All Stars Then and Now: AL Edition

I have this theory that the best age to be a baseball fan is 10 years old. That was my favorite baseball year. At 10, you’re already old enough to read the stories and study the box scores but not so old that you think the manager is a complete idiot. At 10, you aren’t the least bit offended by how much money the players make – in fact, you think it’s really cool that they’re millionaires. At 10, you believe the players care just as much as you do. At 10, even the players hitting .185 and the pitchers with 6.00 ERAs seem special. At 10, you can fall asleep with the radio on under your pillow.

At 10, the players are larger than life – larger than they will ever seem again – but, at the same time, they’re closer than they ever will be again. At 10 you feel sure that you will be one of them someday.

Yes, 10 is a good age. I was 10 in 1977, and so those players, those teams, that year will always be special to me. The fact that was 30 years ago both (1) depresses me to no end and yet, in a strange way, also (2) really depresses me. I had a wonderful talk with Buddy Bell about the 1977 Cleveland Indians, my favorite team ever, and he told me some things about that team and that year that would make the beginnings of an amazing book, if anyone else cared about the 1977 Cleveland Indians. I think it’s fair to say that wasn’t necessarily the best-run organization on earth. Maybe when I’m rich and famous I’ll write some coming of age book about that team sort of the way John Feinstein wrote that book about the 1978 Duke team that nobody else cared about (everybody bought that book anyway because he’s John Feinstein – and it was really pretty good).

In the meantime, though, let’s go back in time and compare this year’s All-Star starters with the 1977 All-Star team. We’ll start in the American League. I will admit, right up front, to being slightly biased toward those players from when I was 10, but we’ll try to be fair.

First base: David Ortiz vs. Rod Carew.
My pick: Carew
Thoughts: Well, it’s not a fair comparison because Ortiz is not a first baseman. He has played seven games at first base all year, and I have a scout friend who saw him a couple of those games and gave me this one word report on Ortiz’s defense: “Brutal.” Meanwhile, I’m not sure that any team would put Carew and his lack of home run power at first base these days. But he could at least play the position. He got to more balls than any first baseman of his day.

In any case, Carew in 1977 was about as locked in as any player in the last 50 years. He would end up hitting .388 with 38 doubles, 16 triples, 14 homes, 100 RBIs, 128 runs and a 178 OPS+ -- which is higher than Ortiz has ever had. He was hitting .394 at the break, and at the time I remember people being almost CERTAIN that he would hit .400. Carew really was an almost mystical figure in 1977, with his 1,001 batting stances and his magical ability to hit the ball wherever he wanted to hit it.

Papi has a little mysticism as well because of his knack for hitting in the clutch. He’s hitting .360 this year with runners in scoring position.

Second base: Placido Polanco vs. Willie Randolph
My pick: Wow, close. Let’s say Randolph.
Thoughts: I’ve already said that I wanted Polanco to get a little recognition, and I’m thrilled that he gets his All Star start. That said, it’s also true that he’s not the best second baseman in the league. Brian Roberts is a better player, and he’s a better player than Randolph was too.

But these are the picks – Polanco vs. Randolph – and while it’s very close, I think Randolph was a little better over his career. The thing that stands out about Randolph is that he found a way to get on base – his .373 on-base percentage is about 50 points higher than the average second baseman of his time. He didn’t strike out, he stole bases at a high percentage, he was a sharp player. The only thing is there were very mixed reviews about his fielding – I always thought he was pretty good, his numbers look really good (he did make errors, though), and Bill James ranked him a B+ fielder.

Shorstop: Derek Jeter vs. Rick Burleson
My pick: Uh, Jeter.
Thoughts: Obviously shortstop was more of a defensive position in 1977 – and Burleson was a good defensive shortstop, significantly better than Jeter. Burleson even hit a bit in ’77 – he ended up batting .293 with 36 doubles. But that wasn’t much offense compared to Jeter, even if you adjust for the time. This isn’t close.

One thing is that in 1977, defensive positions were more defined.

First baseman: Could be high-average, slick fielding guy. Or could be fat power hitter with soft hands.
Second baseman: Little flea who could run and field.
Shortstop: Little flea who could run and field.
Third baseman: Rocket arm guy who could hit 20 homers.
Left field: Strikeout guy with 30-homer power.
Center field: Burner who could steal 50 bases and make all the plays.
Right field: Rocket arm guy who could hit 20 homers.
Catcher: A low average hitter with a little pop who could “call a good game.”

