Joe Morgan fan. I would include him in the top 5 but maybe at 5. Hornsby has to be 1 with Eddie Collins, Lajoie rounding out top 5. Roberto Alomar was pretty dang good. Jackie Robinson also in the conversation.

Sally, with all due respect, I understand your point. My point as to all timers in any sport is, you can only dominate the era you are in. Ie. Hornsby..no one alive thanks he would hit anywhere what he did in the long long time ago era. I had Alomar , just an eye test in my earlier post, but deleted him when I realized Altuve will fly by him in almost every metric. Altuve has as quick hands as many I have seen. He is really f'ing good and I have no love for Asros, but since not a Yankee fan, not a ton of hate either..lol, It/s not Jackie Robinson's fault he started late, and his athleticism in unquestioned, and his daring base running prowess is a bit exaggerated, he stole 200 and was thrown out 76 times, that is not all time stuff, by a long shot and avg'ed under 20 steals a year. 72% is not great . But, he did steal home a ton as Malmo, said, his .313 in 11 combined partial and full seasons with 1500+ hits is elite. For time in Majors.

Sally Vix wrote:

king999 wrote:

Sally, with all due respect, I understand your point. My point as to all timers in any sport is, you can only dominate the era you are in. Ie. Hornsby..no one alive thanks he would hit anywhere what he did in the long long time ago era. I had Alomar , just an eye test in my earlier post, but deleted him when I realized Altuve will fly by him in almost every metric. Altuve has as quick hands as many I have seen. He is really f'ing good and I have no love for Asros, but since not a Yankee fan, not a ton of hate either..lol, It/s not Jackie Robinson's fault he started late, and his athleticism in unquestioned, and his daring base running prowess is a bit exaggerated, he stole 200 and was thrown out 76 times, that is not all time stuff, by a long shot and avg'ed under 20 steals a year. 72% is not great . But, he did steal home a ton as Malmo, said, his .313 in 11 combined partial and full seasons with 1500+ hits is elite. For time in Majors.

You make some really good points but I don't agree that yesterday's baseball superstars would not excel today. Case in point - Rogers Hornsby was still playing in the '30s. Bob Feller started in the '30s and had a fast ball approaching 107 mph. That is as fast if not faster than anyone today.

Sally Vix wrote:

king999 wrote:

Sally, with all due respect, I understand your point. My point as to all timers in any sport is, you can only dominate the era you are in. Ie. Hornsby..no one alive thanks he would hit anywhere what he did in the long long time ago era. I had Alomar , just an eye test in my earlier post, but deleted him when I realized Altuve will fly by him in almost every metric. Altuve has as quick hands as many I have seen. He is really f'ing good and I have no love for Asros, but since not a Yankee fan, not a ton of hate either..lol, It/s not Jackie Robinson's fault he started late, and his athleticism in unquestioned, and his daring base running prowess is a bit exaggerated, he stole 200 and was thrown out 76 times, that is not all time stuff, by a long shot and avg'ed under 20 steals a year. 72% is not great . But, he did steal home a ton as Malmo, said, his .313 in 11 combined partial and full seasons with 1500+ hits is elite. For time in Majors.

You make some really good points but I don't agree that yesterday's baseball superstars would not excel today. Case in point - Rogers Hornsby was still playing in the '30s. Bob Feller started in the '30s and had a fast ball approaching 107 mph. That is as fast if not faster than anyone today.

oking999 wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

You make some really good points but I don't agree that yesterday's baseball superstars would not excel today. Case in point - Rogers Hornsby was still playing in the '30s. Bob Feller started in the '30s and had a fast ball approaching 107 mph. That is as fast if not faster than anyone today.

Ok, I guess? First of all on Hornsby..in the Non age of specialization, he saw same pitcher in games 4 and sometimes for 5 ABs..never happens today. Secondly, all day games, lighting has greatly improved over decades, but all day games most note as an advantage.

Travel is clearly better today, but rosters athletically were NO where near today's.

