MLB.com AllTime Latino Team

[aceventura55369]

Sosa a terrible player, What!!! - I'm not a fan of Sosa's at all, but you have to be joking. During the 12 year run that Harry oultined nearly every team in MLB would have loved to had him in RF. Just the fact that he played in the major leagues for as long as he did willt ell you he was not terrible, terrible players don't make it in the bigs for 15 years or however long he played. :roll:

Aparicio better than A-rod, wow!!! Not only is A-rod the best SS on the list, he will go down as the best SS ever and has a chance to go down as the best player ever. I think Petrosian said it best when he said "The Yankees should lose every year for making him a 3rd basemen." Just remember that A-rod was a Gold Glove SS in his last year at that position. It just sucks that the Yankees have him.

[Free Radicals]

I guess this was an interesting topic to bring to the community .

As for Sosa , he wasn't very good with the White Sox (maybe 20 hr's ) and he was a skinny lil runt then . After being traded to the Cubs he balooned up over the off season and playing all those day games in Wrigley helps anyones numbers . Should Sosa be considered ? of course he should , is he better than Clemente overall , not even close .

[crackerjaxon]

[quote:51de43192e="Petrosian"]Aparicio couldn't even touch A-Rods bat. As for defense he couldn't carry Ozzie's glove either. Hell, in 69 he was only a two and he was far from done as a player.[/quote:51de43192e]



Utter nonsense. Obviously, you never saw him play. Guess what-- these simulations aren't real.

Any GM who chose either of those two over Aparicio should be relegated to Strat-O-Matic only.

Ozzie, was a fine shortstop, but he was no Aparicio.

Admittedly, A-Rod is a better bat, but then again, SS is primarily a defensive position. Third is a good place for Mr. Rodriguez.

SBs mean nothing to the modern statistical theorists-- primarily because you cannot measure their value mathematically.

There are no stats for pitchers rattled, catchers frustrated, hits through the right side, or subtle changes in momentum.

Also, you have NO idea of Aparicio's range or athleticism-- because you have never seen anything like it.

Anyone who saw Aparicio play will tell you the same thing.

He was the best shortstop there ever was.

[crackerjaxon]

[quote:665f70acf4="FAaron"]As great a fielder as Aparicio was, he was not the dominant player of his generation that A-Rod is. I know a lot of folks dislike A-Rod and think he is a pretty boy, but he can do it all. I'm a Mets fan and still wish they'd picked him in '01 when they had the chance.
[/quote:665f70acf4]


Aparicio was, indeed, the dominant shortstop and base stealer of his era.

Remember too, that if someone had uttered the phrase, "..a hit off the glove," during Aparicio's era they would've been laughed out of the place.

[harry lime]

[quote:f7e2e7b05c]Utter nonsense. Obviously, you never saw him play. Guess what-- these simulations aren't real.[/quote:f7e2e7b05c]

I saw him play. He was very good SS, maybe one of the best defensive SS of all time. ARod was also a very good SS. Maybe not as good, but....

[quote:f7e2e7b05c]Admittedly, A-Rod is a better bat, but then again, SS is primarily a defensive position.[/quote:f7e2e7b05c]

So is CF, would you rather have Devon White or Cesar Geronimo than Duke Snider? Because that's essentially what you are saying.

[quote:f7e2e7b05c]SBs mean nothing to the modern statistical theorists-- primarily because you cannot measure their value mathematically.
[/quote:f7e2e7b05c]

ARod steals bases too. At a better rate than Aparicio. He stole 28 last year and has stolen as many as 46. So he's not exactly a slug.


Look, I loved Aparicio as player. He was a very good defensive SS, but he wasn't much of an offensive player. He has a career OPS+ of 82-- ARod is at 143 as of last year and probably higher this year.

Career RC/27 has Aparicio at 3.64 and ARod at 7.94. ARod could be a butcher at SS and still probably be more valuable than Aparicio. But, he's actually a 2 time Gold Glove winner.



[quote:f7e2e7b05c]Any GM who chose either of those two over Aparicio should be relegated to Strat-O-Matic only. [/quote:f7e2e7b05c]

Any GM that chose Aparicio over ARod because they felt that SS should be manned by someone with a great glove but no bat should not even be allowed to play Strat.

