-
Comment -
If you take away that 10 year stretch Albert pujols was just average. LmfaoComment -
buddy i was born in killeen,texas. Rangers and reds were always my favorite team. No way beltre here are his career stats. god you are stupid. He didn't do shit til he went to texas and anyone that knows baseball realizes that.1998 19 Dodgers 77 195 18 42 9 0 7 0 22 14 0 37 2 0 3 4 .215 .278 .369 1999 20 Dodgers 152 538 84 148 27 5 15 0 67 61 12 105 4 5 6 4 .275 .352 .428 2000 21 Dodgers 138 510 71 148 30 2 20 2 85 56 2 80 3 4 2 13 .290 .360 .475 2001 22 Dodgers 126 475 59 126 22 4 13 0 60 28 1 82 2 5 5 9 .265 .310 .411 2002 23 Dodgers 159 587 70 151 26 5 21 0 75 37 4 96 1 6 4 17 .257 .303 .426 2003 24 Dodgers 158 559 50 134 30 2 23 0 80 37 4 103 1 6 5 13 .240 .290 .424 2004 25 Dodgers 156 598 104 200 32 0 48 3 121 53 9 87 0 4 2 15 .334 .388 .629 2005 26 Mariners 156 603 69 154 36 1 19 1 87 38 6 108 0 4 5 15 .255 .303 .413 2006 27 Mariners 156 620 88 166 39 4 25 1 89 47 4 118 1 3 10 15 .268 .328 .465 2007 28 Mariners 149 595 87 164 41 2 26 0 99 38 2 104 0 4 2 18 .276 .319 .482 2008 29 Mariners 143 556 74 148 29 1 25 0 77 50 10 90 0 4 2 11 .266 .327 .457 2009 30 Mariners 111 449 54 119 27 0 8 0 44 19 1 74 0 2 7 19 .265 .304 .379 2010 31 Red Sox 154 589 84 189 49 2 28 1 102 40 10 82 0 7 5 25 .321 .365 .553 2011 32 Rangers 124 487 82 144 33 0 32 1 105 25 0 53 0 8 5 13 .296 .331 .561 2012 33 Rangers 156 604 95 194 33 2 36 0 102 36 8 82 0 9 5 8 .321 .359 .561 2013 34 Rangers 161 631 88 199 32 0 30 0 92 50 12 78 0 2 7 17 .315 .371 .509 2014 35 Rangers 148 549 79 178 33 1 19 0 77 57 13 74 0 5 3 15 .324 .388 .492 2015 36 Rangers 143 567 83 163 32 4 18 0 83 41 4 65 0 8 3 18 .287 .334 .453 2016 37 Rangers 153 583 89 175 31 1 32 1 104 48 6 66 0 3 6 10 .300 .358 .521 2017 38 Rangers 94 340 47 106 22 1 17 0 71 39 2 52 0 6 4 7 .312 .383 .532 2018 39 Rangers 119 433 49 118 23 1 15 0 65 34 2 96 0 8 6 13 .273 .328 .434 Career G AB R H 2B 3B HR GRSL RBI BB IBB SO SH SF HBP GIDP AVG OBP SLG 21 Years 2,933 11,068 1,524 3,166 636 38 477 10 1,707 848 112 Comment -
5 years in 21 he had 100 or more rbi's. when he was in la he was a dog. He had 70 hr less than schmidt in 3 more years. He played in a hitters bp in texasComment -
my bad he had 1 good yr in sea,1 good year in bsn and 1 good year li la.Comment -
Chico, he had 300 HRs and 1000 rbis before Texas.
That's "nothing"?
