|
|
|
|
 |
| MLB |
|
Scores Schedules Standings Statistics Transactions Injuries: AL | NL Players Weekly Lineup Message Board Minor Leagues MLB Stat Search Clubhouses |
| Sport Sections |
|
|
| TODAY: Monday, May 15 | |||||
| Bonds vs. Griffey ESPN.com | |||||
Recently, I read, yet again, that Ken Griffey "is the best player of his era."
One can, I suppose, make that argument. But winning that argument ... well, nobody's done it yet, at least not to my satisfaction. Is Griffey the second best? Perhaps, assuming that we exclude pitchers.
But the best? Only if you're unwilling to accept the majority of the evidence that can be brought to bear on the subject. Let's look at the most compelling evidence, the basic building blocks of offensive production, on-base percentage and slugging percentage:
OBP Slug OPS
Young Bonds .409 .559 968
Young Griffey .380 .569 949
OPS is on-base and slugging added together. The difference here is, I hope, obvious if not overwhelming. Both men have been fearsome sluggers, but Griffey simply hasn't been quite as all-around productive as Barry Bonds. Or for that matter, Mickey Mantle. And the reason is that Griffey draws 70-80 walks per season rather than 100-plus.
Bonds drew at least 100 walks seven times in the decade and led his league five different seasons. Because of that, he also led his league four times in the decade and was over .400 each season from 1990 to 1998 (he was .389 last year). Griffey, meanwhile, has never reached 100 walks and posted a .400 OBP just twice in the decade.
What else is there?
Bonds has been the better basestealer, or at least the more prolific. In 11 seasons, Griffey has stolen 167 bases, at a fine 74 percent success rate. In 14 seasons, Bonds has stolen 460 bases, at a 78 percent success rate.
Intangibles? Hey, neither of these guys is considered a paragon of clubhouse leadership. For what it's worth, though, Bonds has three MVP trophies on his mantel, Griffey just one. And you know that MVP voters do love their intangibles.
Defense? Both Griffey and Bonds have been excellent outfielders. Junior's got a few more Gold Gloves, but I'm not sure he earned all of them. Still, a great defensive center fielder is more valuable than a great defensive left fielder. And it's certainly possible that Griffey's defense does indeed lift him above Bonds in career value.
I don't think that it does, however. I rate Bonds No. 1 of his era, followed by Griffey, Greg Maddux and Roger Clemens, with those latter three in no particular order.
I simply believe that Bonds' edge in OPS (especially when you consider their home ballparks) and steals gives him the slightest edge over Griffey.
Rob Neyer is a senior writer for ESPN.com. | ALSO SEE Who was the player of the '90s?  | ||||