What an absolute disgrace! People poking fun at Mike Schmidt's emotional retirement speech. I'm a life long Phillies fan! This man has taken the Phillies from a laughing stock to terrific years from 1976-1983. Won 10 gold gloves, MVP in '80, '81, and '86, and 548 homers and being booed and jeered in front of a tough crowd when he had bad games and say Phillies fans are the best. That says something and his knees were shot he couldn't do something he loved! And the best third baseman ever!!!
I LOVE THIS MAN! And I grew up watching him destroy my beloved Mets. I remember being 12 years old and seeing him cry. It nearly brought tears to my eyes. You could feel the passion and love he had for the game. A true baseball legend who did it the RIGHT way. Long live Mike Schmidt, and with all due respect to Brooks Robinson, the greatest 3rd baseman in the history of the game.
this fuckin cocksucker pushed me in the face 20 yrs ago when i was just an adorable litl 7yr old lad. fuck you mike schmidt u quit on ur team halfway through the season....now cry like a faggot u fucking jerkoff. and if i EVER see u again i put it on my momma that im gonna smack that ron jeremy moostash right off ur fucking face!
@mriley858 i was with my sister when i was a young lad. we were standing by a door near the players parking lot....because i went to probably 35 home games that year i knew where to get autographs....we see mike coming out and i run over to MY HERO and ask for him to write his name on a piece of paper for a 7 yr old die hard phils fan...he proceeds to say "no thanks kid" and nudged me away by my head. not hard but VERY dismissive! my love for players died that day..my love for the team lives on!
@rodfarva420 ---FUCK YOU!! Mike Schmidt is the fuckin Man! More of a man you'll ever be. If you ran into Mike, he'd kick your fucking ass in COCKSUCKER!!
@soulsofrebellion11 internet tough guy huh? well souls of rebellion....yea nice CORNball name! ur the stuff that leaks out of my cock after i assfuck ur mother! mike schmidt is a true jerkoff and im speaking about an experience that I had. not some golden vision of his mustach brushing against ur pubic area like you dream about. truth is HE RETIRED ON HIS TEAM MIDWAY THROUGH A SEASON!!!!!!!!! because the team was trash so ur idol gave up. hes a jerkoff and hes only matched by you! douchebag
@soulsofrebellion11 lmao dude ....ud be my dad but the line was too long??? u have self respect putting that ancient joke out there? lol i bet u kill the "fellas" down at the elks lodge...or the grocery store u work at....ur really a trolling douchebag so eat me. im done responding to u tooo. it was a throw away comment i didnt no i was dissing ur idol. keep believing mike schmidt gives a fuck about u. and im the moron! lmao lame
@rodfarva420 so what if he didn't give you an autograph? players have so much to deal with in the 1st hand. get over it. and the way you're speaking you probably never grew up. you're the one who's stuck up. expecting to get an autograph and you're STILL pissed off?! Get over it man, just get over it!
@phillyphan1994 players have so much to deal with? like what u fucking douchebag counting money? every player should have time to thank the fans who make him a legend. so fuck you. keep fucking ur pillow to how great schmidt is. fuckin loser
@rodfarva420 DANG buddy, it's not like i worship the guy. i'm just a phillies fan who appreciates what he did for my favorite franchise. and don't you think he'd be just a LITTLE tired of signing so many autographs. maybe you just came to him at the wrong time. and i'm no loser man...you're the one acting like it, if you ask me. grow up bud
@phillyphan1994 i am a phillies fan too...have been since birth. its easy to say ur a fan nowadays. and no if someone gave you a chance to be worshipped by millions of people and be an idol to millions of children no i wouldnt get tired of signing. EVER! what he did for ur favorite franchise is retire in the middle of a season because the team wasnt good. so leave me alone.
idk i felt ashamed like u weren't a fireman or a police officer in an inner city ur job wasn't a marine fighting in Afghanistan u was a professional baseball player the greatest job ever so i feel like hes a little bitch sort of idk
Notice how as soon as he starts to breakdown the cameras start flashing. Drama sells.... Mike was a player I always looked upto when I was a kid. Class act!!!
I was there to see Schmidt's last game at Candlestick Park, just before this surprise announcement. In the middle of the season, he knew that for the good of the team, it was his time. He chose not to hang on like a pathetic shadow and collect a paycheck, like nearly every other great.. He should have had a farewell tour and be feted at every park. Obviously he loved the game dearly. Pure class.
In his last game, Schmidt's two-out error on a routine ground ball loaded the bases for Will Clark, who then hit the game-winning grand slam. Schmidt obviously knew it was time to pass the torch, and I'll bet that in the rest of his speech he says that he didn't want to hold his team back. Again, what outstanding character.
Mike Schmidt is a shithead. He kicked a driver's son off a Phillies bus. The driver just wanted his kid to meet the Phillies and Schmidt said "get him the f--k off the bus". Schmidt was overrated. He led the lead in choking. Would hit homers when they didnt need them.
I remember the last season I played. I went home after a ballgame one day, lay down on my bed, and tears came to my eyes. How can you explain that? It's like crying for your mother after she's gone. You cry because you love her. I cried, I guess, because I loved baseball and I knew I had to leave it. willie mays
the day he retired did not knew why he wept, but i imagined it, he dont want and thought he loved his team, its people since these day, I'm fan of the phillies, because if someone who cries for his team is that the team is great, greetings from mexico city
woah.. this is amazing. and my youth pastor.. huh.. lol.. my youth pastor, Mike Schmidt, is related to Mike Schmidt. I can't remember if he said if he is his uncle or great uncle. but yeah. pretty cool. i was shocked.
David Wright, Ryan Zimmerman and Evan Longoria are three of the great third basemen of this generation. None of them is remotely close to Mr. Michael Jack Schmidt. A superb defender, a terrific hitter. Three-time NL MVP and 1980 World Series MVP. The man was leaving his profession, and due to bad knees he could not do it on his own terms, of course he felt terrible and wanted to cry.
Schmidty was a class act all the way! This is coming from a Yankees fan. Hard to believe there were some Phillies fans who booed the man who was the best to play his position. Philly hasn't had a better 3rd baseman since.
shut the fuck up. lets see you accomplish half of the shit he did playing baseball. go fuck yourself. if anything youre the pussy for insulting him from behind a computer.
This is often played before and after commercial breaks on the Howard Stern show... I had no idea who it was. Great player, but big baby. Nothing worse than crying in a press conference. Waaaah.
there ain't nothin wrong with a man crying when he gives up anything he has that amount of passion for. mike still had baseball in his heart, just not in his knees.
@Danro05 Thanks for saying that. Mike gave Phillies fans such great memories. He cared about his performance deeply. For example, Even though he was the home run king, in his later years he worked on his batting average in the 80's where it climbed to .290.
Despite the OBP, I don't think Weaver would be the only manager to favor Brooks in the bottom of the 9th, two outs and a runner on base. I might add that Robinson's WS stats are better and his 70 WS MVP overshadows Schmidt's 80 MVP if for no other reason than a .429 average and a defensive performance that hasn't been matched since.
Silver Slugger award? ..probably none. 1964 would have been the closest maybe.
Most may, but knowledgeable fans know that Robinson's defense was far superior, leading Schmidt in every single major category. Schmidt bettered Robinson in some but not all offensive categories. The scales tip in Brooks' favor.
Far superior? I'll grant you that Brooks was considered the best defensive 3rd baseman ever (16 gold gloves to his credit) but Schmidt had 10 of his own. The offensive categories are just as tilted to Schmidt (548 HR's to 268, 1595 RBI's to 1357, Schmidt's OBP was .380 to Brooks' .322), his slugging percentage was a lot higher as well. It is kind of strange that their career batting averages were identical (.267).
Schmidt was also a 3-time MVP, Brooks won it once.
16 and 10 don't compare. Robinson had more assists, fewer errors, double plays, better fielding pct.... every major category, so yes far superior. Offensively the edge goes to Schmidt but not by the margin many imagine. Power always gets attention, but Brooks had more hits, more doubles and yes an identical average. Not as tilted as the defense. Add to that Schmidt is one of the all-time leaders in strikeouts. Brooks was a tremendous clutch hitter and didn't strike out anywhere near as much.
