Statistics. Numbers don't often lie in baseball. P/E Averages, as well as more formal statistical categories, weighed heavily in determining value. MVP Résumé. By this I am referring to regular-season and postseason awards as well as career shares. All-Star MVPs don't matter very much to me, but it is fair to mention it for players who have won them. Special attention needed to be given to those who played prior to 1931, the year MVP voting was streamlined. Postseason Performance. This carried a lot of weight in my analyses. After all, winning championships is the objective at the major league level. Defense. P/E Averages are based solely on offense, but that's only half the game. In terms of defense, I focused on Gold Gloves, assist-to-error ratios at second base, third base, and shortstop, and overall quality of play in the field. Individual Success. This includes league leadership in offensive and defensive categories, All-Star nominations, and Hall of Fame voting. Intangibles and Special Considerations. Some players outperform their statistics by saving their best for when it matters most. Consideration also needed to be given to the time in which the athlete played and whether he was a truly unique player for his position or generation.In ranking the top 100, I have not included players from the nineteenth century or the Negro League simply because they competed in settings far different from modern ballplayers. Therefore, I focused only on the men from –. To form my list, I started at 1, taking the player I considered the best available choice at each stop along the way. However, I have presented it by beginning at 100 and finishing with my pick for the top spot, with detailed explanations for each selection. The top 100 includes the 50 Category 5 players (1–50) and 50 of the Category 4 (51–100). In my opinion, these are the 100 best players ever.
100. Tony Lazzeri
I'll begin with Lazzeri, a terrific second baseman for the Yankees in the '20s and '30s. He had some outstanding offensive seasons, with great numbers for a middle infielder. Impressively, he averaged 1.15 net runs per contest. Poosh 'Em Up Tony starts the top 100.
99. Luis Aparicio
Like Lazzeri, Aparicio was a middle infielder. Although he lacked the offensive might of the man at number 100, he was tremendous in the field. Aparicio won nine Gold Gloves and stole more than 500 bases. I opt for his speed and defense over Lazzeri's bat.
98. Enos Slaughter
Slaughter outgained Aparicio in terms of MVP shares (2.10 to 1.24) despite missing three full seasons in the middle of his career. They played different positions, a fact that always makes it hard to compare players. Nevertheless, I like Slaughter's track record in the postseason (4–1 in the World Series with a P/E of 1.010), and I like him over Luis for number 98.
97. Chuck Klein
Klein has a lifetime P/E Average (1.160) that is much higher than Slaughter's (1.040). He also won an MVP and a Triple Crown. Overall, I think Klein was probably more dynamic and more dominant in his prime than Slaughter. That's good enough for me to place him at number 97.
96. Barry Larkin
Larkin lacks the offensive numbers of Klein, but he played well enough at a premium position to warrant a higher ranking. The era in which Chuck Klein played also has to be considered here. Offensive statistics were inflated in the 1930s. I like Larkin's combination of leadership, speed, glove work, and pop at the plate.
95. Dave Winfield
Winfield gets the nod over Larkin based on his longevity and power. Like Larkin, Winfield made a dozen All-Star squads, and he betters the Reds shortstop in Gold Gloves, seven to three. Although he never won a Most Valuable Player award, he did reach 3,000 hits and came within one good season of 500 homers (465). I'll take Winfield in right over Larkin at short … but only by a little.
94. Dave Parker
The Cobra is my choice here because of his MVP résumé. Parker won the award in '78 with a 95 percent share of the available points. He also finished runner-up once and in third place twice. In all, Parker collected 3.19 career shares to Winfield's 2.20. Both were Gold Glove corner outfielders. At peak performance, I think Parker was probably the better player.
93. Pie Traynor
I wasn't exactly sure where Traynor belonged. He played in the '20s and '30s and put up some terrific offensive statistics. Most impressive is his lifetime average of 1.24 net runs per game, which is more than a quarter of a run better than Parker's average (.98). And although there have been many, many talented players in right field, third base is sparse. My ranking of Pie as the seventh-best third baseman ever gives the edge to him over Dave Parker, who failed to make it into the top 10 for his position.
92. Craig Biggio
Craig Biggio comes in at spot 92, ahead of Traynor. Biggio has scored a ton of runs in his career, reaching 100 in a season eight times, including 146 in 1997. Defensively, he has four Gold Gloves to his credit. He only made 10 errors in '95 and again in '96 while winning the award and fielding .986 and .988 respectively. His glove and run-scoring consistency win out here.
91. Wade Boggs
The lifetime P/E Averages for Boggs and Biggio are extremely close, as are their MVP shares and average net runs per game. I chose Wade as the superior player for a couple of reasons. First, he won five batting titles. He also made a dozen consecutive All-Star appearances from the mid-'80s through the mid-'90s. Finally, Boggs averaged 211 hits a season from 1983 to 1989, a time when he was probably the best pure hitter in the game. Can you imagine a lineup with Biggio leading off and Boggs hitting second?