What aspect of baseball does Schmidt do better than Beltre?Comment -
amen... like i said. i was big ranger fan and would never consider him a top. ave less than 80 rbi's a year and he was on some good offensive teams. hell i had season tixs to reds when he was with dodgers. They were in the west with the reds so i seen lot's of his games. He was a good players but not the best i seen. Hell if rolen could of stayed healthy his numbers were a lot better. Problem with rolen is he tried to get balls that beltre would watch go by him. Definitely not a rolen fan even though he played for the reds.Comment -
When scoring is so low that only three players in the entire league hit 30 homeruns, that means every run is worth a lot more. It's why a 2.5 point favorites in the NBA lose all the time, but when a baseball team is -2.5 -110, they are a heavy favorite. It's like you're trying to argue Eli Manning as a better QB than Joe Montana for having better stats
The 138 more extra base hits is simply because Beltre played in an extra 500 games. Schmidt's ratio of extra base hits to outs was far better -- and his extra base hits (more homeruns and triples) helped his team more than Beltre's doubles. The balls in play is ridiculous. That's just because Schmidt was so good at getting on base by walks. Schmidt was better at getting on base (40-point edge in obp) and at hitting for power (50-point edge in slugging) in an era when it was harder to do so. I'm sure you would also argue Carmelo Anthony was better than Larry Bird for having more points and making twice as many three-pointersLast edited by TommieGunshot; 06-18-19, 04:49 PM.Comment -
Graig Nettles is up there among themComment -
George BrettComment -
he had 13 years before he went to texas.
so am i impress with 23 hrs and 70 rbi's a year?
1000 rbi 300 hr in 1835 games
Sorry for being a dickhead. But although he was very durable and he could definitely play for my team. Mike schmidt is just better in my mind. I grew up hating the phillies. But he was the man.Comment -
Beltre had 278. not 300. Over 1835 games. During years when other guys were routinely hitting 50, 60, or 70. That took him through age 31. By the same age Schmidt had 321 homeruns in only 1336 games. That was the highest total in all of baseball those years. So hitting home runs is one thing Schmidt did a lot better than Beltre. Getting on base and not making outs is another thing (.380 obp compared to .339). Hitting for power and getting on base are like the only two things a team wants their hitters to do. And Schmidt did both of those things better. During years when everyone else was worse at it.
Defense is much harder to measure. I think most agrees they were both the best defensive third basemen of their generations (only argument might be Rolen above Beltre; Brooks was 36 by the time Schmidt was a rookie)Comment -
Chipper JonesComment -
Do you really think any of those guys was better than George Brett ? Best name for a third baseman was former Red Sox Clell Laverne Hobson, who some people actually called Butch.Comment -
Charlie Hustle, Chipper, RolenComment -
Don't get me wrong like Schmidt, but Beltre is hard to deny.Comment -
A rodComment -
ChipperComment -
ArenadoComment -
A) weird premise to just arbitrarily take a year, and give a worse set of stats and adjust down the career numbers
B) you aren't too bright with Math, because those numbers are wrong anyways.
His career avg might drop a point or two to .265ish.
C) who the fuk cares about Batting Avg, when OBA is much better assessment of NOT making outs.Comment -
beltre vs. schmidt (or brett) is interesting.... different eras. schmidt was considered dominant player but his stats apparently don't look that great.
why are there so few old 3rd baseman? only one i see on lists is eddie matthews. i'm thinking they immediately move best player in shortstop. and they didn't have model of more recent 3rd baseman (often fairly big hitter) ..... was ernie banks a shortstop?
nice to see someone mentioned Graig Nettles.Comment -
beltre has some seriously impressive stats. arguably much better than schmidt.
but schmidt was 3-time MVP, 2 more top 3. and then 5 more top 10 in MVP race.
beltre is just some top 10's in mvp races mostly...Comment -
someone mentioned dale murphy i think in theoretical sense.
i do think being very dominant for a few years should carry quite a bit of weight in evaluating players careers.
not sure who else is comparable to murphy or what happened to him not to long, distinguished career.Comment -
The answer will be Nolan Arenado in 10 yearsComment -
David Wright easyComment -
BrettComment -
In 1982 they played Boggs at first base more than third base and his defense was above average. In 1981 they let Yaz and Tony Perez play first base and DH where they combined to hit .250 with fewer than 50 extra base hits and 80 walks in over 700 plate appearances, while Boggs was stuck in the minors. In 1980 they didn't have Lansford and played a 21-year-old Glen Hoffman at third instead of a 22-year-old Wade Boggs. They Red Sox had plenty of options and opportunities to get him on the team and have him in the lineup. Instead they wasted about 2.5 yearsComment -
Johnny benchComment -
Brooks Robinson & Harmon KillebrewComment
