Comments on: Dave Concepcion in . . . The Nagging Question

By: 75reds

75reds — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 05:52:44 +0000

Concepcion should be in the Hall. He was the best shortstop of the 70′s. Don’t give me that Larry Bowa crap. Belanger may have been his equal defensively (I didn’t see him enough to know for sure). Concepcion had amazing range, a remarkably strong and accurate arm and great instincts. He was also the best hitting shortstop of his day. The writers have always overlooked defense..there are plenty of great defensive players that deserve to be in the Hall. And there should not be a quota of Hall of Famers from the Big Red Machine.

Throw out all the number crunching and buy the 1975 World Series DVD collection…it’s a bargain. For $40 you get the entire Series on seven DVDs. Watch and behold #13.

By: Rounding Thirty 3rd

Rounding Thirty 3rd — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:01:40 +0000

80. The Orioles had some great defense up the middle as well - for the eight year span 1969-1976, Davey Johnson/Bobby Grich (2B), Mark Belanger (SS), and Paul Blair (CF) won 20 of a possible 24 gold gloves. Toss in either Etch or Elrod catching and you have a formidable match-up to that Big Red Machine team. (Note: From 1974-1977, Bench-Morgan-Concepcion-Geronimo swept all 16 possible Gold Gloves).

By: JL25and3

JL25and3 — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:03:55 +0000

79. Watching the Yankees play the Orioles over the weekend, this thought struck me: if Adam Jones can become even a lousy major-league hitter, better than replacement but below average, he could be Cesar Geronimo. And immediately this thread came to mind, because here's a category where the Big REd Machine has to win hands down: everyday defensive strength up the middle. I haven't done a lick of research, but I expect that Bench, Morgan, Concepcion and Geronimo will be extremely tough to beat.

By: Suffering Bruin

Suffering Bruin — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 01:20:31 +0000

78. If they haven't been mentioned already, my nominees are Jackie Robinson and Pee Wee Reese.

By: Josh Wilker

Josh Wilker — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:51:11 +0000

77. Michael and Clark also have the distinction of being something of a negative image of Tinker and Evers. In a historical light, Tinker and Evers (see 22 for the winning percentage of the Cubs during their reign) personify the small island of Cubs dominance in an otherwise vast sea of Cubs falure. Michael and Clarke, on the other hand, presided over the usually dominant Yankees' glummest, most irrelevant years. As far as their defense, all I can offer is that the Strat-O-Matic 1970s online game has both of them listed as 3s with fairly low e-ratings. Not bad, but perhaps not good enough to save them from being dubbed, all things considered (limp offensive skills, cruddy team, longevity), the worst double play combo of all time.

By: Jeb

Jeb — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:02:05 +0000

76. Gene Michael had a lifetime OPS+ of 67, which is exactly 10 points less than Raffy Ramirez. Horace Clarke had a lifetime OPS+ of 83, which is less than Hubbard's 85. DING DING DING we obviously have a new champ until someone can find a starting combo that was worse for 5 or more years. Also, I don't know if Gene and Horace played good defense, but Hub and Raffy did (at least in 1982 they turned the most DPs in the NL).

By: sly jones

sly jones — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 04:25:00 +0000

75. Hey, how ’bout the 1969-1973 Yankees?
Horace Clarke and Gene Michael.
That was a little before my time, but how good were they?

I know Clarke had a little speed, but I don’t remember ever hearing he or Stick spoken of very highly.

By: Jeb

Jeb — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 01:33:29 +0000

74. yeah, but who's worse than them for 5 years offensively?

By: Eric Enders

Eric Enders — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 23:56:46 +0000

73. 72 That's one year. The year that's listed next to each name. Obviously, if a combo was bad enough, they wouldn't stick around long enough to form a long-term pairing. I don't think Hubbard and Ramirez are a realistic candidate. Hubbard was an absolutely phenomenal defensive second baseman. The reason they played together for that long is because it was believed their defense justified their lack of offense. Maybe it did and maybe it didn't, but I don't think they can be claimed to be the worst

By: Jeb

Jeb — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 23:47:12 +0000

72. 71 I'm not trying to be contrary, but are these players that played for 5 years or more or are we talking about 1-2 years? Any team can have a bad combo for a year, but for 5 or more is just unacceptable, which is what the Braves did. Also, Belanger and Kiko were both shortstops, Rich Dauer was the 2nd baseman on that team and he had a 91 OPS+ in 1980. The O's won 98 games that year thanks mostly to their solid pitching and good years from Bumbry, Singleton and Murray.