All points well-made, but the difference in OBP negates a lot of the negativity that Schmidt's strikeout total would otherwise have.
Out of curiosity, since you obviously followed his career pretty closely, how many silver slugger awards do you think Brooks would have had if it had been awarded back in his day?
Neither do the other stats that you cherrypicked. Schmidt has only 614 fewer hits than Robinson, but played five fewer seasons and nearly 500 fewer games.
Schmidt has SIGNIFICANT leads in just about every important offensive category.
Like I said, strikeouts mean nothing. They don't make you a bad hitter. EqA measures total offensive production per out, meaning that even if he strikes out a lot, a good EqA means he's productive no matter what.
No, strikeouts DO mean something. In Schmidts case they are somewhat negated by his overwhelming power stats as stated in previous posts. Yes, Robinson had more hits. Thats significant. Robinson did play two seasons too long, but doesnt affect his numbers that greatly and had he retired at that juncture, his batting average would be higher and not tied with Schmidts. The fact he was able to play more games is feather in Robinsons cap, not Schmidts.
No, strikeouts don't mean anything. Neither does batting average.
As I said, EqA measures total offensive production PER OUT. It's far less misleading than regular batting average. Schmidt destroys Robinson in that stat too.
Once again, the only reason that Schmidt has fewer hits is because he has a lot less games and plate appearences.
So by your logic Pete Rose's hit total is meaningless because he played more games and longer than Ty Cobb. I say kudos to Rose. He was blessed with better longevity than Cobb, as Robinson was to Schmidt.
Important - World Series stats. Interestingly, Robinson does better offensively and Schmidt to some degree defensively.
Robinson had more WS hits, home runs, rbis, fewer strikeouts and a whopping .303 average to Schmidts anemic .236. Robinson also had higher OBP, OPS and SLG, stats you consider important and I dont. Schmidt had more runs, doubles and BB advantage Robinson.
Robinson has more PO, A, DP, TC/G, but Schmidt had fewer errors and .966 FA to Robinsons .961 advantage Robinson.
World Series stats really aren't that important. Especially when you consider that Schmidt only played in 36 playoff games, and only 11 World Series games. Robinson played in 21 World Series games (different eras). A lot more opportunities. A LOT more.
And you really consider a .303 average "whopping"? Really? Would you care to throw out any more tiny sample sizes?
If I understand you correctly batting averages, rbis, hits, strikeouts, HR's, every major defensive category and World Series performances aren't that important in determining greatness, but OPS, WARP, EQR and EQA are? That makes about as much sense as saying Brooks Robinson was an offensive liability. Good luck selling that to baseball pundits.
A .303 batting average compared to a .236batting average? Uh yeah, that's a whopping difference.
I think you should change that "pundits" to "purists".
Batting average is misleading. If you play for a great team (depending on where you hit in the lineup and depending on what OBP the players in front of you have) you can rack up a ton of RsBI. I don't understand why you think strikeouts are like the worst possible thing ever. Errors and fielding percentage are not "major" defensive categories. Every stat that purists love can be misleading in a lot of ways. SABR stats are less misleading.
How can it be misleading? Batting averages are statistical facts based upon hits and at bats. Why argue it? It's mathematics. I never said strikeouts are the worst possible thing ever, but they're certainly not an attribute and must therefore be a negative.
OBP and SLG are way better than batting average. So, let me ask you a question that I ask everyone who thinks batting average is a good statistic.
Who was the better hitter in 2004? Shea Hillenbrand or Adam Dunn? Would you rather have Barry Bonds or Ichiro? Mickey Mantle or Todd Helton? Ryan Howard or Juan Pierre?
It's simple, really. OBP judges a hitter better than batting average ever will. And OPS+ is the best indicator for how good a hitter is. Win shares measures your value.
Brooks was a defensive wizard, no one can argue that. But he was an offensive liability. His OPS+ is 104, just four points above average (and that's in a rather poor hitting era). His OBP is .322 (poor), his SLG is .401 (poor), and his OPS is .723 (again, poor).
Schmidt trumps him in every important offensive category. OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, total bases, home runs, WARP, EqA, EqR, walks, and win shares.
I suppose it depends on what stats are considered. Average, RBS's, Hits, home runs are what I consider fundamental offensive stats. Cherrypicking? OPS and WARP are obscure stats that quantitatively are trivial. I offer fundamental stats offensively and defensively and again, Robinson trumps Schmidt in every major defensive category. Schmidt does not trump Robinson in every major offensive category. To state that Robinson was an offensive liability is just plain nonsense.
Fundamental stats are often the most misleading ones. RsBI are not a measure of personal greatness. Batting average is far inferior when compared to OBP.
Read again, I never argued that Schmidt was better defensively, because he isn't. However, you can't use errors, fielding percentage, and Gold Gloves as serious defensive credentials. Use defensive WARP, FRAA, defensive rating, etc.
OPS is a combination of SLG and OBP...how is it obscure? WARP is not obscure either.
Your World Series comments segue well into my next argument. Schmidt was a shy, introverted and quiet fellow...not the stuff leaders are made of. Brooks was a born team leader and a powerful catalyst in the success of the 66-71 Orioles. Those Orioles were far more successful than Schmidt's Phillies. Brooks led, Schmidt didn't. . There's a reason why the Orioles won and the Phillies didn't and Robinson played a huge role in how the Orioles success compared to the Phillies. Hence more WS stats
You're right, there is a reason why the Orioles were consistently good. Their pitching. Jim Palmer won 20 games eight times in nine years. Mike Cuellar won 20 games four times. In 1971, every starter on the Orioles won 20 games. The Orioles consistently had some of the greatest pitching staffs.
I love how you are knocking Schmidt because he played on teams that didn't have the luxury of having the great pitching staffs that Baltimore had. Yeah, that definitely makes Brooks the better player.
Not just pitching but great defense....especially Robinson's 16 Gold Gloves. The Phillies didn't have good pitching? Steve Carlton doesn't count, right? Not knocking Schmidt, he just wasn't as complete as Robinson.
Wasn't as complete? Are you kidding me? Robinson was excellent defensively, average-at-best offensively. Schmidt was excellent both offensively and defensively. I don't know how you could possibly say that Robinson was more complete.
Steve Carlton is one pitcher. Jim Palmer, Mike Cuellar, Dave McNally, and Pat Dobson is a complete pitching staff. It is hilarious that you want to compare a SINGLE pitcher to an entire staff full of all-stars and 20-game winners.
Uh dude, I"m paraphrasing Jim Palmer. He's said it times innumerable. There wouldn't have been four 20 game winners if it weren't for Brooks.The same sentiments have been echoed by other period Orioles. Oh, don't tell me......Palmer doesn't know what he's talking about.
No, I'm sure Palmer does know what he's talking about.
But you act like Robinson was the entire team. You act like it was all his doing, all his will and skill that made Palmer and Cuellar and McNally and whoever else on the Orioles so good. You act like they didn't have the great infield, with players OTHER than Robinson.
And thanks for dodging my questions. And thanks for dodging my point that Carlton is one pitcher. And that the Orioles had consistently great players outside of Brooks.
Nope, wrong again. Read the posts. I said a powerful catalyst with 16 GGs as part of a great Orioles defense, not acted like or was all his doing. Those are your words.
I've not seriously followed baseball since the strike, so I dont know those players. Im debating Schmidt and Robinson, not them.
Why cant you respond about Schmidts lack of leadership as opposed to Robinsons? Lets talk hot sack defense What oddball stats do you use to measure a players defensive greatness?
I love how you act like it was Schmidt's lack of leadership that was the reason why they didn't win championships. Not the fact that he was on three or four great teams. Then you turn around and act like Brooks' leadership is the reason why the Orioles won so much. And don't tell me that that's not what you're doing.
FRAA, FRAR, defensive rating, defensive WARP, Rtot, etc. etc.
And nowhere in any of your previous posts did you say anything along the lines of what you claim you said.
And you don't have to know the players that I mentioned to answer my questions. It's quite simple, really.
You obviously like batting average, so I asked you if you would rather have some guys who hit for decent averages but have subpar OBPs and OPSs or some guys who have subpar batting averages but well-above average OBPs and OPSs.