90. Andre Dawson
The Hawk earns my vote over Boggs. He betters Wade slightly in terms of lifetime P/E (.998 to .960), but it's his MVP season of 1987 that tipped the scales in his favor. Dawson won the award while languishing on a team that was terrible, which shows you how truly dominant he was that year. He was also runner-up in the balloting twice. Add in eight Gold Gloves and the choice is clear. Dawson is number 90 on my all-time list.
89. Gabby Hartnett
Obviously, Hartnett lacks the offensive numbers of Dawson, although his 1930 campaign (.339 BA, .404 OBP, .630 SLP, 122 RBI, 1.235 P/E) was tremendous. Catcher is such a tough position to play. Therefore, Gabby edges Andre based on position value. I think having Hartnett behind the plate would better serve a team than having Dawson in right field.
88. Billy Williams
I like Williams's consistency. From '61 through '73, the Cubs' star averaged 98 runs batted in per season in an era when pitchers dominated. He also won Rookie of the Year and Player of the Year honors during that stretch as well. While he didn't make my top 10 for left field, he does come in ahead of Hartnett for spot 88.
87. Paul Waner
Amazingly, Big Poison reached 200 hits in a season eight times, finishing his career with 3,152 base knocks. I prefer him over Williams because he was more productive (1.11 net runs to .99) and sported much better batting averages. Waner retired with a mark of .333, and he hit above .350 six times. Paul had the advantage of playing in the '20s and '30s, but I still consider him the better choice.
86. Orlando Cepeda
Cepeda had an interesting run. Like Waner, he had his best seasons in the first half of his career. Baby Bull also had an outstanding campaign in 1967, winning the MVP and helping to lead the Cardinals to the World Series title over Boston. Cepeda had much better power than Waner (379 homers to 113) and had better RBI totals (1,365 to 1,309) despite 2,000 fewer plate appearances.
85. Goose Goslin
Goslin's 1.130 lifetime P/E is terrific, and it's more than 100 points higher than Cepeda's. Goose topped 200 net runs in five different seasons; Cepeda reached that number only once. On a per-game basis, Goslin averaged almost a quarter net run more while amassing more than 1,600 runs batted in throughout the '20s and '30s. Goose Goslin slides in safely at number 85.
84. Juan Gonzalez
Juan begins a short run of more recent players on my list. Gonzalez won two MVPs and was an RBI machine throughout his career. He had one of the great postseason series ever against the Yankees in the '96 ALDS (2.263 P/E). Although he wasn't a polished ballplayer in terms of defense and baserunning, I would opt for him over Goslin if I were picking a team.
83. Mike Piazza
Like Hartnett, Piazza earns points for being a catcher. I see him as a superior player to Gonzalez because he distinguished himself as his position's best offensive force in history. True, his defense hurts his case. Nevertheless, Piazza enters the list at number 83, just ahead of the powerful slugger.
82. Jeff Kent
Kent and Piazza have both been recognized for great offense at positions normally known for defense. Jeff Kent knocked in more than 100 runs every year from 1997 to 2005 except one, tremendous production for a second baseman. I chose him over Piazza for three reasons. First, he won an MVP. Second, he has been slightly better in the postseason. Third, he is better defensively at second than Piazza is behind the plate.
81. Ozzie Smith
This is an interesting one. Obviously, Ozzie has the glove while Kent has the bat. I opt for the defensive master at shortstop, the position that probably requires the most skill to play. Smith's Gold Glove collection is extremely impressive. The Wizard never won an MVP, but he was instrumental on several Cardinals teams that went deep into the postseason.
80. Omar Vizquel
If I had the chance, I'd take Vizquel over Ozzie. His defensive numbers are just better. Offensively, they have similar résumés. For a more detailed comparative analysis, check out the top-10 list for shortstop, where Omar is seventh and Ozzie is eighth.
79. Paul Molitor
At number 79, I'm going with offense over defense. Molitor racked up more than 3,300 hits over his career, seemingly getting better with age. Paul also scored 1,782 runs and registered more than 600 lifetime doubles. I'll take his offense, leadership, and postseason success (1.326 P/E in the playoffs) over Vizquel's glove and range at short.
78. Robin Yount
Both members of the 3,000-hit club, Yount and Molitor were longtime teammates in Milwaukee, which makes this an interesting comparison. Yount wins here because he won two Most Valuable Player awards and because he played his career at short and in center field. Molitor played mostly as a DH. Therefore, Yount is the better choice.
77. Willie McCovey
Stretch was a dominant player in the late '60s and early '70s; he was one of the most feared hitters in the game. I'm not sure the same can be said for Yount, a great hitter but not the same threat in terms of power. McCovey's production average of .87 net runs per game is disappointing for a first baseman, but he did play in a pitcher's era, and he was a platoon player for much of his early career. In the final analysis, 521 homers are hard to overlook.
76. Chipper Jones
Many people probably won't agree with this ranking, but I can't ignore how clutch Chipper has been. From both sides of the plate, he has gotten big hits in big spots. Jones is also helped by the fact that he's played the majority of his games at third, a position that is not as deep in talent as first base. Finally, he's been more productive on a per-game basis than Stretch.
