Best Cubs Hitter ever?

[Wrong Sider]

Hi All...1st time poster, long time lurcker. I am not really sure of what section to put this in, but since it is about Cubs players past & present, I placed it in Cubs Discussions. If the mods feel it should be moved to another section, please feel free to do so.

 

I value all of your guys opinions here and I was asked by a co-worker who knew I was a rabid Cub fan the following question and I did not have a real good answer for him. He had just watched a show on HBO about Ted Williams and how he might have been the best hitter of all time. He asked me who in Cubs History has been the best hitter the Cubs have had. I really could not answer the question. In my mind, the Cubs have not really had a good all-around hitter like a Ted Williams. They have had sluggers like Banks, Sauer, Sosa (yes, I know that his slugging prowness came from a bottle),Billy Williams, Hack Wilson, Santo and such. They have had some hitters like Grace, Anson, Riggs Stephenson, Madlock and such. But who would you say is the best hitter overall. The one who had the entire package...like Ted Williams?

[OleMissCub]

From a purely cumulative stats perspective, I'd have to say Sosa and then Billy Williams.

 

The most talented hitter to ever play for the Cubs I think would have to be Hornsby. But he only played with us for four years, so I don't really consider him to be a member of our "greatest players" club.

[wvcbxl]

From a purely cumulative stats perspective, I'd have to say Sosa and then Billy Williams.

 

How about Cap Anson? (although technically he didn't play for a team called "Cubs" :wink: )

[Backtobanks]

Also, it's really hard to compare totally different eras, but I would think Williams would be near the top if you're talking about the complete package. As OMC posted, Hornsby only played for the Cubs for 4 years. Madlock was a great hitter, but was a Cub for only a few years. I'm afraid Sosa can't be taken seriously as "one of the greatest" hitters or sluggers because of the PEDs allegations. A player like Bonds was a great player before PEDs, while Sosa never distinguished himself beforehand.

[DiamondMind]

I can really only comment on hitters I've actually seen, and as far as that goes, Sosa is the obvious answer. Ramirez, Grace and Dawson are probably fighting for #2 in my mind.

[Derwood]

Sosa 1998-2003 simply can't be matched in terms of sheer offensive output.

[bhogg]

the correct answer is "Ryne Sandberg" and I don't want to see any of your pesky stats!

[fromthestretch]

Sosa 1998-2003 simply can't be matched in terms of sheer offensive output.

 

That's definitely tops. The next best would most likely be Hack Wilson from 1927-1930, when he posted a 1.051 OPS. His overall numbers in six years as a Cub are great with a line of .322/.412/.590 and an average of 31 HR, 108 R, and 128 RBI per season.

[bukie]

Pesky stats incoming...

 

The best comparable stat I could find historically was RC/27 (runs created per 27 outs, a sabermetric measure of a player's individual offensive worth to his team).

 

RC/27 numbers for various famous Cubs:

 

Player (Years as Cub)  RC/27 (as Cub)
----------------------------
Hornsby, Rogers (4)     10.4
Wilson, Hack (6)         9.2
Sosa, Sammy (13)         7.2
* Lee, Derrek (6)        7.2
* Ramirez, Aramis (7)    7.0
Anson, Cap (22)          6.9
Williams, Billy (16)     6.7
Hartnett, Gabby (19)     6.6
Grace, Mark (13)         6.4
Santo, Ron (14)          6.1
* Soriano, Alfonso (3)   6.1
Sandberg, Ryne (13)      5.7
Dawson, Andre (6)        5.7
Banks, Ernie (19)        5.6
Chance, Frank (15)       5.4

Edited July 16, 2009 by bukie

[Clem Fandango]

No love for Tuffy Rhodes? You fiends!

[OleMissCub]

Sosa 1998-2003 simply can't be matched in terms of sheer offensive output.

 

That's definitely tops. The next best would most likely be Hack Wilson from 1927-1930, when he posted a 1.051 OPS. His overall numbers in six years as a Cub are great with a line of .322/.412/.590 and an average of 31 HR, 108 R, and 128 RBI per season.

 

Hack is problematic because his astronomical numbers were in large part due to the crazy offensive era in which he played. The ridiculous offensive numbers of the late 20's-early 30's stand as the only real rival to the steroid era as far as offensive production. Consider that in Hack's best year, 1930, the LEAGUE batting average was .303.

 

Thus, one could (if they wanted to) quite convincingly dismiss Sosa (roids) and Hack (softball league stats) from their lists of greatest Cubs hitters. If one were to do that, I'd think the clear remaining choice is Billy Williams. Completely contrary to Hack, Billy put up the bulk of his numbers while playing during an era dominated by pitching. For example, take 1963 and see that the league BA was just .249. You have to go back to 1917 to find a league BA that low.

 

So for Billy to hit a career .290 during an 18 year career when the league average was .254 over that same span is pretty impressive. His 133 career OPS+ over 18 seasons is pretty damn nice as well.

 

I guess I've convinced myself in doing this research right now. I'm gonna go with Billy Williams. final answer.

[TruffleShuffle]

kevin orie imo

[OleMissCub]

Pesky stats incoming...