If you like batting average, and view it as a legitimate stat, then you would take Ichiro Suzuki over Mickey Mantle. You would take Hillebrand over Dunn, etc.
I call the shots here and there's been too much offense talk and not enough defense. What about defense? Show me your stats that nobody pays attention to.
Yeah, let's not change subjects. Never once have I argued that Robinson and Schmidt are equal defensively. I said that Schmidt was the more complete player because he was great offensively and defensively. Brooks, on the other hand, was average at best offensively.
And no, you definitely do not "call the shots here".
You have brought absolutely nothing to the table to support your own arguments. I give you a ton of offensive stats that Schmidt trumps Robinson in, and you fail to answer to them. Instead, you just tell me about how stupid they are because they are not the ridiculous traditional stats.
And, for the record, the only things you have brought up is World Series stats and basically blaming Mike Schmidt for the Phillies not being good.
My case is supported by standard, accepted statistical baseball criteria and an authoritative source, 'The Baseball Encylopedia', MacMIllan and Co...baseball's bible.
Can you quote your source?
Is it 'Eric Anno's Strange & Unusual Baseball Facts'? I'm sure every reference librarian in the country is clamoring to get that title...lol
Baseball Commissioner Bug Selig announced today that all major baseball statistics including batting averages, rbis, et. al are hereby revoked and request that all sports publications cease and desist from publishing them. 'Eric Anno's Strange & Unusual Baseball Facts' will be adopted and replace 'The Baseball Encylopedia' as standard reference.
The joke of the day at work yesterday: "Brooks Robinson was an offensive liability"
You could probably use the terribly unfunny paragraph that you wasted your time writing (and I'm sure it took you most of the day) at work. It sure gave me a great laugh. Albeit a sarcastic laugh, but it was a laugh nonetheless.
And I haven't made up any of these stats. You asked me to cite my sources, and I did. Then you turn around and act like they are all in my head.
Sorry that you are a traditionalist. Sorry you fear change in baseball. It's a shame.
Nobody pays attention to those obsure, irrelevant stats. The stats I use are real, concrete, have been employed since the earliest days of the game and will continue to be. There's a reason for that.....they matter. Yours never will
Intelligent baseball fans pay attention to SABR stats. Rob Neyer, Billy Beane, and Bill James, according to you, are just idiots. You have the same mindset as Joe Morgan and Murray Chass, which is definitely not a good mindset to have.
And there's a reason why you see an ever-growing following of sabermetrics. Because they are the best tools possible for comparing players. Runs created, OPS, WHIP, win shares, TPR, please tell me how these stats don't matter, but batting average and RsBI do.
I didn't say they were idiots, but you're making a good case for yourself. BE doesn't even list those stats in the player registers. They're obscure. When the NY Times Sports pages start showing these stats I'll believe you.....fat chance that'll ever happen. Charlie Eckman said "It's a very simply game." It's about winning and losing, scoring runs and good defense. And defense is the name of the game. Baseball being the only major sport where the defense controls the ball.
You said that Robinson was the greatest third baseman to ever play the game. You never said that he was the greatest DEFENSIVE third baseman, you said he was the greatest third baseman. That means it accounts for both offense and defense.
Schmidt beats out Robinson in damn near every possible offensive category, even your stupid traditional stats. I don't know how many times I have to say this before it gets through your thick skull.
Now now, let's watch our temper or you won't graduate.
He's both. It goes without saying that Brooks is the greatest defensive third baseman ever. It's just that Schmidt can't match him on any major defensive stat while Brooks betters or matches Schmidt in a few of the aforementioned major offensive categories.
The scales clearly tip in Brooks' favor.
Talk about dodging questions - Again, what criteria do you use to determine a player's defensive skills?
You tell me that I have dodged your question, but I have named my defensive metrics several times. Go back and look. You'll see.
"The scales cleary tip in Brooks' favor"
That could not be any more false. Schmidt absolutely demolishes Robinson in offense, and he was a great defensive player too. Brooks was nothing more than an average offensive player and a great defensive player.
And I have not once lost my temper. You refuse to listen and are stubborn.
I have posted what stats I use for defense in two different posts. Go back and look for them, they are there.
Well, given his 104 OPS+ and seven full seasons with a below-average OPS+, added to the fact that his OBP is under .325, and how his career OWP is inferior to GRAIG NETTLES', then I'll stick by my original assertion that Brooks was an offensive liability. He was average at best, and a liability at his worst.
Schmidt played mostly on plastic. With the rare seam hit, playing deep grounders were fast but predictable. This would have been tailor made for BR whose D numbers would be even higher than they are versus Schmidt. BR played mostly on grass with all the nuances, unpredictability and bad hops inherent on that surface.
Brooks' clutch play often hit behind the runner, putting the team's winning ahead of his #'s. I clearly remember fans often commenting on that in the stands.
Your next argument is the turf? Seriously? This is all you have now?
It's nice to know that people in the stands in the '60s and '70s were commenting on Brooks' play. Keep in mind, these people often knew so very little.
And are you telling me that the ball bounced worse on grass than on AstroTurf? Have you seen the enormous hops that take place on AstroTurf? That was the main complaint with AstroTurf, that it made the ball bounce A LOT higher than on grass.
Well, I've mentioned offense, defense, post season, all-star accomplishments and leadership. There really isn't much else. Granted, not as important but worthy of stating. Qualify your statement about fans knowing little then.
True the ball bounces higher and faster on plastic, but how many bad hops and various speeds do you get? Every natural grass park especially in those days had very different characteristics...and a LOT of bad hops.
What have you mentioned on offense? What? Hits? More longevity-based stats? Yeah, you've really helped your cause by mentioning offense.
Nobody is arguing who was better defensively, though you use ridiculously outdated stats and biased awards. Again, doesn't help your cause, especially considering I never disagreed about Brooks being the superior defensive player.
All-Star accomplishments? Absolutely amazing. Those are so damn meaningful!
Again, more hits, more doubles, more triples, tied average and fewer strikeouts, and I forgot, more sacrifice flies.
Schmidt leads Robinson in the following defensive categories: O - nada - none. I agreed Schmidt was better on offense. Complete meaning offense and defense considered, on balance Robinson comes out ahead. All-Star appearances and perfomance do count for something but not as much as the aforementioned. Robinson's one WS MVP performance had far better stats than Schmidt's one.
How in bloody hell does Robinson come out ahead? Please, explain this to me.
Schmidt was a great defensive player as well as a great offensive player. You refuse to acknowledge this, and instead give me bullshit offensive categories (sac flies? Seriously?) and tell me that he comes out as a more well-rounded player, which is completely and totally illogical as well as false.
Robinson was great defensively, mediocre at best offensively. Schmidt was great on both sides of the game.
Again, more home runs, RsBI, walks, total bases, batting runs, batting wins, runs created, win shares, better OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, EqA, etc.
All-Star appearences count for nothing. Exactly...nothing. They mean almost as much as strikeouts!
Schmidt is 160 FRAA (fielding runs above average). That means he was great defensively. Schmidt is also nearly 1,000RARP (runs above replacement player), meaning he was excellent offensively. Schmidt was a FAR better OVERALL player.
Mike Schmidt was the best defensive third baseman in the National League in his time. He won the Gold Glove award ten times. Before steroids, he was in the top ten of all time home run leaders. Seriously, just stand back, and think about it. An infielder is in the same league with his bat as the common HR outfield slugger. That's why Mike Schmidt is the best third baseman of all time. If you're speaking of defense only, Brooks has it in spades. In baseball, homeruns rule.
It depends on what criteria you use I think. I factor in defense at 3rd as equally important as offense. I also consider post season play and leadership qualities. Factoring those in I think Brooks comes out ahead. No doubt Schmidt was the greatest power hitting 3rd baseman ever, but I see Brooks as being a more complete player.
Schmidt played on both plastic, and natural grass. Brooks played on mostly grass, with the exceptions of the KC Royals, and his last season againt Toronto and Seattle. You are making a case for Mike Schmidt, since he played in a league that had both surfaces vs. the natural grass A.L. Teams with natural grass during Schmidt's era were; San Francisco, San Diego, LA, NY Mets, and Atlanta. Schmidt had to adjust his defense at home vs. the handful of grass NL teams. Brooks didn't!!