75. Lou Brock
I left Lou Brock out of my top 10 for left field, which was a very difficult decision. Here, he comes in ahead of Jones for spot 75. Most notably, Brock was tremendous in the World Series as evidenced by a 1.348 P/E mark in the Fall Classic. That's a terrific average, especially considering that Brock was a speedster and not a slugger. If I had the opportunity, I'd take Lou at the top of my lineup rather than Chipper in the middle of it.
74. George Sisler
Gorgeous George was a tremendously skilled batsman who hit better than .300 13 times. Twice, he batted over .400, including his .420 mark in 1922. A great run producer as well, Sisler is my choice over Brock. While Sisler walked more than he whiffed, Brock was just the opposite, registering almost 1,000 more strikeouts than bases on balls.
73. Joe Medwick
Sisler (with the Browns) and Medwick (with the Cardinals) both played the majority of their careers in St. Louis. Both won MVPs and finished with terrific lifetime batting averages. Medwick, however, was a little more productive and hit with a little more power, two facts that contribute to his 86-point advantage in terms of career Production and Efficiency Average.
72. Earle Combs
I'll take Combs over Medwick. Earle scored more than 100 runs in eight consecutive seasons. More important, he was great in the World Series, batting .350 and scoring 17 runs in 16 games. In the '32 Classic, he helped the Yanks to a sweep over the Cubs with a P/E of 1.800. Medwick was very good, but I think Combs was a little bit better.
71. Jim Bottomley
Bottomley didn't have the same World Series success as Combs, but he was a great player nonetheless. Sunny Jim put up great numbers in terms of batting average and on-base percentage and was a consistent run producer. In 1928 he was the NL MVP, generating 228 net runs of offense while posting his career-best P/E Average (1.339). Sunny Jim is the choice for position 71 on my top 100 list.
70. Albert Belle
Although Belle wasn't a widely popular player in his day, it's hard to ignore his numbers. In '95 he reached 50 homers and 52 doubles while slugging .690. Albert averaged 40 homers per 162 games played and owns a very high career P/E mark (1.161). His power and postseason production earn him the higher placement over Bottomley.
69. Joe Cronin
One of the best offensive shortstops in history, Joseph Edward Cronin was a lifetime .301 batter with eight seasons of more than 100 RBI. He never hit for as much power as Belle, but he played a tremendously demanding position on the diamond while Belle was a corner outfielder and a designated hitter.
68. Kirby Puckett
Puckett had a great combination of glove work and prowess at the plate. He won six Gold Gloves and had a penchant for making the big catch at the big moment, just as he did in Game 6 of the 1991 World Series. Cronin, in my opinion, doesn't stand up against Kirby when defense is included in the analysis.
67. Gary Carter
Like Puckett, Gary Carter was clutch in the big game and was a terrific team leader. He's my choice here, however, simply because of the position he played. Getting 100 or more RBI in from the catcher spot, something Carter did four times, is tremendous production. The Kid also won three consecutive Gold Gloves (1980–1982) and was a perennial All-Star selection in the National League.
66. Earl Averill
Earl Averill was a name I knew very little about before writing this book. He had some huge seasons in the 1930s, including his '31 showing (251 net runs). His lifetime averages of 1.179 P/E and 1.29 net runs were too impressive when comparing him with Carter.
65. Frankie Frisch
Frisch was a great combination of offense and defense. Considering he was a second baseman, I think he would have been more valuable to a team than Averill. Four times, Frankie finished in the top 10 of MVP balloting, including a first-place finish in '31. The Fordham Flash is my choice for number 65.
64. Nap Lajoie
As with Omar Vizquel and Ozzie Smith, Frisch and Lajoie are a pair of players from the same position who piggyback one another on my list. I like the fact that Nap led his league in batting five times. His Triple Crown season in 1901 may have been against lesser competition but was miraculous nonetheless.
63. Ralph Kiner
Many people don't see Kiner as a Hall of Famer, but I do. Although he didn't play that long, he was lethal when he was in the lineup. And he wasn't one dimensional either. He scored runs, drew a lot of walks, and hit for good averages. Against Lajoie, he wins out simply based on his power numbers (.548 lifetime slugging and five straight seasons with 40 or more homers).
62. Duke Snider
I chose Snider over Kiner for a couple of reasons. First, he played 18 seasons and topped 400 career homers. He was the Major League Player of the Year in '55, a year in which his Brooklyn squad finally overcame the Yankees in the World Series. Duke hit .320 with four home runs in that Series. Kiner never appeared in the postseason, a fact that hurts him in this comparison.
61. Al Kaline
Like Snider, Kaline was a popular outfielder who enjoyed some of his best seasons in the mid-'50s. He also played well in big games. Against the Cardinals in the '68 Series, Al batted .379 with 11 hits, good enough for a 1.467 P/E over seven games. The choice between the two wasn't easy. Ultimately, I selected Kaline as the better player based on 10 Gold Gloves and 15 All-Star appearances.
60. Rod Carew
Carew was a great batsman who had one unbelievable season in 1977. Rodney batted .388 with 239 hits and 128 runs scored in winning the American League MVP. His consistently high batting averages led to 18 All-Star nominations and seven league batting titles. That's enough convincing for me. Carew enters my list ahead of Al Kaline at number 60.
