Comments on: Omar Vizquel, Babe Ruth, and the all-time hits list

By: chumthumper

chumthumper — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:59:24 +0000

Gleeman just needed a filler post.

By: johnchesterny

johnchesterny — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:51:59 +0000

“Much faster”? How much faster?

By: watchfullhose

watchfullhose — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:10:41 +0000

You can measure SOME batters by total # of hits….but not when you’re looking down the list as far as #42.

By: jkcalhoun

jkcalhoun — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 23:28:54 +0000

Peak value or career value?

By: spudatx

spudatx — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 21:34:37 +0000

Yeah, but I bet Omar couldn’t have gotten there with the same blood alcohol level as the Babe.

By: natstowngreg

natstowngreg — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 21:25:19 +0000

If Bill Mazeroski (career .260/.299/.367) can make the Hall of Fame for his exceptional defense, Vizquel (career .272/.336/.352) can make it for his exceptional defense. Most likely, it will take a long wait and a vote of the veterans’ committee.

By: proudlycanadian

proudlycanadian — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 20:10:45 +0000

Much faster. Mays could steal whenever he wanted.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 18:53:40 +0000

Seriously? That is like saying TLR is the 2nd worst manager of all time because he is 2nd in losses as manager….the very thing bad managers do, lose games.

Counting just means they did it a lot (like being in the top 10 in out making, hint: making outs = bad at hitting), not that they did it well.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 18:51:10 +0000

If no one is making the argument, then why is anyone making the comparisons?

To me, the comparison is an attempt to make the argument…or at least to get a foot into the door of making the argument.

The original comparison is a lazy and dumb one. Craig was just point that out.

By: theutilityman

theutilityman — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 18:07:58 +0000

I don’t see how you can possibly measure someone’s overall ability as a “hitter” unless you use the counting stat “hits.” Does being a productive “hitter” automatically mean a player is a good overall “producer” or “offensive player?” Not necessarily. It just means someone hit the ball into fair territory a lot without that ball landing in someones glove or finding it’s way to first base before the batter.

But to say that you can’t use the very thing you are counting to define whether or not someone is good at that thing, is mind-boggling. I like advanced stats, too, but to completely dismiss one of the most fundamental parts of the game rubs me the wrong way.

By: johnchesterny

johnchesterny — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:37:27 +0000

“better on the base paths”?…how so?

By: hushbrother

hushbrother — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:33:26 +0000

He has made a lot of outs. In fact, at this moment Vizquel is tied for seventh all time, with Dave Winfield (8,422). But hey, just to be mentioned in the same sentence as Dave Winfield …

By: Brian Donohue

Brian Donohue — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:31:12 +0000

The above is a good example of why I typically read 10 comments to every 1 post here. I’m not sure how happy the writers are here generally — maybe GE pays lousy — but if I wrote here I’d light votive candles everyday in thanks for being given thoughtful, insightful readers who keep me honest and gently slap me back into line when I’m not. I’ve written online regularly for 9 yrs. and I can’t over-emphasize the rarity of a smart audience.

By: donkastain

donkastain — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:13:00 +0000

Omar has always, and will always be my favorite player. I would love to see him in the Hall for selfish reasons, but I don’t think he will be.

By: paint771

paint771 — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:11:01 +0000

This is a total straw man, and unfair to Vizquel. You’re basically inventing an argument that nobody is making – that the total hit list is a measure of how good a hitter a player is – and then layering it on top of a situation where it isn’t even being discussed. The hit list is a simple fact, not an argument, and noting that Vizquel (or Jeter) have played long enough and been productive enough to make their way up that particular ladder is worth noting. But have you seen a single person, ANYWHERE, make the argument that this proves Vizquel is a better hitter than Ruth? (and I haven’t seen it for Jeter/Mays either, but knowing New York, you could probably scrounge up a blog post here and there for that one). Is your argument going to be that we should stop counting hits? Then why bring it up? Save as an opportunity to point out Vizquel’s historically relative crappiness to defend against an argument you just made up, which, again, seems pretty unfair to Vizquel in this context.

Dude’s put together a lot of hits in his career. That’s cool.

By: braddavery

braddavery — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:52:11 +0000

Silly? No one said Jeter is better than Willie Mays because he has more hits.

By: megary

megary — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:41:03 +0000

All right all of you….whoever thought Omar Vizquel and Babe Ruth were essentially the same player raise your hand?

C’mon now….

Anyone??

Silly post if you ask me.

By: Lukehart80

Lukehart80 — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:34:54 +0000

So Omar Vizquel is NOT Babe Ruth’s equal???

Just about any statistic is silly if examined in complete isolation from any other data.

By: elmaquino

elmaquino — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:26:14 +0000

Is “helluvan” a word?

By: proudlycanadian

proudlycanadian — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:21:11 +0000

It is not any more silly than the Jeter passes Mays in base hits story. Mays hit with a lot more power, was better on the base paths and was a much better fielder than Jeter.