Good point. I'd add, however that Brooks had never even played on artificial turf before the 1970 WS, and he shut down the Reds on it as if he'd played the stuff his entire career....quite spectacularly.
And, for the record, Brooks is not even in the top three or four overall third basemen. It's really incredible that you think he was a better overall player than Eddie Mathews, George Brett, Schmidt, or Wade Boggs.
The scale is really not tipping in favor of Robinson at all.
But, you are way too stubborn and refuse to listen to logic or anything I state, for that matter. So, you'll just come back with a response telling me how I'm obscure or irrelevant or something like that.
Matthews makes a better case for displacing Schmidt due to his outstanding offense, but Schmidt betters him in guess what category? The other players mentioned don't have the other category to displace either.
Schmidt betters Mathews (there's only one "t" by the way) in home runs, RsBI (your stat), doubles, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, walks, total bases, win shares, and some other categories that I won't mention because you'll just ignore them and tell me how obscure they are.
Brett was worlds better offensively than Robinson, and was not that bad defensively. Again, these are all better OVERALL third basemen, in case you either ignored what I said or refused to acknowledge it, as usual.
The stats that you bring up are traditional stats, that doesn't mean they are the best stats for judging a player.
These stats that you are so quick to dismiss as "made up" are the best tools for judging how valuable a player is against other players. OPS+ and win shares are millions upon millions times better than batting average and RsBI.
The only offensive stats that Brooks has an advantage in is hits, doubles, and triples, all of which can be attributed to longevity. Literally, those are it. Unless you wanna count sac flies and sac hits, there is nothing else.
Schmidt has advantages in the following offensive categories:
Runs, home runs, RsBI, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, total bases, steals, steal success, walks, HBP, IBB, ABR, EqA, ABW, OWP, extra-base hits, times on base, and win shares.
You finally mentioned steals. Important and I was going to handicap you with that. Good play, but your argument is one-dimensional, compounded by the use of obscure stats. Right, nobody argues that Schmidt was the best powerhitting 3rd baseman of all time, but there's more to the game than that, especially at such a crucial defensive position as 3rd base.
Suppose Schmidt was better defensively, which he wasn't even close. What "non-traditional" stat would you use to justify it?
Why the hell do you keep asking me what defensive stats I use? I've already posted them three or four times.
And please tell me how my argument is one-dimensional. You argue that Brooks is the superior overall third baseman, which is totally false and is backed up by everything that I have posted.
"compounded by the use of obscure stats"
Please. Don't even try to play that card anymore. I gave you the traditional stats that you seem to love, in addition to my SABR stats.
He brings such formidable attention and intelligence to bear on the enemy pitcher that one senses that the odds have almost been reversed. It is the man on the mound, not the one up at the plate, who is in worse trouble from the start.
What an absolute disgrace! People poking fun at Mike Schmidt's emotional retirement speech. I'm a life long Phillies fan! This man has taken the Phillies from a laughing stock to terrific years from 1976-1983. Won 10 gold gloves, MVP in '80, '81, and '86, and 548 homers and being booed and jeered in front of a tough crowd when he had bad games and say Phillies fans are the best. That says something and his knees were shot he couldn't do something he loved! And the best third baseman ever!!!
iwantbeerdamnit 11 hours ago
This was the most uncomfortable, testicle-shrinking display I have ever seen.
jjp009 1 month ago
548 Homeruns, 10 gold gloves, 3 time MVP, 80 World Series Champ. BEST Third baseman ever. Fact.
EastCoastDude99 1 month ago
clubsoda kenny on facebook
furnicaticaloasa 1 month ago 2
I'm absolutely crying over here ...
vladlovesceltic 1 month ago
Through your tears.
jcasaurus 1 month ago
best 3rd baseman of all time.
DroppinKnowledge69 3 months ago
tsss..tsss...somebody give this guy a tissue he's gonna flood the place or sumthin' tssk...tssk...
QKNTheMan 3 months ago 6
@QKNTheMan brilliant.
nambatzis 3 months ago
You have the right to cry when your a legend at something you don't want to stop with all your heart but you can't physically take it.
When you win the MVP award 3 times and hit over even 200 Home runs then you deserve to cry when you have to end it all.
WhAtZCrAcKiNN 4 months ago
opie and anthony!!
phizfrail 4 months ago 13
linger longer
howthefagworks 4 months ago in playlist Liked 5
Happy Birthday Schmidty. All you faggots that dont like him i say suck Phillies Cock pricks
TheStaypr0 4 months ago
Mike Schmidt is a fuckibg pussy! Sign my autograph now faggot! Quit on his team in the middle of a season!
rodfarva420 4 months ago
fucking pussy
godboy50 4 months ago
I know he's prolly trolling but to insinuate Schmidt isnt a legend of baseball lol
xxsandmanxx02 5 months ago
get over it u fucking baby!!!! WAY TO RETIRE ON UR TEAM MIDWAY THROUGH A SEASON. legend?
rodfarva420 6 months ago
wtf all the people hating have never played a sport professionally and never had passion for sports
devinvincent89 7 months ago
I LOVE THIS MAN! And I grew up watching him destroy my beloved Mets. I remember being 12 years old and seeing him cry. It nearly brought tears to my eyes. You could feel the passion and love he had for the game. A true baseball legend who did it the RIGHT way. Long live Mike Schmidt, and with all due respect to Brooks Robinson, the greatest 3rd baseman in the history of the game.
MedicalVideoJunkie 7 months ago 2
I HAVE HIS SIGNED BAT!!!! OMG
iRunxKnife 7 months ago
Mike Schmidt was a legend. What a ball player!!!!!
jperez1910 8 months ago 3
i hate athletes that cry over retiring. They should work a real job.
k3304 8 months ago
Thanks Schmitty...I'll never forget my wedding anniversary. This was the day I got married.
fek2000 8 months ago
this fuckin cocksucker pushed me in the face 20 yrs ago when i was just an adorable litl 7yr old lad. fuck you mike schmidt u quit on ur team halfway through the season....now cry like a faggot u fucking jerkoff. and if i EVER see u again i put it on my momma that im gonna smack that ron jeremy moostash right off ur fucking face!
xm202 rules btw
rodfarva420 8 months ago
@rodfarva420 what do you mean Mike Schmidt pushed you in your face when you were 7? How the hell did that take place?
mriley858 8 months ago
@mriley858 i was with my sister when i was a young lad. we were standing by a door near the players parking lot....because i went to probably 35 home games that year i knew where to get autographs....we see mike coming out and i run over to MY HERO and ask for him to write his name on a piece of paper for a 7 yr old die hard phils fan...he proceeds to say "no thanks kid" and nudged me away by my head. not hard but VERY dismissive! my love for players died that day..my love for the team lives on!
rodfarva420 8 months ago
@rodfarva420 ---Please get over it. Fucking Baby!
soulsofrebellion11 8 months ago
@rodfarva420 this is why you can't 'idolize' players .. they really don't give a shit about the fans .. I watch but that's where it ends
steelermia 7 months ago
@rodfarva420 ---FUCK YOU!! Mike Schmidt is the fuckin Man! More of a man you'll ever be. If you ran into Mike, he'd kick your fucking ass in COCKSUCKER!!
soulsofrebellion11 8 months ago 2
@soulsofrebellion11 internet tough guy huh? well souls of rebellion....yea nice CORNball name! ur the stuff that leaks out of my cock after i assfuck ur mother! mike schmidt is a true jerkoff and im speaking about an experience that I had. not some golden vision of his mustach brushing against ur pubic area like you dream about. truth is HE RETIRED ON HIS TEAM MIDWAY THROUGH A SEASON!!!!!!!!! because the team was trash so ur idol gave up. hes a jerkoff and hes only matched by you! douchebag
rodfarva420 8 months ago
@rodfarva420 ---Go FUCK YOURSELF!! I'D be your father but the line was too long.