59. Tony Gwynn
As hitters, Gwynn and Carew were two peas in a pod. Both were artists with a bat in their hands. In my opinion, Gwynn was the better player, however. He hit 10 points higher for his career and was slightly more productive. While Tony also has a higher lifetime P/E mark (.981 to .938), I made my final decision based on defense. The lifetime Padre won the Gold Glove five times, something Carew never did once during his career.
58. Willie Stargell
Like Gwynn, Pops played his entire career for one team, becoming a legendary figure in Pittsburgh. If given the choice between the two, I'd take him over Tony because of power considerations. Stargell led the NL in homers twice and finished with 475 for his career. His long-ball ability also accounts greatly for an advantage of almost 100 points in terms of P/E.
57. Bill Terry
Terry didn't have the same power as Stargell, but he was a tremendous hitter nonetheless. He batted .350 or higher four times and was over .300 11 times. My mind was made up when comparing Terry and Stargell in terms of production. Memphis Bill averaged 1.19 runs for his team's scoreboard each game, almost a quarter run per game higher than Pops.
56. Lou Boudreau
Boudreau's status as a shortstop helps him greatly here. I like his combination of glove and stick better than Terry's. He also won an MVP, which Terry didn't, and was in the top 10 of the balloting eight times. I think Lou Boudreau is an underrated ballplayer in most circles, but he comes in quite high on my list.
55. Eddie Murray
At number 55, Steady Eddie makes the list. Most impressive about Murray was his ability to be a consistent run producer over many, many seasons. Add in his three Gold Gloves ('82–'84), Rookie of the Year, All-Star accomplishments, and 3.33 career shares in MVP voting, and you can understand why he's so high on my top 100.
54. Harry Heilmann
Heilmann narrowly beats out Murray for this spot. He won four batting titles and retired with a .342 lifetime mark. His career P/E Average, 1.144, is also outstanding. Murray has consistency on his side, but I think Heilmann was probably more exceptional. Just take a look at his numbers in the 1920s. Despite not being a home-run hitter, Heil-mann sports a higher career slugging percentage (.520) than Murray (.476).
53. Jim Rice
Rice isn't in the Hall of Fame, but I definitely think he should be. Rice hit for power and high averages, and he delivered in the clutch. When the Red Sox were battling the Yankees for the division title in '78, Rice eclipsed 400 total bases, slugged .600, and won the AL MVP. Unlike Heilmann, he didn't have the luxury of playing during a high-scoring era like the 1920s.
52. Johnny Mize
Mize missed three full years ('43, '44, and '45) in the prime of his career. Just imagine how impressive his numbers would be had he not missed that time. The Big Cat tops Rice in terms of lifetime postseason P/E (1.064 to .913). He also has him by 139 points for their regular-season averages (1.185 to 1.046).
51. Jackie Robinson
Jackie comes in as the highest-ranked Category 4 player on my list, a distinction that lands him firmly at number 51. It's hard to say exactly what Robinson would have accomplished had he been able to join the Dodgers before 1947 and had he not needed to endure the endless onslaught of racial prejudice. His MVP campaign of '49 has to be considered one of the great individual seasons of all time. Robinson's speed, ability to play multiple positions, and courage to fight through 10 heroic seasons give him the nod over Mize.
50. Pete Rose
Rose begins the discussion of the Category 5 players. I felt that his overwhelming numbers (4,256 hits, 2,165 runs, 746 doubles, and so on) were worthy of that highest rating even though he may never have been a truly dominant player, and his lifetime P/E number is below .900. Rose played two dozen seasons and accumulated some unparalleled statistics that earn him a spot in my top 50.
49. Mark McGwire
McGwire comes in ahead of Rose based on his power advantage. Rose's MVP campaign of '73 helps his case considerably, but I can't ignore Big Mac's advantage of 423 lifetime homers. Whether or not McGwire belongs in the Hall of Fame based on steroid allegations is an argument for another time. This analysis has been formulated strictly by the numbers and on-field accomplishments.
48. Carl Yastrzemski
Yaz won an MVP and was a terrific defensive outfielder (seven Gold Gloves). Moreover, he was tremendous in the postseason, sporting a lifetime P/E of 1.240 when it mattered most. In the '67 Series Yaz nearly beat the Cardinals single-handedly (P/E: 1.310). McGwire can't boast that, and that's enough ammunition to put the Boston legend at number 48.
47. Eddie Mathews
The decision between Yaz and Mathews was a hard one for me to make. Ultimately, I chose Mathews based on his position and better home-run numbers. A third baseman with long-ball power like Math-ews doesn't come along very often. His ranking as the fourth best at the hot corner earns him a slight advantage over Yastrzemski.
46. Roberto Alomar
Alomar is my choice because he did so many things well on the diamond. He was a tremendous fielder, a smart base runner, and a clutch hitter with enough power to make him dangerous to opposing pitchers. Arguably, he is the greatest defensive second baseman of all time. He's also my choice as the forty-sixth best baseball player in history.
45. Ryne Sandberg
The argument for Sandberg over Alomar was spelled out in greater detail in the second base top 10. I don't expect many to agree with Sandberg's high ranking. However, when considering his defense, postseason success, and '84 MVP campaign, I think 45 is a deserving spot for Ryno.