 

The best comparable stat I could find historically was RC/27 (runs created per 27 outs, a sabermetric measure of a player's individual offensive worth to his team).

 

RC/27 numbers for various famous Cubs:

 

Player (Years as Cub)  RC/27 (as Cub)
----------------------------
Hornsby, Rogers (4)     10.4
Wilson, Hack (6)         9.2
Sosa, Sammy (13)         7.2
* Lee, Derrek (6)        7.2
* Ramirez, Aramis (7)    7.0
Anson, Cap (22)          6.9
Williams, Billy (16)     6.7
Hartnett, Gabby (19)     6.6
Grace, Mark (13)         6.4
Santo, Ron (14)          6.1
* Soriano, Alfonso (3)   6.1
Sandberg, Ryne (13)      5.7
Dawson, Andre (6)        5.7
Banks, Ernie (19)        5.6
Chance, Frank (15)       5.4

 

Pretty good stats that I think back up the claim that Williams was the best over his career. You can dismiss Hornsby for lack of time served, then take out Wilson and Sosa because of their era's (Hack suffers from lack of time served too, imo), then obviously take out Lee & Rammy who both don't have service time yet as Cubs, and you are left with Williams.

 

 

* as far as what adequate service time is in order to be considered an all-time great with a team, I'm gonna submit that 10 years is enough.

[fromthestretch]

Sosa 1998-2003 simply can't be matched in terms of sheer offensive output.

 

That's definitely tops. The next best would most likely be Hack Wilson from 1927-1930, when he posted a 1.051 OPS. His overall numbers in six years as a Cub are great with a line of .322/.412/.590 and an average of 31 HR, 108 R, and 128 RBI per season.

 

Hack is problematic because his astronomical numbers were in large part due to the crazy offensive era in which he played. The ridiculous offensive numbers of the late 20's-early 30's stand as the only real rival to the steroid era as far as offensive production. Consider that in Hack's best year, 1930, the LEAGUE batting average was .303.

 

Thus, one could (if they wanted to) quite convincingly dismiss Sosa (roids) and Hack (softball league stats) from their lists of greatest Cubs hitters. If one were to do that, I'd think the clear remaining choice is Billy Williams. Completely contrary to Hack, Billy put up the bulk of his numbers while playing during an era dominated by pitching. For example, take 1963 and see that the league BA was just .249. You have to go back to 1917 to find a league BA that low.

 

So for Billy to hit a career .290 during an 18 year career when the league average was .254 over that same span is pretty impressive. His 133 career OPS+ over 18 seasons is pretty damn nice as well.

 

I guess I've convinced myself in doing this research right now. I'm gonna go with Billy Williams. final answer.

 

The thing is though, Wilson's OPS+ for his six years as a Cub was 155.

Billy Williams' best six-year run was 141.

Sosa's best six-year run was 162.

 

So while Sosa and Wilson may have played in better offensive eras, their numbers are still better relative to their respective leagues. This certainly isn't a knock on Williams, who was a fantastic hitter.

[OleMissCub]

The thing is though, Wilson's OPS+ for his six years as a Cub was 155.

Billy Williams' best six-year run was 141.

Sosa's best six-year run was 162.

 

So while Sosa and Wilson may have played in better offensive eras, their numbers are still better relative to their respective leagues. This certainly isn't a knock on Williams, who was a fantastic hitter.

 

Good stats and good point, but again, service time should negate Hack from being a real nominee. He only has two years on Hornsby in that regard. To put it in perspective, Aramis Ramirez has been a cub longer than Hack was.

[fromthestretch]

The thing is though, Wilson's OPS+ for his six years as a Cub was 155.

Billy Williams' best six-year run was 141.

Sosa's best six-year run was 162.

 

So while Sosa and Wilson may have played in better offensive eras, their numbers are still better relative to their respective leagues. This certainly isn't a knock on Williams, who was a fantastic hitter.

 

Good stats and good point, but again, service time should negate Hack from being a real nominee. He only has two years on Hornsby in that regard. To put it in perspective, Aramis Ramirez has been a cub longer than Hack was.

 

I'll give you that. Six years, at least in that era, probably wasn't a long time with one team.

[JeffH]

Sosa 1998-2003 simply can't be matched in terms of sheer offensive output.

 

That's definitely tops. The next best would most likely be Hack Wilson from 1927-1930, when he posted a 1.051 OPS. His overall numbers in six years as a Cub are great with a line of .322/.412/.590 and an average of 31 HR, 108 R, and 128 RBI per season.

 

Hack is problematic because his astronomical numbers were in large part due to the crazy offensive era in which he played. The ridiculous offensive numbers of the late 20's-early 30's stand as the only real rival to the steroid era as far as offensive production. Consider that in Hack's best year, 1930, the LEAGUE batting average was .303.

 

Thus, one could (if they wanted to) quite convincingly dismiss Sosa (roids) and Hack (softball league stats) from their lists of greatest Cubs hitters. If one were to do that, I'd think the clear remaining choice is Billy Williams. Completely contrary to Hack, Billy put up the bulk of his numbers while playing during an era dominated by pitching. For example, take 1963 and see that the league BA was just .249. You have to go back to 1917 to find a league BA that low.