He retired because he felt he was hurting the team, you FUCKING MORON!! GO FUCK YOUR MAMA!!
soulsofrebellion11 8 months ago
@soulsofrebellion11 lmao dude ....ud be my dad but the line was too long??? u have self respect putting that ancient joke out there? lol i bet u kill the "fellas" down at the elks lodge...or the grocery store u work at....ur really a trolling douchebag so eat me. im done responding to u tooo. it was a throw away comment i didnt no i was dissing ur idol. keep believing mike schmidt gives a fuck about u. and im the moron! lmao lame
rodfarva420 8 months ago
@rodfarva420 so what if he didn't give you an autograph? players have so much to deal with in the 1st hand. get over it. and the way you're speaking you probably never grew up. you're the one who's stuck up. expecting to get an autograph and you're STILL pissed off?! Get over it man, just get over it!
phillyphan1994 6 months ago
@phillyphan1994 players have so much to deal with? like what u fucking douchebag counting money? every player should have time to thank the fans who make him a legend. so fuck you. keep fucking ur pillow to how great schmidt is. fuckin loser
rodfarva420 6 months ago
@rodfarva420 DANG buddy, it's not like i worship the guy. i'm just a phillies fan who appreciates what he did for my favorite franchise. and don't you think he'd be just a LITTLE tired of signing so many autographs. maybe you just came to him at the wrong time. and i'm no loser man...you're the one acting like it, if you ask me. grow up bud
phillyphan1994 6 months ago
@phillyphan1994 i am a phillies fan too...have been since birth. its easy to say ur a fan nowadays. and no if someone gave you a chance to be worshipped by millions of people and be an idol to millions of children no i wouldnt get tired of signing. EVER! what he did for ur favorite franchise is retire in the middle of a season because the team wasnt good. so leave me alone.
rodfarva420 6 months ago
@rodfarva420 man as much as i totally disagree with you, whatever. GO PHILLIES!
phillyphan1994 6 months ago
@rodfarva420 His knees were done, there's no avoiding that pain. He truly loved the game.
MattSif 5 months ago
XM 202/197
fivepoint0008 9 months ago 2
@fivepoint0008 xm206/who cares what there on on sirius. hoo hoo robin
rodfarva420 8 months ago 2
Schmidt was the greatest, way better than Bonds or any of the steroid losers.
lmrdjm275 9 months ago 2
idk i felt ashamed like u weren't a fireman or a police officer in an inner city ur job wasn't a marine fighting in Afghanistan u was a professional baseball player the greatest job ever so i feel like hes a little bitch sort of idk
mizzcarlos 9 months ago
@mizzcarlos the point was his dream came true
usmc12345678910 9 months ago
@mizzcarlos ---maybe you're the "little bitch"?
soulsofrebellion11 8 months ago
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!
jeffer2m 10 months ago
3 people are enormous cry babies
NiiCK5TER 10 months ago
thanks schmidtty
sitonmyshamrock 10 months ago
There is proof for us all its ok for any guy to cry if one of the most proven studs ever does.
stevekon11 11 months ago
Fag! LOL! Only kiddin! Mike was the Man!!
zeppy215 11 months ago
O and A rule
dkpai05 11 months ago 3
I love opie and anthony. This bit never gets old.
cisco77566 11 months ago 3
*cough* faggit *cough*
jloch85 1 year ago
Notice how as soon as he starts to breakdown the cameras start flashing. Drama sells.... Mike was a player I always looked upto when I was a kid. Class act!!!
mjkzeus1 1 year ago
"I thank God that dream came truuuuuuuuuuuueeee!"
ajharker 1 year ago
thumbs up for opie and anthony!!
phizfrail 1 year ago 18
@phizfrail howard stern was first to make fun him
psu68born 22 hours ago
I was there to see Schmidt's last game at Candlestick Park, just before this surprise announcement. In the middle of the season, he knew that for the good of the team, it was his time. He chose not to hang on like a pathetic shadow and collect a paycheck, like nearly every other great.. He should have had a farewell tour and be feted at every park. Obviously he loved the game dearly. Pure class.
searcher3 1 year ago 3
@searcher3
In his last game, Schmidt's two-out error on a routine ground ball loaded the bases for Will Clark, who then hit the game-winning grand slam. Schmidt obviously knew it was time to pass the torch, and I'll bet that in the rest of his speech he says that he didn't want to hold his team back. Again, what outstanding character.
searcher3 1 year ago 2
@searcher3 and very selfless which is more that we can say for Cal Ripken, Jr. who was stinking up Baltimore in order to keep his "streak".
Cnice76 11 months ago
Mike Schmidt is a shithead. He kicked a driver's son off a Phillies bus. The driver just wanted his kid to meet the Phillies and Schmidt said "get him the f--k off the bus". Schmidt was overrated. He led the lead in choking. Would hit homers when they didnt need them.
k3304 1 year ago
@k3304 i guess hes in the hall of fame for no reason then
philss1515 1 year ago
I remember the last season I played. I went home after a ballgame one day, lay down on my bed, and tears came to my eyes. How can you explain that? It's like crying for your mother after she's gone. You cry because you love her. I cried, I guess, because I loved baseball and I knew I had to leave it. willie mays
rbcast23 1 year ago
BEST Third Basemen EVER..........548 Homers, 10 Gold Gloves, 3 time league MVP, 1980 World Series MVP. Nuff said.
EastCoastDude99 1 year ago
the day he retired did not knew why he wept, but i imagined it, he dont want and thought he loved his team, its people since these day, I'm fan of the phillies, because if someone who cries for his team is that the team is great, greetings from mexico city
cuchulain212 1 year ago
woah.. this is amazing. and my youth pastor.. huh.. lol.. my youth pastor, Mike Schmidt, is related to Mike Schmidt. I can't remember if he said if he is his uncle or great uncle. but yeah. pretty cool. i was shocked.
AMERICANBOY633 1 year ago
David Wright, Ryan Zimmerman and Evan Longoria are three of the great third basemen of this generation. None of them is remotely close to Mr. Michael Jack Schmidt. A superb defender, a terrific hitter. Three-time NL MVP and 1980 World Series MVP. The man was leaving his profession, and due to bad knees he could not do it on his own terms, of course he felt terrible and wanted to cry.
teachher 1 year ago 2
I want to PUKE!
MikeMeldan 1 year ago
@MikeMeldan Why, because Mike loved and cared enough about what he did for a living? Nothing wrong with that.
discolando 1 year ago
Mike Schmidts great
theontherise 1 year ago
Schmidty was a class act all the way! This is coming from a Yankees fan. Hard to believe there were some Phillies fans who booed the man who was the best to play his position. Philly hasn't had a better 3rd baseman since.
hoopsheavenpa 1 year ago 2
God Bless you Mike Schmidt!!! Yes, he has a right to cry because he gave it his all...I respect that man!!
VIKING33NY 1 year ago 3
pussy
dirtylarry69 1 year ago
Class-act ALL THE WAY!
danolson68 1 year ago
Waaaaaaaah... Fuckin pussy. Stop crying you big baby.
ivand87a 1 year ago
@ivand87a
Fuck you, ivand87a. I hope you choke on a hot dog someday soon.
danolson68 1 year ago
shut the fuck up. lets see you accomplish half of the shit he did playing baseball. go fuck yourself. if anything youre the pussy for insulting him from behind a computer.
VISHMAN14 1 year ago 4
@ivand87a stfu
emilyydx 1 year ago
This is often played before and after commercial breaks on the Howard Stern show... I had no idea who it was. Great player, but big baby. Nothing worse than crying in a press conference. Waaaah.
ivand87a 1 year ago
Maybe he should've played baseball in a dress
JoeCollege000 1 year ago
A genuine baseball player... I almost forgot what one of those looked like until I saw this!
BassBaller 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
F the Phillies! Lets go Mets!
southpaw817 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
He should have been wearing a dress.
jasonashland 1 year ago
@jasonashland He'd still kick your ass more than likely.
LASportsFan4Life 1 year ago
@LASportsFan4Life Only if he's not on his period.
jasonashland 1 year ago
@jasonashland lol
SuperClarenceX 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
what a fag.
ifuckedyourmom77 1 year ago
Greatest baseball player ever.