44. Reggie Jackson
While Sandberg played well in the playoffs twice, Reggie was a two-time World Series MVP. In and of itself, that counts heavily in his favor. He also hit 563 homers and drove in more than 1,700 runs. Too many strikeouts? Yes. A lifetime batting average of just .262? Yes. Nevertheless, Mr. October is my choice for number 44, the same number the Yankees retired in honor of him.
43. Bill Dickey
Also a Yankees legend, Dickey splits the two right fielders. I'll take him over Jackson because of position. Having a catcher with Dickey's bat is a tremendous advantage for any manager. Extremely productive, he averaged 1.08 net runs per game, an outstanding mark for a backstop. From 1929 to 1939, the lifelong pinstriper hit over .300 10 out of 11 seasons.
42. Roberto Clemente
Clemente holds the MVP advantage over Dickey. He won the regular-season award in '66 and the World Series version in '71. Dickey never won, although it can certainly be argued that his greatness was often overshadowed by the likes of Ruth, Gehrig, and DiMaggio. Nevertheless, I'd take Clemente on my team to play right field if both players were available.
41. Harmon Killebrew
Killebrew's 58-point advantage in terms of lifetime P/E isn't enough by itself for him to better Clemente on my list. Both men won MVPs and both had their moments in the postseason. What impressed me most about Harmon's career was eight seasons with more than 40 home runs from the late '50s through the early '70s. In today's game, he probably would have routinely knocked 50–55 balls over the fence year in and year out.
40. Sammy Sosa
While I think Killebrew would have been a 50-homer player today, I'm not sure he'd be able to hit 60, which Sosa did three times. In those three years ('98, '99, '01), Sammy hit 193 round-trippers, a remarkable achievement. Did performance-enhancing substances have anything to do with it? Possibly and maybe even probably. However, my choice has been to focus on what we know for sure. Although he may be guilty in the eyes of the public, he accomplished enough on the field to warrant a top-40 ranking.
39. Jeff Bagwell
When the strike hit in 1994, Bagwell was on his way to one of the great seasons in the sport's history (P/E of 1.549 in 110 games). He was the unanimous MVP that year and was in the top 10 of the vote five other times. The lifelong Astros teammate eclipses Sosa based on better production (1.21 net runs per game to 1.08) and better consistency. Year in and year out, Bagwell was a nightmare for opposing pitchers to handle.
38. Derek Jeter
The main reason Jeter ranks ahead of Bagwell and so many other notable players is that he is incredibly clutch when games are on the line. His leadership, other intangibles, and sheer will to win make him a legendary player. With very good defense at a premium position as well, Jeter deserves to be this high on my list.
37. Ivan Rodriguez
I have to opt for I-Rod's defense and MVP résumé. Having Rodriguez behind the plate would be more valuable, albeit slightly, than having Jeter at short in my opinion. In winning the 2003 NLCS Most Valuable Player award, Rodriguez was a one-man wrecking crew, driving in 10 runs over seven games against the Cubs.
36. Roy Campanella
Here's another case where two players from the same position are back-to-back. While Rodriguez's career has been longer and more distinguished in terms of overall All-Star appearances and Gold Gloves, it must also be noted that Campy's last year (1957) was the first in which the defensive award was given. I can't ignore his three MVPs, the fact that he made eight straight All-Star teams, and his impressive 1.069 lifetime Production and Efficiency Average.
35. Mel Ott
Ott doesn't have the advantage of playing at a premium defensive position like Campanella, and he never even won an MVP. However, he was a tremendous power hitter and run producer for the Giants from the late 1920s. Beginning in '29, Ott averaged more than 120 RBI per season for the next 10 years. Mel also hit over .300 in half of his 22 major league seasons. Campanella, while great in '51, '53, and '55, didn't display the consistency of Ott.
34. Brooks Robinson
In my opinion, Robinson is the greatest defensive player in baseball history. That unique distinction is enough to warrant placing him ahead of Ott. He won the Gold Glove every year from 1960 through 1975, a tremendous achievement at an extremely demanding infield position. In the 1970 World Series, he made one miraculous play after another, almost sucking the will out of the Cincinnati hitters. He doesn't compare with many players on this list in terms of P/E, but sometimes looking beyond the numbers is necessary for measuring greatness. Having a player of Robinson's caliber at the hot corner is a tremendous advantage for any team.
33. Cal Ripken Jr.
One of the most difficult decisions was choosing between Ripken and Robinson for spot 33. Both Baltimore immortals, they would team to form a dynamic left side of the infield on the ultimate Orioles squad. I selected Ripken as the superior player, however. Cal won two MVPs and was the Major League Player of the Year in both of those seasons as well. With almost 1,700 career RBI and 431 home runs, Ripken's offensive prowess at the shortstop position won out over Brooks.
32. Ernie Banks
Even though Banks played more career games at first base, he won his back-to-back Most Valuable Player honors as a shortstop. Therefore, the comparison between him and Ripken is fairly easy. Banks had much better power and was a better run producer. Mr. Cub led the NL in RBI twice and in home runs twice despite never playing on a team talented enough to make it into October. He would be the number 3 shortstop on that top-10 list if he had played at least 60 percent of his games there. He didn't, so Cal ended up there, but Banks prevails in this head-to-head comparison.
