[johnsondc]

Originally Posted by jmonahan7

You moron Yankee fans always overrate your players.

Jeter was and never will be better than Cal.

If you are going to call Cal overrated for saying that the only thing he did was play in a bunch of consecutive games then Lou Gehrig is overrated too. Their stats are comparable with Ripken playing only 4 more years than Gehrig. Do you think Gehrig is overrated?

Jeter is twice the balplayer Ripken ever was. And Gehrig was twice the ballplayer ripken ever was. Both Jeter and Gehrig helped lead thier team to exactly what basebal is played for and the tuest measure of the greatness of a ballplayer. Getting to and then winning WS.

[fort.st.john'er]

And Cal led his team to a World Series title too. In his second year if I'm not mistaken.

[BayAreaYankeeFan]

Originally Posted by jmonahan7

You moron Yankee fans always overrate your players.

Jeter was and never will be better than Cal.

If you are going to call Cal overrated for saying that the only thing he did was play in a bunch of consecutive games then Lou Gehrig is overrated too. Their stats are comparable with Ripken playing only 4 more years than Gehrig. Do you think Gehrig is overrated?

Lol, look at their career stats before you call any Yankee fans morons. Solely on stats alone Jeter and Gehrig are superior players. Look for yourself.

Jeter

.317AVG .388OBP .463SLG .975FP

Gehrig Lifetime

.340AVG .447OBP .632SLG

Ripken Lifetime

.276AVG .340OBP .447SLG .977FP

Jeter has 5 seasons with 200+ or more hits, Gehrig had 8 and Ripken had just 2. Theres just a 2 point difference in FP aswell so you cant even argue much that Ripken was a far superior fielder. It's clear to me that I'm not the moron.

Originally Posted by fort.st.john'er

And Cal led his team to a World Series title too. In his second year if I'm not mistaken.

As did Jeter in his rookie year. He went on to win 3 more ^^

[NatsNSoxFan]

Jeter has had a great team around him too. Cal is better than Jeter and you cannot say he is overrated, that is just plain idiotic. And dont just look at AVG and OBP look st HR's RBI's and other stats too. You dont get into the Hall of Fame with as high a percentage as Cal did by being overrated.

[johnsondc]

But you can get into the HOF by playing in more consecutive MLB games than anyone in the history of the game. And that is a heck of alot of ball players.

[NatsNSoxFan]

therefore making it a great accomplishment. Manny Ramirez is a sure-fire first ballot hall of famer and he usually doesnt play 50 games without a day off. You cant downplay something like that and the durablility and grit it took to play through all those games.

[BayAreaYankeeFan]

Originally Posted by jmonahan7

therefore making it a great accomplishment. Manny Ramirez is a sure-fire first ballot hall of famer and he usually doesnt play 50 games without a day off. You cant downplay something like that and the durablility and grit it took to play through all those games.

When you think of Cal you think of the streak. I'm sure that most HoF voters thought about this too. I'm not downplaying it but come on, don't deny that stat wise, he was an above average player. He got in on the strength of his streak and not his bat or fielding prowess. Thats why I say he is in my eyes the most over rated player.

[SouthPaw]

Cal overrated? Is that even possible?

The man had 3000 hits, 431 home runs, a .276 average over 21 seasons, won two MVP's, a World Series along with two other playoff appearances, made 19 consecutive All-Star rosters, won the Rookie Of the Year in 1982, took eight Silver Slugger's at short, won two Gold Gloves, played in 2632 consecutive games to shatter Lou Gehrig's mark, and conducted himself with so much class and professionalism it defied belief.

To answer the earlier question--Cal overrated? No, that's not possible.

[johnsondc]

Longevity does not make a player great. Because a player is decent enough and fortunate enough not to have any serious injuries over a career, does not make him great. Longevity records are just that, and tell little about a player except that he played many years. One can say a player who could start for a team for 20+ years makes him exceptional. Yes, but it does not make him great. I bet if any of you look hard, you may easily come up with 20-30 shortstops in baseball history that you would rather have on your team before Cal.

[nyjyrk]

On the contrary.
Longevity does make a player great. To be able to play at the highest level for a long time is a positive trait that noone should overlook. Think of how many players started out tearing up the league (Darryl Strawberry, Mo Vaughn, Ron Kittle, etc.), only to falter later in thier career. Players like Ripken and Winfield and Yastrzemski constantly worked on thier game. They adjusted to new pitchers, people with years of scouting reports, age, and seasons of wear-and-tear. To be able to overcome that and still produce at a major league level is amazing.