Josh Hamilton

[Hitman23]

Pujols is slumping too. I don't think Bautista "sucks again". If he had 25 home runs in July and went through this no one would be saying anything close to that. Same with Pujols.

As for Hamilton, as much talent as he has hitting a baseball he is not the most gifted player, ever. Not even close.

[Mr.Muhozi]

Yeah, but he came out of nowhere and no one expected it to last. Just about everyone suspected PEDs. He averaged ~15hr/season for the first 6 years of his career, then at the prime age of 30, his batting coach told him to turn his hips a little sooner and he belted 54 homeruns. Then he hit 43 homeruns and hit above .300 the next season. Now he sucks again, batting below the Mendoza line 33 games into the season.

Josh Hamilton always had this ceiling, except for when he was higher than a kite. First round draft pick and he raked as soon as he got into the majors : .292/ .368/ .554/.922 slash line with a 131 OPS+ his rookie year after not playing baseball for three years and doing every controlled substance he could get his hands on.

I'm glad I checked your post again and saw the edit.

My comparison with Bautista was how a player can have a really hot streak then turn anonymous all of a sudden. I remember how everyone declared Jose MVP before it was even the all-star break.

But I'm glad Josh is beasting. It's nice to now talent never goes away.

[kan_t]

I'm glad I checked your post again and saw the edit.

My comparison with Bautista was how a player can have a really hot streak then turn anonymous all of a sudden. I remember how everyone declared Jose MVP before it was even the all-star break.

But I'm glad Josh is beasting. It's nice to now talent never goes away.

Bautista would be the MVP if the Jays got in the playoff last year.

[Mr.Muhozi]

Bautista would be the MVP if the Jays got in the playoff last year.

You could've said the same thing for Ellsbury and the Red Sox.

[ThePinStripes]

Pujols is slumping too. I don't think Bautista "sucks again". If he had 25 home runs in July and went through this no one would be saying anything close to that. Same with Pujols.

He's batting below the Mendoza line. Whether or not Pujols is slumping as well is kind of irrelevant.

As for Hamilton, as much talent as he has hitting a baseball he is not the most gifted player, ever. Not even close.

Maybe you'd care to name 5 or 10 of this long and distinguished list?

I'm glad I checked your post again and saw the edit.

My comparison with Bautista was how a player can have a really hot streak then turn anonymous all of a sudden. I remember how everyone declared Jose MVP before it was even the all-star break.

But I'm glad Josh is beasting. It's nice to now talent never goes away.

Huh?

He finished 3rd in MVP voting, and one of the two above him was a pitcher. He lost to one position player by a measly 9 points. Not bad for a player on a team with zero playoff chances. Not an unfair prediction either. Especially since many don't think pitchers should be MVP eligible and he was certainly a better player than Jacoby.

And while his measly .896 OPS in the second half wasn't early as good as his 1st half, this fading to "anonymity" was about 3% off Lord Elsbury's OPS for the season (who finished 2nd in MVP voting). PS: Elsbury plays in Fenway.

43 homeruns, 1.056 OPS, 180 OPS+

[kan_t]

Maybe you'd care to name 5 or 10 of this long and distinguished list?

Ruth, Mantle, Aaron, Mays, Williams, A-Rod, Griffey Jr., Pujols, etc.

[ThePinStripes]

I'm not sure how you could say he's nowhere near as talented as those players.

[Hitman23]

I'm not sure how you could say he's nowhere near as talented as those players.

I'm not sure how you can.

[Hitman23]

He's batting below the Mendoza line. Whether or not Pujols is slumping as well is kind of irrelevant.

No it's not. Like I said if this stretch was in the middle of the season when he already had 25 no one would say anything.

Bautista will come around. As will Pujols. It's relevant to compare because it's nearly the same situation.

[Hitman23]

Maybe you'd care to name 5 or 10 of this long and distinguished list?

On a list of all time players, he's not even in the top 1000 in WAR

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_career.shtml

On the list of active players, he's ranked #83

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_active.shtml

Maybe he needs a few years before you can say he's one of the most talented players of all time?

[ThePinStripes]

On a list of all time players, he's not even in the top 1000 in WAR

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_career.shtml

On the list of active players, he's ranked #83

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_active.shtml

Maybe he needs a few years before you can say he's one of the most talented players of all time?

I think the disconnect is coming from the definition of "talented."
Talent =/= Accomplishment

[kan_t]

I think the disconnect is coming from the definition of "talented."
Talent =/= Accomplishment

So what's your standard?

[Hitman23]

I think the disconnect is coming from the definition of "talented."
Talent =/= Accomplishment

So how do you measure talent then? I don't disagree with you that the man is talented. He's got a sh*t load of it. I only commented because you said he could be one of the most talented of all time. At the end of his career he possibly could be. As it stands now you can't say that. You need the results in order to. So unless you have something to measure his talent by..... show it to me.

[ThePinStripes]

So what's your standard?