Let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say that Aparicio is the best SS to ever have played (though ARod has a better Fielding %). Let's also say ARod is a little over-rated. Most people agree that most balls in play are completely unaffected by defensive skill. In other words, most balls are either hits or outs and a great fielder or really poor fielder would not have made any difference. I can't remember , but I believe it's estimated that somehwere between 4-6 a game are questionable. So, let's make another huge leap here and say that half of those are hit to SS. Now-- huge leap number 3-- Aparicio gets to 2 of those that ARod wouldn't get to. Now we are talking about singles here most likely-- a SS rarely stops an extra base hit. So, you would rather have those 2 singles stopped over ARod's immense offensive superiority? And to even get to those 2 singles we had to make some huge leaps. In reality it's probably less than 1 a game.

[dwightskino211]

This argument is really about the difference in baseball era's. Aparicio did all the things that modern baseball players can't do. Steal 56 bases against the top catchers in the game. Bunt anytime he wants to for a base hit. Hit and run, move runners over and give him self up. In the field he is every bit as good as ozzie, with a MUCH better arm, he turned the dp better than almost anyone who ever played. Don't forget when little looie played there were not 32 or more teams in baseball. There are not 32 catchers who can even reach 2b!! There were not watered down pitching stafffs. Looie faced several stacked staffs with 6-7 very good pitchers series after series. Today's teams 4th-5 starters and bull pen totally suck until you get to the 8th and 9th inning. Look at last three years' tigers pitching staff and devil rays and reds and brewers etc, 30-40 pitchers with era's over 5.50 and tons of walks. Their strato cards, if hitters cards would be .375 on base with power!!

Now A rod is just doing what is the norm in this era, swing away hit for power and go to the bank with tons of money!! He will go down in baseball history among the top 5, I believe to ever play the game. If you shrunk the leagues down to 10-12 teams his average hrs and rbi would go down. He is facing terrible pitching in half of his ab's and the strike zone has been changed to the hitters favor. He still is a gifted fielder, very good base runner and can steal bases. He can play ss as well as any today, and is a target for abuse. His last 3-5 years taken as a whole demonstrate his greatness. A point being missed in this discussion is that if you are making up the greatest hispanic team in history, the other players you select somewhat dictate what you need to complete your team. Just like the ATG 2 teams we pick you need every thing to win. Great starters, a good to great bullpen, you want excellent defense, power, speed and throwing arms. What about platoons, power parks pitching parks etc. Small ball attributes and huge on base and xtra base hits. The entire body of hispanic players should be looked at to find the players that would jell into a team, not just all star names with gaudy numbers. If you look at all the hall of fame players today, you could make up a jr varsity today with the likes of boggs, yount, brett, etc. they all really are not that great, but they are in the hall and we have to live with whatever we feel about them, and their performances. In closing I think A rod would get the nod because he does more things well, but the caveat would be is there good enough defense at 2b, 3b and 1b to make up the difference. If so I could move him to 3rd!!!

[harry lime]

I don't really want to get in a whole "which era is better" debate, but suffice it to say that this era's players are likely every bit as good as the players in the 50's. Possibly, not as fundamentally sound, but I think even that gets over-stated. Every old ballplayer thinks his era was better and played better fundamentals-- you can find quotes from the 1890's that say the same thing.


[quote:6ba56bb80d]Now A rod is just doing what is the norm in this era, swing away hit for power and go to the bank with tons of money[/quote:6ba56bb80d]

No, he's not. He's nowhere near the norm. He's won an MVP, probably should have won 2 others and very likely will win this year. He's pretty universally regarded as the best all around player in the game right now and he's not even 30 years old.

[quote:6ba56bb80d]A point being missed in this discussion is that if you are making up the greatest hispanic team in history, the other players you select somewhat dictate what you need to complete your team. Just like the ATG 2 teams we pick you need every thing to win. Great starters, a good to great bullpen, you want excellent defense, power, speed and throwing arms. What about platoons, power parks pitching parks etc. Small ball attributes and huge on base and xtra base hits. The entire body of hispanic players should be looked at to find the players that would jell into a team, not just all star names with gaudy numbers.[/quote:6ba56bb80d]

There's not one scenario I can think of that would make me take Aparicio over ARod. He's not a bad defender, he's actually quite good. His offense, even adjusting for era, is so far superior to Aparicio's itt's laughable.

I just don't understand this notion that we need a great field no-hit SS on the team. If your choice is the great field/no hit SS or the great field/great hit SS-- you take the latter every single time. I honestly don't see how this really even debatable.