Cbig87 2 years ago 3
there ain't nothin wrong with a man crying when he gives up anything he has that amount of passion for. mike still had baseball in his heart, just not in his knees.
Danro05 2 years ago 32
@Danro05 amen
joisey82 1 year ago
@Danro05 Thanks for saying that. Mike gave Phillies fans such great memories. He cared about his performance deeply. For example, Even though he was the home run king, in his later years he worked on his batting average in the 80's where it climbed to .290.
theLaNDoftheLOOPS 5 months ago
He made the most spectacular plays that could top Brooks Robinson but the simple plays like the slow grounder off a .210 hitter gave him trouble.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
Here it is, your moment of zen.
roberthesterphoto 2 years ago
MIke schmidt retired??? When?
diziamonddave 2 years ago
When you're as good of a player as Schmidt and play for 18 years in a sport you love, you have the right to cry like a baby when you retire.
peaceandmetal88 2 years ago 28
Very True
Ignatius1125 2 years ago
GO PHILLIES ( VINCE)
pd116595 2 years ago
Poor little fella....
cjhutch0416 2 years ago
what a faggot! he cried cuz he misses naked males!
bradvolk3 2 years ago
18 years ago...I came to a press conference with the dream to become a big, crying homo....
I thank god the dream came truuuuuuuue.....
Ginge220 2 years ago
Comment removed
Ginge220 2 years ago
Despite the OBP, I don't think Weaver would be the only manager to favor Brooks in the bottom of the 9th, two outs and a runner on base. I might add that Robinson's WS stats are better and his 70 WS MVP overshadows Schmidt's 80 MVP if for no other reason than a .429 average and a defensive performance that hasn't been matched since.
Silver Slugger award? ..probably none. 1964 would have been the closest maybe.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Brooks Robinson was the greatest third baseman in history. Anybody care to debate that?
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
I think a lot of people would, both were great but most put Schmidt ahead of Brooks.
powerliftingfan1 2 years ago
Most may, but knowledgeable fans know that Robinson's defense was far superior, leading Schmidt in every single major category. Schmidt bettered Robinson in some but not all offensive categories. The scales tip in Brooks' favor.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Far superior? I'll grant you that Brooks was considered the best defensive 3rd baseman ever (16 gold gloves to his credit) but Schmidt had 10 of his own. The offensive categories are just as tilted to Schmidt (548 HR's to 268, 1595 RBI's to 1357, Schmidt's OBP was .380 to Brooks' .322), his slugging percentage was a lot higher as well. It is kind of strange that their career batting averages were identical (.267).
Schmidt was also a 3-time MVP, Brooks won it once.
powerliftingfan1 2 years ago
16 and 10 don't compare. Robinson had more assists, fewer errors, double plays, better fielding pct.... every major category, so yes far superior. Offensively the edge goes to Schmidt but not by the margin many imagine. Power always gets attention, but Brooks had more hits, more doubles and yes an identical average. Not as tilted as the defense. Add to that Schmidt is one of the all-time leaders in strikeouts. Brooks was a tremendous clutch hitter and didn't strike out anywhere near as much.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
All points well-made, but the difference in OBP negates a lot of the negativity that Schmidt's strikeout total would otherwise have.
Out of curiosity, since you obviously followed his career pretty closely, how many silver slugger awards do you think Brooks would have had if it had been awarded back in his day?
powerliftingfan1 2 years ago
Strikeouts don't mean anything.
Neither do the other stats that you cherrypicked. Schmidt has only 614 fewer hits than Robinson, but played five fewer seasons and nearly 500 fewer games.
Schmidt has SIGNIFICANT leads in just about every important offensive category.
Like I said, strikeouts mean nothing. They don't make you a bad hitter. EqA measures total offensive production per out, meaning that even if he strikes out a lot, a good EqA means he's productive no matter what.
EricAnno 2 years ago
No, strikeouts DO mean something. In Schmidts case they are somewhat negated by his overwhelming power stats as stated in previous posts. Yes, Robinson had more hits. Thats significant. Robinson did play two seasons too long, but doesnt affect his numbers that greatly and had he retired at that juncture, his batting average would be higher and not tied with Schmidts. The fact he was able to play more games is feather in Robinsons cap, not Schmidts.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
No, strikeouts don't mean anything. Neither does batting average.
As I said, EqA measures total offensive production PER OUT. It's far less misleading than regular batting average. Schmidt destroys Robinson in that stat too.
Once again, the only reason that Schmidt has fewer hits is because he has a lot less games and plate appearences.
EricAnno 2 years ago
So by your logic Pete Rose's hit total is meaningless because he played more games and longer than Ty Cobb. I say kudos to Rose. He was blessed with better longevity than Cobb, as Robinson was to Schmidt.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Exactly.
Added to the fact that Rose is an inferior player in almost every single way.
EricAnno 2 years ago
The numbers don't lie. Rose had more hits...period. I do agree that Cobb was a better overall player though.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Important - World Series stats. Interestingly, Robinson does better offensively and Schmidt to some degree defensively.
Robinson had more WS hits, home runs, rbis, fewer strikeouts and a whopping .303 average to Schmidts anemic .236. Robinson also had higher OBP, OPS and SLG, stats you consider important and I dont. Schmidt had more runs, doubles and BB advantage Robinson.
Robinson has more PO, A, DP, TC/G, but Schmidt had fewer errors and .966 FA to Robinsons .961 advantage Robinson.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
World Series stats really aren't that important. Especially when you consider that Schmidt only played in 36 playoff games, and only 11 World Series games. Robinson played in 21 World Series games (different eras). A lot more opportunities. A LOT more.
And you really consider a .303 average "whopping"? Really? Would you care to throw out any more tiny sample sizes?
EricAnno 2 years ago
If I understand you correctly batting averages, rbis, hits, strikeouts, HR's, every major defensive category and World Series performances aren't that important in determining greatness, but OPS, WARP, EQR and EQA are? That makes about as much sense as saying Brooks Robinson was an offensive liability. Good luck selling that to baseball pundits.
A .303 batting average compared to a .236batting average? Uh yeah, that's a whopping difference.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
I think you should change that "pundits" to "purists".
Batting average is misleading. If you play for a great team (depending on where you hit in the lineup and depending on what OBP the players in front of you have) you can rack up a ton of RsBI. I don't understand why you think strikeouts are like the worst possible thing ever. Errors and fielding percentage are not "major" defensive categories. Every stat that purists love can be misleading in a lot of ways. SABR stats are less misleading.
EricAnno 2 years ago
How can it be misleading? Batting averages are statistical facts based upon hits and at bats. Why argue it? It's mathematics. I never said strikeouts are the worst possible thing ever, but they're certainly not an attribute and must therefore be a negative.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
OBP and SLG are way better than batting average. So, let me ask you a question that I ask everyone who thinks batting average is a good statistic.
Who was the better hitter in 2004? Shea Hillenbrand or Adam Dunn? Would you rather have Barry Bonds or Ichiro? Mickey Mantle or Todd Helton? Ryan Howard or Juan Pierre?
It's simple, really. OBP judges a hitter better than batting average ever will. And OPS+ is the best indicator for how good a hitter is. Win shares measures your value.
EricAnno 2 years ago
I'd love to debate that.
Brooks was a defensive wizard, no one can argue that. But he was an offensive liability. His OPS+ is 104, just four points above average (and that's in a rather poor hitting era). His OBP is .322 (poor), his SLG is .401 (poor), and his OPS is .723 (again, poor).
Schmidt trumps him in every important offensive category. OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, total bases, home runs, WARP, EqA, EqR, walks, and win shares.
Schmidt was a better overall player.
EricAnno 2 years ago
I suppose it depends on what stats are considered. Average, RBS's, Hits, home runs are what I consider fundamental offensive stats. Cherrypicking? OPS and WARP are obscure stats that quantitatively are trivial. I offer fundamental stats offensively and defensively and again, Robinson trumps Schmidt in every major defensive category. Schmidt does not trump Robinson in every major offensive category. To state that Robinson was an offensive liability is just plain nonsense.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Fundamental stats are often the most misleading ones. RsBI are not a measure of personal greatness. Batting average is far inferior when compared to OBP.