So how do you measure talent then? I don't disagree with you that the man is talented. He's got a sh*t load of it. I only commented because you said he could be one of the most talented of all time. At the end of his career he possibly could be. As it stands now you can't say that. You need the results in order to. So unless you have something to measure his talent by..... show it to me.

You watch the player and make a subjective determination of what he is capable of and what his ceiling is. When you see someone like Hamilton, age 31, doing what he does after what he did to himself, there is a damn good argument that he is one of the most talented players ever.

Of course, there is no objective way to measure talent. There is no talent-meter. That's why it's not open and shut. But that doesn't mean you can just substitute any other adjective in there like "accomplished" or whatever else you want.

[Hitman23]

YBut that doesn't mean you can just substitute any other adjective in there like "accomplished" or whatever else you want.

I didn't, you did. I gave you lists, of active players as well, that measure the level of talent with the best statistic that measures the talent of a player right now. He's ranked 83rd. I'm not sure what else you want. He's got 6 years in the majors. That's enough time to get his stats high enough on the active player's list. Evan Longoria has 5 years and is number 54. Does that make him as talented as Babe Ruth?

[Clive]

On a list of all time players, he's not even in the top 1000 in WAR

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_career.shtml

On the list of active players, he's ranked #83

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_active.shtml

Maybe he needs a few years before you can say he's one of the most talented players of all time?

I don't think cumulative WAR is the way to go here, just because he's only had six productive seasons. He loses out in a big way on counting stats.

If you look at adjusted OPS+, he's at a very respectable 140 for his career and still climbing. After this season he's going to be in some very elite company, just not top ten of all time.

[Hitman23]

I don't think cumulative WAR is the way to go here, just because he's only had six productive seasons. He loses out in a big way on counting stats.

If you look at adjusted OPS+, he's at a very respectable 140 for his career and still climbing. After this season he's going to be in some very elite company, just not top ten of all time.

Okay, makes sense, fair enough. Still proves what I'm saying though.

[ArodEra]

Okay, makes sense, fair enough. Still proves what I'm saying though.

Sure does. If he were eligible (and he will be after this year, barring injury), he'd rank #74 on that OPS+ list. Nothing to sneeze at but he's nowhere near the top 5-10 players in the history of the sport (say what?). That's kinda stretching it more than a bit to say the least. Take away this sick season where he's tearing it up in unheard of ways, and he's barely a whisper when naming the all-time greats.

Still, he's a great player with some admirable accomplishments, especially when you consider what he's been through, his demons and his daily struggles.

[ThePinStripes]

I didn't, you did. I gave you lists, of active players as well, that measure the level of talent with the best statistic that measures the talent of a player right now. He's ranked 83rd. I'm not sure what else you want. He's got 6 years in the majors. That's enough time to get his stats high enough on the active player's list. Evan Longoria has 5 years and is number 54. Does that make him as talented as Babe Ruth?

So Jesus Montero is not at all talented since he has a career WAR of 0.5. Stephen Strasburg too- his career WAR is 4.4. No talent chump.

Career WAR is Career WAR, not talent. You, unilaterally decided talent = accomplishments or career WAR and stubbornly insist that because talent = accomplishments or career WAR, Josh Hamilton is hardly a blip on the radar.

And again, you're discrediting the little blip on his radar known as his developmental years spent away from baseball doing every drug known to man. That's the big question. If he was just doing this and developed like anyone else, no one would think much of it. The fact that he's a very serious triple crown threat while playing center-field at age 31 after what he's been through is what makes people wonder how good he could have been.

[Hitman23]

I can't even respond to that I'm still trying to chew on all the words you just stuffed in my mouth.

I'm gonna watch the Rangers game. If my head stops spinning from your logic I'll come back and argue with you later.

[sweet_lou_14]

Utterly ridiculous that anyone can try to argue Josh Hamilton as THE most gifted/talented player in the history of the game. Teknetic, I agree that A-Rod is at least in that (highly subjective) conversation. But I'll take the #1 hitter of all time who also happened to be an elite pitcher.

[teknetic]

Why is it ridiculous? Young ARod in his Mariner (and Texas depending on how you view his steroid use) days was essentially a .315/40/130 SS who also played elite defense and stole 25+ bags a year.

I mean, you can make a case for it, but to just brush off a talent like ARod and basically claim he doesn't even come close to Hamilton is insane.

[THEBOSS84]

Why is it ridiculous? Young ARod in his Mariner (and Texas depending on how you view his steroid use) days was essentially a .315/40/130 SS who also played elite defense and stole 25+ bags a year.

I mean, you can make a case for it, but to just brush off a talent like ARod and basically claim he doesn't even come close to Hamilton is insane.

He said it's ridiculous to argue Hamilton is the most talented/gifted, not A-rod.

[teknetic]

Oh snap. Misread!

[awy]

if we want to talk about hitters who can pitch then find a dude with a good OF arm and he can probably dominate in the 1920's