31. George Brett
Brett's case is helped by the fact that I ranked him as the second best third baseman of all time. Incredibly clutch, he proved himself over and over again in his team's biggest games. In terms of P/E, he betters Banks slightly, 1.032 to 1.000 for their careers. If Banks had remained a shortstop for his entire career, then I might opt for him over Brett. I'll take the lifelong Royals infielder to anchor third base on my team anytime.
30. Manny Ramirez
Manny is not a good fielder, can be a clubhouse distraction, and always seems to be mentioned in various trade rumors. So why is he positioned so high on my list? Simply because he's one of the best run producers the game has ever known. With a lifetime P/E score of 1.234, Ramirez is an offensive force. Brett was a great hitter, but I'd take Manny based on his penchant for plating runs on such a consistent basis.
29. Eddie Collins
There are probably many baseball experts who would rate Eddie Collins as the best second baseman ever, and it would be hard to argue with them. Collins had a long career, consistently hitting for high averages while generating runs for his team. He had a .400 or better onbase percentage in 15 full seasons. He's my choice ahead of Ramirez based on his steadiness, defense, and status as a second baseman.
28. Albert Pujols
Deciding where to include Pujols in the top 100 was one of the harder decisions I had to make when writing this book. Obviously, he still has years to play, and no one knows how many more championships or how many more MVPs he'll win. I think twenty-eighth is a good spot for him now. Ten or fifteen years in the future, I think it's conceivable that Pujols could be in the top 10; he's that good. His power and run production are too much for Eddie Collins to overcome.
27. Frank Thomas
Thomas has enjoyed a late-career resurgence, which helps him to be ranked so high. In 2006 he smacked 39 homers and drove in 114 for Oakland, leading them into the playoffs without much protection around him. In the 1990s Thomas was arguably the best player in baseball. He won back-to-back MVPs and routinely put up huge offensive numbers. One day, Pujols will pass him on my list. For the time being, though, Big Hurt's overall numbers win out.
26. Mickey Cochrane
As with Collins, some people feel Cochrane is the best ever at his position. He was certainly a unique ballplayer, reaching base often and hitting for incredibly high averages (.331 or better in five of his first seven seasons) year in and year out. I like Cochrane's toughness, leadership, and defense behind the plate over Big Hurt's power. Finding a player like Cochrane is more difficult than finding one like Thomas.
25. Joe Morgan
The top 25 begins with Morgan, the two-time MVP spark plug who ignited Cincinnati's Big Red Machine of the 1970s. In the mid-'70s especially, Morgan was a lethal combination of defensive mastery, speed, power, and intelligence on the diamond. He's another player who would get a lot of acclaim as the best ever at his position, although I have him ranked third in that discussion. His back-to-back MVP seasons in '75 and '76 give him the edge over Black Mike.
24. Tris Speaker
Like Morgan, Speaker had a great combination of glove and bat. I favor him here, however, because he simply had more good seasons than Joe. Was he as dominant as Morgan in the prime of their careers? I doubt it. But Speaker was much more consistent, in the regular season as well as in the World Series, and that fact convinced me that he was the better choice.
23. Al Simmons
Other than Babe Ruth, Simmons is the only man in history to record a P/E mark above 1.600 (1.638 in 1930) for an entire season. That year, Simmons averaged more than two full net runs per contest (281 in 138 games), a phenomenal accomplishment. He also maintained an average of 1.37 net runs per game for his career. In comparison with Speaker, Simmons was more productive, more powerful, and my choice for 23 on the top-100 list.
22. Ken Griffey Jr.
For a while it looked as if Junior would be the best candidate to break Aaron's home-run record. From '96 through '99 he knocked 209 balls over the fence while also driving in 567 runs for Seattle. With the Reds he hasn't been able to stay healthy and maintain that same level of dominance. Nevertheless, membership in the 500-home-run club along with 10 Gold Gloves gives him the nod over Al Simmons.
21. Hank Greenberg
The only reason Greenberg doesn't rank higher on my list is longevity. Hank played in fewer than 1,400 career games, but he was a legendary hitter and run producer. His 1.318 lifetime P/E trails only Ruth, Gehrig, and Ted Williams. In the postseason, he was even better, sporting a 1.356 mark in the World Series. For those reasons, I rank him ahead of Junior.
20. Rickey Henderson
The reason Greenberg fails to come in higher is the same reason Henderson makes my top 20. Henderson played at a high level over an extremely long career. He amassed unbelievable numbers in terms of runs scored, stolen bases, and walks. More important, he established himself as a truly unique player, the greatest leadoff hitter of all time. The Man of Steal was the pure embodiment of what a table setter should be, getting on, getting over, and getting in better than anyone in history. And he did it for a quarter of a century.