Read again, I never argued that Schmidt was better defensively, because he isn't. However, you can't use errors, fielding percentage, and Gold Gloves as serious defensive credentials. Use defensive WARP, FRAA, defensive rating, etc.
OPS is a combination of SLG and OBP...how is it obscure? WARP is not obscure either.
It's not nonsense.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Your World Series comments segue well into my next argument. Schmidt was a shy, introverted and quiet fellow...not the stuff leaders are made of. Brooks was a born team leader and a powerful catalyst in the success of the 66-71 Orioles. Those Orioles were far more successful than Schmidt's Phillies. Brooks led, Schmidt didn't. . There's a reason why the Orioles won and the Phillies didn't and Robinson played a huge role in how the Orioles success compared to the Phillies. Hence more WS stats
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
You're right, there is a reason why the Orioles were consistently good. Their pitching. Jim Palmer won 20 games eight times in nine years. Mike Cuellar won 20 games four times. In 1971, every starter on the Orioles won 20 games. The Orioles consistently had some of the greatest pitching staffs.
I love how you are knocking Schmidt because he played on teams that didn't have the luxury of having the great pitching staffs that Baltimore had. Yeah, that definitely makes Brooks the better player.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Not just pitching but great defense....especially Robinson's 16 Gold Gloves. The Phillies didn't have good pitching? Steve Carlton doesn't count, right? Not knocking Schmidt, he just wasn't as complete as Robinson.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Wasn't as complete? Are you kidding me? Robinson was excellent defensively, average-at-best offensively. Schmidt was excellent both offensively and defensively. I don't know how you could possibly say that Robinson was more complete.
Steve Carlton is one pitcher. Jim Palmer, Mike Cuellar, Dave McNally, and Pat Dobson is a complete pitching staff. It is hilarious that you want to compare a SINGLE pitcher to an entire staff full of all-stars and 20-game winners.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Uh dude, I"m paraphrasing Jim Palmer. He's said it times innumerable. There wouldn't have been four 20 game winners if it weren't for Brooks.The same sentiments have been echoed by other period Orioles. Oh, don't tell me......Palmer doesn't know what he's talking about.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
No, I'm sure Palmer does know what he's talking about.
But you act like Robinson was the entire team. You act like it was all his doing, all his will and skill that made Palmer and Cuellar and McNally and whoever else on the Orioles so good. You act like they didn't have the great infield, with players OTHER than Robinson.
And thanks for dodging my questions. And thanks for dodging my point that Carlton is one pitcher. And that the Orioles had consistently great players outside of Brooks.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Nope, wrong again. Read the posts. I said a powerful catalyst with 16 GGs as part of a great Orioles defense, not acted like or was all his doing. Those are your words.
I've not seriously followed baseball since the strike, so I dont know those players. Im debating Schmidt and Robinson, not them.
Why cant you respond about Schmidts lack of leadership as opposed to Robinsons? Lets talk hot sack defense What oddball stats do you use to measure a players defensive greatness?
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
I love how you act like it was Schmidt's lack of leadership that was the reason why they didn't win championships. Not the fact that he was on three or four great teams. Then you turn around and act like Brooks' leadership is the reason why the Orioles won so much. And don't tell me that that's not what you're doing.
FRAA, FRAR, defensive rating, defensive WARP, Rtot, etc. etc.
And nowhere in any of your previous posts did you say anything along the lines of what you claim you said.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Hmm, you sure "love "to use the word "love and "act."
Go to the next page, use the find feature and type in "catalyst". It's there.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
And you don't have to know the players that I mentioned to answer my questions. It's quite simple, really.
You obviously like batting average, so I asked you if you would rather have some guys who hit for decent averages but have subpar OBPs and OPSs or some guys who have subpar batting averages but well-above average OBPs and OPSs.
If you like batting average, and view it as a legitimate stat, then you would take Ichiro Suzuki over Mickey Mantle. You would take Hillebrand over Dunn, etc.
EricAnno 2 years ago
I call the shots here and there's been too much offense talk and not enough defense. What about defense? Show me your stats that nobody pays attention to.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Wow. Just...wow.
Yeah, let's not change subjects. Never once have I argued that Robinson and Schmidt are equal defensively. I said that Schmidt was the more complete player because he was great offensively and defensively. Brooks, on the other hand, was average at best offensively.
EricAnno 2 years ago
And no, you definitely do not "call the shots here".
You have brought absolutely nothing to the table to support your own arguments. I give you a ton of offensive stats that Schmidt trumps Robinson in, and you fail to answer to them. Instead, you just tell me about how stupid they are because they are not the ridiculous traditional stats.
And, for the record, the only things you have brought up is World Series stats and basically blaming Mike Schmidt for the Phillies not being good.
EricAnno 2 years ago
My case is supported by standard, accepted statistical baseball criteria and an authoritative source, 'The Baseball Encylopedia', MacMIllan and Co...baseball's bible.
Can you quote your source?
Is it 'Eric Anno's Strange & Unusual Baseball Facts'? I'm sure every reference librarian in the country is clamoring to get that title...lol
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
The New Bill James Baseball Historical Abstract.
Damn near all of my stats come from there, or Baseball-Reference, or Baseball Prospectus.
EricAnno 2 years ago
THIS JUST IN:
Baseball Commissioner Bug Selig announced today that all major baseball statistics including batting averages, rbis, et. al are hereby revoked and request that all sports publications cease and desist from publishing them. 'Eric Anno's Strange & Unusual Baseball Facts' will be adopted and replace 'The Baseball Encylopedia' as standard reference.
The joke of the day at work yesterday: "Brooks Robinson was an offensive liability"
Send some more. We need a laugh.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
You could probably use the terribly unfunny paragraph that you wasted your time writing (and I'm sure it took you most of the day) at work. It sure gave me a great laugh. Albeit a sarcastic laugh, but it was a laugh nonetheless.
And I haven't made up any of these stats. You asked me to cite my sources, and I did. Then you turn around and act like they are all in my head.
Sorry that you are a traditionalist. Sorry you fear change in baseball. It's a shame.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Nobody pays attention to those obsure, irrelevant stats. The stats I use are real, concrete, have been employed since the earliest days of the game and will continue to be. There's a reason for that.....they matter. Yours never will
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Intelligent baseball fans pay attention to SABR stats. Rob Neyer, Billy Beane, and Bill James, according to you, are just idiots. You have the same mindset as Joe Morgan and Murray Chass, which is definitely not a good mindset to have.
And there's a reason why you see an ever-growing following of sabermetrics. Because they are the best tools possible for comparing players. Runs created, OPS, WHIP, win shares, TPR, please tell me how these stats don't matter, but batting average and RsBI do.
EricAnno 2 years ago
I didn't say they were idiots, but you're making a good case for yourself. BE doesn't even list those stats in the player registers. They're obscure. When the NY Times Sports pages start showing these stats I'll believe you.....fat chance that'll ever happen. Charlie Eckman said "It's a very simply game." It's about winning and losing, scoring runs and good defense. And defense is the name of the game. Baseball being the only major sport where the defense controls the ball.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
No, they're really not obscure.
You said that Robinson was the greatest third baseman to ever play the game. You never said that he was the greatest DEFENSIVE third baseman, you said he was the greatest third baseman. That means it accounts for both offense and defense.
Schmidt beats out Robinson in damn near every possible offensive category, even your stupid traditional stats. I don't know how many times I have to say this before it gets through your thick skull.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Now now, let's watch our temper or you won't graduate.
He's both. It goes without saying that Brooks is the greatest defensive third baseman ever. It's just that Schmidt can't match him on any major defensive stat while Brooks betters or matches Schmidt in a few of the aforementioned major offensive categories.
The scales clearly tip in Brooks' favor.
Talk about dodging questions - Again, what criteria do you use to determine a player's defensive skills?
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Ok, this is really hilarious.
You tell me that I have dodged your question, but I have named my defensive metrics several times. Go back and look. You'll see.
"The scales cleary tip in Brooks' favor"
That could not be any more false. Schmidt absolutely demolishes Robinson in offense, and he was a great defensive player too. Brooks was nothing more than an average offensive player and a great defensive player.
And I have not once lost my temper. You refuse to listen and are stubborn.