That was it. The thing is: Everybody who played the positions had these qualities. There were no real freaks in 1977 – no 30-homer shortstops, no big RBI second basemen, no .340-hitting catchers. And so it was easy to tell your superstars because they could also do a little more – any second baseman or shortstop who could hit even a little was a star. If your center fielder had a little power in addition to those other characteristics, he was a superstar. If your catcher could hit with power, he was a superstar. And so on.

Now things are so much more confusing. You have catchers who hit, but they’re terrible catchers. You have shortstops who are among the best hitters in baseball but they can’t field a lick. You’ve got centerfielders who can’t run, power hitting second basemen who can’t turn the double play, right fielders with weak arms, it’s a baffling world. It’s probably better when players are not so narrowly defined, but it’s harder to compare them.

Third base: Alex Rodriguez vs. George Brett
My pick: Don’t make me do this.
Thoughts: OK, it’s clear that A-Rod has the better numbers and is the better overall player. Even in the context of the times, he has better numbers and is the better overall player. I am granting that right up front.

And, yes, I’m skeptical about clutch hitting – I don’t want to be one of these guys who rates one player above another because he supposedly hits better in the clutch.

And yet …

And yet, I can’t help it. Brett was SO good, so often in the big games; we are talking about the guy who hit .373 in his two World Series appearances, the guy who single-handedly beat Toronto in crucial Game 3 of the 1985 ALCS, the guy who hit three homers off of Catfish Hunter in Game 3 of the 1978 ALCS in a desperate attempt to keep his team alive, the guy who homered in the eighth inning of Game 5 of the 1976 ALCS, tying the game (and setting up Chris Chambliss’ heroics), the guy who always, always, always, seemed to come through when it mattered most. He was quite easily the best player on those Royals teams that always made the playoffs, always-always, and many years he simply would not let them lose. We’ve done this before, but take a look again at the lineup for the 1985 World Series Royals?

1B: Steve Baloni, .243/307/.477, 36 homers, 88 RBIs.
2B: Frank White, .249/.284/.414, 22 homers, 69 RBIs.
SS: Onix Concepcion, .204/.255/.245 (yikes!), 2 homers, 20 RBIs.
SS (2): Buddy Biancalana: .188/.277/.261, 1 homer, 6 RBIs
LF: Lonnie Smith: .257/.321/.366, 6 homers, 41 RBIs.
CF: Willie Wilson: .278/.316/.356, 21 triples, 87 runs.
RF: Darryl Motley: .222/.257/.413, 17 homers, 49 RBIs.
DH: Hal McRae: .259/.349/.450, 14 homers, 70 RBIs.

Look at that team. THAT team won the World Series. You don’t have a single guy with an OBP higher .350. You don’t have a single guy who hit .280. Sure, they did get good starting pitching and a great year out of Quiz in the bullpen. But, let’s say it again: THAT TEAM WON THE WORLD SERIES.

And, of course, there was George.

George Brett: .335/.436/.585, 30 homers, 112 RBIs, 108 runs, 31 intentional walks.

George that year hit .396 with runners in scoring position and two outs. He hit .545 with the bases loaded. He hit .550 with just a man on third. It’s hard to fathom any one player carrying a team more than Brett did in 1985.

Could A-Rod do that? It’s just a question. A-Rod has precisely the opposite reputation. It’s a reputation that I don’t think is fair – he’s actually a .304 lifetime hitter with runners in scoring position with a .953 OPS, plus clutch hitting, if it exists at all, is pretty wildly overstated – but it is true that A-Rod has a .104 batting average his last two playoff series too. And he does seem to think an awful lot about things when the game is on the line. And I don’t get the impression that his teammates have ultimate faith in him – it would be hard for me to imagine ARod walking into the clubhouse before Game 3 (the way Brett did) and said: “Climb on my back; I’m carrying us tonight..”

A-Rod is a better player than Brett, I think – he will (and should) be viewed as one of the best players in baseball history. Much more power. Gets on base more. Higher lifetime batting average (if you can believe that). More stolen bases. The whole thing.

But let me ask you this – and I know it’s not a fair question because we already know the result. But I’ll ask anyway: If you were manager of the 1985 Kansas City Royals, and you were told you had to win the World Series or lose your job – who would you take, George Brett or A-Rod?