19. Frank Robinson
Robinson won two MVPs to Henderson's one, hit with much more power, and was simply more dangerous offensively. Frank's 1.126 lifetime P/E is outstanding, buoyed by 586 homers and more than 1,800 runs both scored and driven home. Henderson was a leadoff hitter while Robinson was a middle-of-the-order threat, so it's sort of an apples and oranges thing. My gut instinct tells me that Robinson was the superior player.
18. Rogers Hornsby
Not only did Hornsby put up better numbers than Robinson, but he also did so while playing mainly at second base, a position normally highlighted by defensive-minded fielders. In fact, Hornsby put up some of the great offensive seasons, regardless of position, in the history of baseball. In 1925 he finished the season with a P/E score of 1.557, a tremendously high average. He wasn't the greatest teammate, and he wasn't a virtuoso in the field, but his phenomenal offensive numbers warrant this high of a ranking.
17. Charlie Gehringer
My reasons for selecting Gehringer over Hornsby were spelled out in detail in . I don't think there's another player in baseball history more underrated than Charlie Gehringer. He was a complete ballplayer, and he was tremendously consistent, earning the nickname the Mechanical Man for his steady play year after year.
16. Alex Rodriguez
When all is said and done, A-Rod may indeed rank as one of the top 5 players of all time. His power advantage over Gehringer is the main reason he is ranked ahead of the lifelong Detroit second baseman.
15. Johnny Bench
Arguably the greatest defensive catcher in history, Bench was also incredibly clutch. His 1970 campaign (45 homers, 148 RBI, 355 total bases) may be the best ever for a backstop. I guess I'd take Bench's combination of power, production, and defense behind the plate over A-Rod's skill set on the left side of the infield. But it's not an easy choice.
14. Yogi Berra
This is another case of players from the same position back-to-back on my list. Ranking Bench at number 15 and Berra at number 14 just goes to show how I view these players in comparison with one another. There probably wasn't a closer call in the entire book. I'll use Berra's rings and extra MVP as evidence to support my decision.
13. Honus Wagner
The greatest shortstop as well as the greatest middle infielder of all time is up next. If MVPs had been awarded throughout Wagner's career, he no doubt would have won one, if not many. He led the league in batting eight times and was considered a giant in the game. Although he can't match Berra in terms of championships, he did have so many outstanding seasons that I feel he deserves this spot.
12. Mike Schmidt
The gap between Schmidt and the next-best third baseman (Brett) is wider than at any other position. I can't imagine anyone with a solid knowledge of baseball history making a logical argument that Michael Jack Schmidt isn't the greatest third baseman ever. His defense, power, and MVP résumé make him a solid choice over Wagner. The fact that his career P/E is 11 points higher just adds fuel to the fire. The Philadelphia legend is one of the best dozen ever.
11. Stan Musial
Musial has the edge over Schmidt in terms of lifetime P/E (by 40 points), career net runs per game (by .07), and by a wide margin in the three efficiency averages (.331 BA, .417 OBP, and .559 SLP vs. .267, .380, and .527). My final choice, however, was also based on MVP shares. Both men won the award three times, but Musial holds a distinct advantage with 6.96 career shares to 4.96 for Schmidt.
The Top 10
If you've been paying close attention, then you can probably predict who is still left. Leaving Musial out was hardest of all. Several times I had him in, and several times I had him out. His exclusion is certainly no knock against his outstanding Hall of Fame career. Someone had to be number 11.
Four of my top 10 wore pinstripes in the Bronx. Four were center fielders. Only two were infielders, and they were both first basemen. Therefore, you won't find any catchers, second basemen, third basemen, or shortstops.
10. Mickey Mantle
The Mick begins the top 10. Cardinals fans reading this book are probably not pleased that Stan the Man didn't make it in. I just think Mantle was better. He was a great defensive center fielder while Musial played left and first base. Mickey hit for better power and was better on the bases. In his prime, Mantle was without peer in the mid-'50s. Finally, the man who wore number 7 was simply better in the big games, bettering Musial in terms of postseason P/E scores by a comfortable margin (1.073 to .788).
9. Hank Aaron
I don't think Hank Aaron was better than Mantle when both were at their best, but he wins out over the course of a long and storied career. Aaron's accomplishments are just too noteworthy not to give him the edge over Mickey. Both were complete players in terms of power, average, defense, and speed. Aaron merely did it longer.
8. Jimmie Foxx
Some might argue that Foxx's numbers are inflated by the era in which he played and that, therefore, this is too high of a ranking. I don't care if Foxx played softball. His power and production numbers are awesome, as is his 1.315 career Production and Efficiency Average. Double X won three MVPs and nearly came away with a fourth. Aaron only won the award once. That is enough to convince me that Foxx was better.
7. Willie Mays
I'm sure there will be several outcries against various rankings, ratings, and opinions in this work. I'm also sure that none will be louder than those speaking out against Mays at number 7. Most baseball experts would certainly put Mays in their top five if not higher. I don't agree, which isn't to say that Mays wasn't an immortal ballplayer. His speed and defense are obvious advantages over Foxx. To rank higher on my list, however, he needed to win more than one championship, and he needed to hit better than the .247 lifetime average he managed in the postseason.