EricAnno 2 years ago
What were they? Which post? You said Brooks was an offensive liability before. Now you state he was average. Which was it?
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
I have posted what stats I use for defense in two different posts. Go back and look for them, they are there.
Well, given his 104 OPS+ and seven full seasons with a below-average OPS+, added to the fact that his OBP is under .325, and how his career OWP is inferior to GRAIG NETTLES', then I'll stick by my original assertion that Brooks was an offensive liability. He was average at best, and a liability at his worst.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Schmidt played mostly on plastic. With the rare seam hit, playing deep grounders were fast but predictable. This would have been tailor made for BR whose D numbers would be even higher than they are versus Schmidt. BR played mostly on grass with all the nuances, unpredictability and bad hops inherent on that surface.
Brooks' clutch play often hit behind the runner, putting the team's winning ahead of his #'s. I clearly remember fans often commenting on that in the stands.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Really?
Your next argument is the turf? Seriously? This is all you have now?
It's nice to know that people in the stands in the '60s and '70s were commenting on Brooks' play. Keep in mind, these people often knew so very little.
And are you telling me that the ball bounced worse on grass than on AstroTurf? Have you seen the enormous hops that take place on AstroTurf? That was the main complaint with AstroTurf, that it made the ball bounce A LOT higher than on grass.
Ask Ozzie Smith.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Well, I've mentioned offense, defense, post season, all-star accomplishments and leadership. There really isn't much else. Granted, not as important but worthy of stating. Qualify your statement about fans knowing little then.
True the ball bounces higher and faster on plastic, but how many bad hops and various speeds do you get? Every natural grass park especially in those days had very different characteristics...and a LOT of bad hops.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
What have you mentioned on offense? What? Hits? More longevity-based stats? Yeah, you've really helped your cause by mentioning offense.
Nobody is arguing who was better defensively, though you use ridiculously outdated stats and biased awards. Again, doesn't help your cause, especially considering I never disagreed about Brooks being the superior defensive player.
All-Star accomplishments? Absolutely amazing. Those are so damn meaningful!
Leadership? Sorry, there's no stat for leaders.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Again, more hits, more doubles, more triples, tied average and fewer strikeouts, and I forgot, more sacrifice flies.
Schmidt leads Robinson in the following defensive categories: O - nada - none. I agreed Schmidt was better on offense. Complete meaning offense and defense considered, on balance Robinson comes out ahead. All-Star appearances and perfomance do count for something but not as much as the aforementioned. Robinson's one WS MVP performance had far better stats than Schmidt's one.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
How in bloody hell does Robinson come out ahead? Please, explain this to me.
Schmidt was a great defensive player as well as a great offensive player. You refuse to acknowledge this, and instead give me bullshit offensive categories (sac flies? Seriously?) and tell me that he comes out as a more well-rounded player, which is completely and totally illogical as well as false.
Robinson was great defensively, mediocre at best offensively. Schmidt was great on both sides of the game.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Again, more home runs, RsBI, walks, total bases, batting runs, batting wins, runs created, win shares, better OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, EqA, etc.
All-Star appearences count for nothing. Exactly...nothing. They mean almost as much as strikeouts!
Schmidt is 160 FRAA (fielding runs above average). That means he was great defensively. Schmidt is also nearly 1,000RARP (runs above replacement player), meaning he was excellent offensively. Schmidt was a FAR better OVERALL player.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Mike Schmidt was the best defensive third baseman in the National League in his time. He won the Gold Glove award ten times. Before steroids, he was in the top ten of all time home run leaders. Seriously, just stand back, and think about it. An infielder is in the same league with his bat as the common HR outfield slugger. That's why Mike Schmidt is the best third baseman of all time. If you're speaking of defense only, Brooks has it in spades. In baseball, homeruns rule.
strangeones4 2 years ago 3
It depends on what criteria you use I think. I factor in defense at 3rd as equally important as offense. I also consider post season play and leadership qualities. Factoring those in I think Brooks comes out ahead. No doubt Schmidt was the greatest power hitting 3rd baseman ever, but I see Brooks as being a more complete player.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Comment removed
strangeones4 2 years ago
Schmidt played on both plastic, and natural grass. Brooks played on mostly grass, with the exceptions of the KC Royals, and his last season againt Toronto and Seattle. You are making a case for Mike Schmidt, since he played in a league that had both surfaces vs. the natural grass A.L. Teams with natural grass during Schmidt's era were; San Francisco, San Diego, LA, NY Mets, and Atlanta. Schmidt had to adjust his defense at home vs. the handful of grass NL teams. Brooks didn't!!
strangeones4 2 years ago
Good point. I'd add, however that Brooks had never even played on artificial turf before the 1970 WS, and he shut down the Reds on it as if he'd played the stuff his entire career....quite spectacularly.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
And, for the record, Brooks is not even in the top three or four overall third basemen. It's really incredible that you think he was a better overall player than Eddie Mathews, George Brett, Schmidt, or Wade Boggs.
The scale is really not tipping in favor of Robinson at all.
But, you are way too stubborn and refuse to listen to logic or anything I state, for that matter. So, you'll just come back with a response telling me how I'm obscure or irrelevant or something like that.
EricAnno 2 years ago
Matthews makes a better case for displacing Schmidt due to his outstanding offense, but Schmidt betters him in guess what category? The other players mentioned don't have the other category to displace either.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Schmidt betters Mathews (there's only one "t" by the way) in home runs, RsBI (your stat), doubles, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, walks, total bases, win shares, and some other categories that I won't mention because you'll just ignore them and tell me how obscure they are.
Brett was worlds better offensively than Robinson, and was not that bad defensively. Again, these are all better OVERALL third basemen, in case you either ignored what I said or refused to acknowledge it, as usual.
EricAnno 2 years ago
And your case is not supported by anything.
The stats that you bring up are traditional stats, that doesn't mean they are the best stats for judging a player.
These stats that you are so quick to dismiss as "made up" are the best tools for judging how valuable a player is against other players. OPS+ and win shares are millions upon millions times better than batting average and RsBI.
EricAnno 2 years ago
This getting to be burlesque. The stats are all there. Tradition is good. Name one or more specifically cited that is incorrect.
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
What stats are you speaking of?
The only offensive stats that Brooks has an advantage in is hits, doubles, and triples, all of which can be attributed to longevity. Literally, those are it. Unless you wanna count sac flies and sac hits, there is nothing else.
Schmidt has advantages in the following offensive categories:
Runs, home runs, RsBI, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, total bases, steals, steal success, walks, HBP, IBB, ABR, EqA, ABW, OWP, extra-base hits, times on base, and win shares.
EricAnno 2 years ago
You finally mentioned steals. Important and I was going to handicap you with that. Good play, but your argument is one-dimensional, compounded by the use of obscure stats. Right, nobody argues that Schmidt was the best powerhitting 3rd baseman of all time, but there's more to the game than that, especially at such a crucial defensive position as 3rd base.
Suppose Schmidt was better defensively, which he wasn't even close. What "non-traditional" stat would you use to justify it?
tuckahoeneck 2 years ago
Why the hell do you keep asking me what defensive stats I use? I've already posted them three or four times.
And please tell me how my argument is one-dimensional. You argue that Brooks is the superior overall third baseman, which is totally false and is backed up by everything that I have posted.
"compounded by the use of obscure stats"
Please. Don't even try to play that card anymore. I gave you the traditional stats that you seem to love, in addition to my SABR stats.
EricAnno 2 years ago
pfat0
That's because he worked for what he has become, and now he leaving the thing that he loves so very much
germanshepard44 2 years ago
i remember hearing about this when i was like five years old and crying in my bathwater :.(
Jovian84 2 years ago
tremendo 3ra base,uno de los mejores!!
daveromm 2 years ago
schmidt is the best third baseman ever!!!!
D7a7v9e7 2 years ago 3
He brings such formidable attention and intelligence to bear on the enemy pitcher that one senses that the odds have almost been reversed. It is the man on the mound, not the one up at the plate, who is in worse trouble from the start.
— author Roger Angell
renandstim 2 years ago
Comment removed
spazticnerfbrain200 2 years ago