RF: Vladimir Guerrero vs. Reggie Jackson
My pick: Vlad.
Thoughts: In 1969, Reggie Jackson was 23 years old and the best player in baseball. He hit .275, but he also walked 114 times. He hit 47 homers. He had a 187 ERA+. It is one of the great 23-year-old seasons in baseball history:

Top seasons for 23-year-old hitters since the Deadball era (ranked by RCAA – runs created above average):

1. Ted Williams, 1942: .356, 36, 136, 1.147 OPS
2. Albert Pujols, 2003: .359, 43, 124, 1.106 OPS
3. Arky Vaughn, 1935: .385, 19, 99, 1.098 OPS
4. Stan Musial, 1944: .347, 12, 94, .990 OPS
5. Mickey Mantle, 1955: .306, 37, 99. 1.042 OPS
6. Reggie Jackson, 1969: .275, 47, 118, 1.018 OPS
7. Frank Thomas, 1991: .318, 32, 109, 1.006 OPS
(tie). Willie Mays, 1954: .345, 41, 110, 1.078.

In fact, Reggie’s 47 homers ranks second all-time for players 23 and younger (only a 23-year-old Mark McGwire in that crazy 1987 season hit more – it’s amazing that the top two young home run hitters both played in that awful-hitting Oakland Coliseum).

Reggie was never quite that good again. He stopped walking for one thing. He never again came within five homers of 47 in a season. He played in a lousy offensive era and, for much of his career, in lousy offensive parks. This is not to downplay Reggie – he still ended up with a terrific Hall of Fame career, and he was Mr. October, and he had the candy bar and all that. But at 23, he looked like he might be even better – he looked like he might become one of the 10 best ever. And he didn’t become that.

Vlady, meanwhile, is a phenomenon. His advantages over Reggie are decisive – 60 point batting average advantage, 35 point OBP advantage, 90 point SLG advantage – and while some of that is context, his OPS+ is better also. And Guerrero has a chance this year to have his best season yet.

Centerfield: Ichiro vs. Richie Zisk(?)
My pick: Ichiro
Thoughts: In the actual 1977 game, Yaz started in center field, but I think we’ll leave Yaz in left where he belongs. And Reggie belongs in right so we’ll keep him there too. We’ll match up Zisk and Ichiro. Did you know that Zisk actually has a higher OPS+ (126) than Ichiro (121)? I didn’t. Anyway, Ichiro’s the better player.

Leftfield: Magglio Ordonez vs. Carl Yastrzemski.
My pick: Whew.
Thoughts: Depends on how you want to judge this. Yaz by 1977 was declining as a player. Magglio is absolutely mashing the ball – he’s on pace to hit 70 doubles this year. So (and I guess I should have figured this out before we started) if it’s Magglio in 2007 vs. Yaz in 1977, then it’s definitely Maggs. If it’s Yaz vs. Maggs as players in their peak, I’d take Yaz. What to do, what to do. I think the point here is probably to just pick the better player, the one you would rather have in their prime. I’ll take Yaz.

Catcher: Pudge Rodriguez vs. Pudge Fisk
My pick: Pudge.
Thoughts: But which Pudge?*

Is Ivan Rodriguez the greatest catcher ever? I think it probably comes down to three: Yogi Berra, Johnny Bench and Rodriguez. Berra was probably the most powerful hitter of the three over a whole career, though you would probably take Bench in his prime. Rodriguez has the best batting average, but he actually has the lowest on-base percentage of the three because he never walks. Bench was probably the best defensive catcher of the three and of all time, but it’s really close between him and Rodriguez. And Bench became a third baseman at 34, while Rodriguez at 35 is still the best catcher in the business. Rodriguez has lasted longer and has the best counting numbers, but he’s the only one of the three to not win multiple World Series, and while that isn’t his fault, it certainly isn’t something you want to take away from the other two. It’s very close.

I think looking over the evidence, the greatest catcher of all time is: Josh Gibson.

What a copout.

(I know there are Mike Piazza fans who want him high on this list, and Piazza was a better hitter than any of the three – he’s the best hitting catcher ever. And as I’ve said here before, I’ve had a scout friend tell me Piazza was actually a better catcher than his reputation. But, honestly, he could not have helped but be better than his reputation, right? He wasn’t good defensively at all, and I just think catcher is too unique a position to put a bad defender in the Top 3. As always, I’m willing to be convinced otherwise).

-- An early commenter pointed out that Fisk -- the original Pudge -- was much better in 1977 (.923 OPS -- 139 OPS+) than Pudge v2.0 is this year (.737 OPS, 93 OPS+). The objection is duly noted, but I'll stick with Rodriguez. It is worth pointing out that Pudge v2.0 has walked FOUR times this year.

*Clarified post to differentiate between the two Pudges.

So totaling it up, I’ve got three All Stars from 1977 – Carew, Randolph, Yaz. I’ve got four from 2007 – Jeter, Vlady, Ichiro, Pudge. And I’ve got the Brett-ARod tossup. Sigh. Let’s take Brett and make it an even 4-4.

Tomorrow: NL All-Stars, 1977 and Now.