 

So for Billy to hit a career .290 during an 18 year career when the league average was .254 over that same span is pretty impressive. His 133 career OPS+ over 18 seasons is pretty damn nice as well.

 

I guess I've convinced myself in doing this research right now. I'm gonna go with Billy Williams. final answer.

 

The thing is though, Wilson's OPS+ for his six years as a Cub was 155.

Billy Williams' best six-year run was 141.

Sosa's best six-year run was 162.

 

So while Sosa and Wilson may have played in better offensive eras, their numbers are still better relative to their respective leagues. This certainly isn't a knock on Williams, who was a fantastic hitter.

 

Isn't OPS+ adjusted for the league/era in which you played?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I'm going to have to say Sosa was the best Cubs hitter ever.

[bukie]

Sosa 1998-2003 simply can't be matched in terms of sheer offensive output.

 

That's definitely tops. The next best would most likely be Hack Wilson from 1927-1930, when he posted a 1.051 OPS. His overall numbers in six years as a Cub are great with a line of .322/.412/.590 and an average of 31 HR, 108 R, and 128 RBI per season.

 

Hack is problematic because his astronomical numbers were in large part due to the crazy offensive era in which he played. The ridiculous offensive numbers of the late 20's-early 30's stand as the only real rival to the steroid era as far as offensive production. Consider that in Hack's best year, 1930, the LEAGUE batting average was .303.

 

Thus, one could (if they wanted to) quite convincingly dismiss Sosa (roids) and Hack (softball league stats) from their lists of greatest Cubs hitters. If one were to do that, I'd think the clear remaining choice is Billy Williams. Completely contrary to Hack, Billy put up the bulk of his numbers while playing during an era dominated by pitching. For example, take 1963 and see that the league BA was just .249. You have to go back to 1917 to find a league BA that low.

 

So for Billy to hit a career .290 during an 18 year career when the league average was .254 over that same span is pretty impressive. His 133 career OPS+ over 18 seasons is pretty damn nice as well.

 

I guess I've convinced myself in doing this research right now. I'm gonna go with Billy Williams. final answer.

 

The thing is though, Wilson's OPS+ for his six years as a Cub was 155.

Billy Williams' best six-year run was 141.

Sosa's best six-year run was 162.

 

So while Sosa and Wilson may have played in better offensive eras, their numbers are still better relative to their respective leagues. This certainly isn't a knock on Williams, who was a fantastic hitter.

 

Isn't OPS+ adjusted for the league/era in which you played?

It's compared to the league average for that year, so it's a decent measure of how much better a player was than the league at that time. So yes, it's decent for comparing between eras.

[bukie]

More pesky stats incoming (these ones I had to figure out mostly on my own, so...)

 

Win shares are basically a stat designed to compare across eras and positions. It's adjusted to era, but also includes fielding for hitters and pitching (for pitchers, obviously). For purposes of how good a player would be, I took the average win shares of a player with that many appearances, and took the overall difference to be Win Shares Above Average (hardball times does this, but they didn't have this data for everyone).

 

So, cumulative WSAA for famous Cubs (except Cap Anson, because WS data isn't available prior to 1900):

 

Player (Years as Cub)   WSAA (as Cub)
----------------------------
Hartnett, Gabby (19)     132
Sandberg, Ryne (13)      103
Williams, Billy (16)     102
Chance, Frank (15)       101
Sosa, Sammy (13)          87
Santo, Ron (14)           86
Wilson, Hack (6)          69
Banks, Ernie (19)         58
Grace, Mark (13)          54
* Ramirez, Aramis (7)     33
Hornsby, Rogers (4)       32
* Lee, Derrek (6)         27
Dawson, Andre (6)         18
* Soriano, Alfonso (3)     8

[biittner77]

Larry Biittner. Just look at his line from 1977. Seriously, don't look at any of his other numbers.

 

I'm glad no one has posted Bill Madlock's numbers as a Cub because its too heartbreaking to think that the Wrigleys gave him away just to save some money.

[bukie]

Larry Biittner. Just look at his line from 1977. Seriously, don't look at any of his other numbers.

 

I'm glad no one has posted Bill Madlock's numbers as a Cub because its too heartbreaking to think that the Wrigleys gave him away just to save some money.

Actually, Madlock was nowhere near the player for the rest of his career as he was for those 3 years as a Cub. If anything, the Cubs did the right thing in selling high on him. Of course, it would have been nice if they had actually gotten good value for him.

[NCCubFan]

Actually, Madlock was nowhere near the player for the rest of his career as he was for those 3 years as a Cub.

That isn't quite true. He wasn't CONSISTENTLY at that level after leaving the Cubs, but he did win two more batting titles with Pittsburgh (1981 and 1983).

[UMFan83]

Here is the only stat you ever need to end this discussion:

 

Times saved us (entire season):
Neifi Perez:                       1
Anyone else to ever play for Cubs: 0

[moorecg]

Jody Davis.

 

Followed closely by....

 

Ron Cey