Feller's velocity was clearly overestimated, any historian would tell you so, the measurements were done with antiquated equipment and by a moving motorcycle and drive by moving alongside delivery which is a crap shoot at best.

No one threw 107 back in the 30's no matter who said it, the measurement was way too sketchy to be taken as fact. And with weight of old time bats, no one would have EVER hit him. Just is.

king999 wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

You make some really good points but I don't agree that yesterday's baseball superstars would not excel today. Case in point - Rogers Hornsby was still playing in the '30s. Bob Feller started in the '30s and had a fast ball approaching 107 mph. That is as fast if not faster than anyone today.

Ok, I guess? First of all on Hornsby..in the Non age of specialization, he saw same pitcher in games 4 and sometimes for 5 ABs..never happens today. Secondly, all day games, lighting has greatly improved over decades, but all day games most note as an advantage.

Travel is clearly better today, but rosters athletically were NO where near today's.

Feller's velocity was clearly overestimated, any historian would tell you so, the measurements were done with antiquated equipment and by a moving motorcycle and drive by moving alongside delivery which is a crap shoot at best.

No one threw 107 back in the 30's no matter who said it, the measurement was way too sketchy to be taken as fact. And with weight of old time bats, no one would have EVER hit him. Just is.

Sally Vix wrote:

oking999 wrote:

Ok, I guess? First of all on Hornsby..in the Non age of specialization, he saw same pitcher in games 4 and sometimes for 5 ABs..never happens today. Secondly, all day games, lighting has greatly improved over decades, but all day games most note as an advantage.

Travel is clearly better today, but rosters athletically were NO where near today's.

Feller's velocity was clearly overestimated, any historian would tell you so, the measurements were done with antiquated equipment and by a moving motorcycle and drive by moving alongside delivery which is a crap shoot at best.

No one threw 107 back in the 30's no matter who said it, the measurement was way too sketchy to be taken as fact. And with weight of old time bats, no one would have EVER hit him. Just is.

About the motorcyle measurements of speed - his speed was calculated at 104 but at 107 when adjusting for the motorcycle. No idea what that means but he threw pretty fast.

Sally Vix wrote:

king999 wrote:

Sally, with all due respect, I understand your point. My point as to all timers in any sport is, you can only dominate the era you are in. Ie. Hornsby..no one alive thanks he would hit anywhere what he did in the long long time ago era. I had Alomar , just an eye test in my earlier post, but deleted him when I realized Altuve will fly by him in almost every metric. Altuve has as quick hands as many I have seen. He is really f'ing good and I have no love for Asros, but since not a Yankee fan, not a ton of hate either..lol, It/s not Jackie Robinson's fault he started late, and his athleticism in unquestioned, and his daring base running prowess is a bit exaggerated, he stole 200 and was thrown out 76 times, that is not all time stuff, by a long shot and avg'ed under 20 steals a year. 72% is not great . But, he did steal home a ton as Malmo, said, his .313 in 11 combined partial and full seasons with 1500+ hits is elite. For time in Majors.

You make some really good points but I don't agree that yesterday's baseball superstars would not excel today. Case in point - Rogers Hornsby was still playing in the '30s. Bob Feller started in the '30s and had a fast ball approaching 107 mph. That is as fast if not faster than anyone today.

Sally Vix wrote:

king999 wrote:

Ok, I guess? First of all on Hornsby..in the Non age of specialization, he saw same pitcher in games 4 and sometimes for 5 ABs..never happens today. Secondly, all day games, lighting has greatly improved over decades, but all day games most note as an advantage.

Travel is clearly better today, but rosters athletically were NO where near today's.

Feller's velocity was clearly overestimated, any historian would tell you so, the measurements were done with antiquated equipment and by a moving motorcycle and drive by moving alongside delivery which is a crap shoot at best.

No one threw 107 back in the 30's no matter who said it, the measurement was way too sketchy to be taken as fact. And with weight of old time bats, no one would have EVER hit him. Just is.

Question for you - do you think Ted Williams, Lou Gehrig, Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb and Rogers Hornsby would not have hit well today?