6. Ty Cobb
My reasoning for Cobb over Mays has already been discussed, so I will keep this explanation brief. Despite hitting only 117 home runs and playing a large portion of his career in the dead-ball era, Cobb still averaged almost a quarter of a net run better per game than Mays and bettered him by 50 points in lifetime P/E.
5. Barry Bonds
In selecting Bonds as the fifth best player in history, I have ignored the issue of steroids and looked only at the numbers and on-field accomplishments. I don't know if that's the best way to do it, but it was the only way I felt I could be fair and objective. He ranks ahead of Cobb because he played better defense, hit with tremendous power, and won seven Most Valuable Player awards, a fact that is the strongest argument in his favor.
4. Ted Williams
This is the final case of two same-position players coming in together in the top 100. I think Williams was the better hitter and played in a better league, coming up short against DiMaggio on more than one occasion. If he hadn't missed so many games in two separate war efforts, then he might own records that no one else, not even Barry Bonds, could touch.
The Top Three
In my opinion, the three greatest baseball players of all time are Joe DiMaggio, Lou Gehrig, and Babe Ruth. You might find it amazing, based on that opinion, that I am not a Yankees fan. My team, for better or worse, is the Mets. Yet I cannot let fan loyalty sway my judgment. What is amazing is that these three immortals came within an eyelash of all playing with one another. Ruth played with the Yankees through 1934 and was still in baseball in 1935, the year before Joltin' Joe appeared on the scene. Gehrig knew what it was like to play with them both. Imagine a lineup with Ruth batting third, DiMaggio hitting cleanup, and Gehrig providing ultimate protection in the fifth spot. It almost happened. The stars nearly aligned, but it wasn't quite meant to be. Nevertheless, the fact they all wore pinstripes in the mid'30s paved the way for the sport's greatest dynasty. It also created a great ending to my top-100 list.
The Case for DiMaggio
Three American League MVPs (1939, 1941, and 1947)
Three full seasons missed in the prime of his career (1943–1945)
An All-Star nomination in every season he played
The best defense at the most critical position of the three players
10 pennants and nine World Series championships
The Case for Gehrig
Averaged 1.57 net runs per game as the most productive player ever
1.493 career P/E Average in the World Series
Averaged 250 net runs per season from 1926 to 1938
5.44 career MVP shares and the 1934 Triple Crown
2,130 consecutive games played
The Case for Ruth
1.436 lifetime P/E, the highest average in history
714 home runs and a .690 career slugging percentage
His 1921 season, arguably the greatest ever (P/E: 1.714)
Revolutionized the sport, hitting more home runs than entire teams early in his career
94–46 lifetime record as a pitcher and 0.87 ERA over 31 World Series innings
3. Joe DiMaggio
The Yankee Clipper comes in third, unable to wrestle away one of the top two spots from Gehrig and Ruth. DiMaggio put up tremendous numbers beginning in his rookie year. Had he not left for the war effort, or had he not suffered from various pain and injuries at the end of his career, his lifetime statistics would be even more impressive. I chose him over Williams for a couple of reasons. First, from '36 to '42, the years before his career was interrupted, Joe was unbelievable, averaging 224 net runs per season and batting .339 over that span. He earned 3.97 MVP shares and had a combined P/E of 1.358 for those first seven seasons. Second, and more important, DiMaggio's teams won 10 pennants and nine World Series. While he wasn't always great in October, he did play center field and hit in the middle of the Yankees' lineup. Ted Williams never won a championship, and he hit .200 in his only postseason appearance. Ted was the better hitter, but Joe was more complete in terms of defense and leadership. It would be a very difficult decision, but if I needed to win one game, I'd take DiMaggio in center over Williams in left.
2. Lou Gehrig
The Iron Horse didn't have DiMaggio's flair, and he didn't win as many titles. He also wasn't as important in the field. Nonetheless, it can easily be argued that Gehrig was the most productive player ever, and that is extremely impressive. His average of 1.57 net runs generated per game is better than any player in history. I simply can't ignore that level of production. Need more proof that Gehrig deserves to be number 2? Consider this. Imagine a "perfect" offensive season in which the following conditions were met: 165 or more RBI, more than 400 total bases, more than 90 extra-base hits, more than 100 walks, less than 85 strikeouts, an on-base percentage above .440 with a batting average above .340, more than 40 home runs, and at least 210 hits. Only one player in history has ever achieved this amazing combination of production and efficiency in the same season. That man was Lou Gehrig, and he did it four times (1927, 1930, 1931, and 1934).
1. Babe Ruth
In my opinion, it would be extremely difficult to analyze baseball history and all of its players and their statistics and accomplishments and not come to the conclusion that Babe Ruth was the best ever. In terms of P/E Average, no one is close to Ruth's 1.436 lifetime mark or his standard of eight seasons above 1.500. I believe his 1921 campaign (171 RBI, 177 runs, 457 total bases, 1.714 P/E) is the greatest individual season in the sport's history, not likely to ever be matched. Ruth changed the face of baseball, taking it out of its dead-ball era and into a brave new world where 50 and 60 home runs in a season were possible. When you factor in Ruth's achievements as a pitcher, which I have done, I think the choice becomes quite clear. Babe Ruth is the greatest baseball player in history.
