The Bobby Abreu Tracker Thread

[ice grillin you]

Brooks Robinson was IMO, and it is highly debateable

its really not tho

as a fielder

brooks>>schmidt

as a hitter

schmidt>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>everyone

[Wingspan]

unless you are 60 years old...you have not see either player play on an every day basis at all. so all your speculation of robinson, and schmidt is based on highlight reels and 2nd, sometimes 3rd generation recaps of what they did.

[ice grillin you]

i saw schmidt play on a almost daily basis for about ten years...robinson no but ive seen plent of highlites and i live outside of baltimore now where hes a hero and even most oriole fans admit schmidt was better

in this case tho you dont need to have seen either player...the discrepency in the stats is so enormous that only a retarded crack addict would say brooks robinson was a better player than mike schmidt

[SunMo]

do you know how farged up your life is if you are addicted to crack and retarded?  yikes.

[reese125]

in this case tho you dont need to have seen either player...the discrepency in the stats is so enormous that only a retarded crack addict would say brooks robinson was a better player than mike schmidt

go check ALL those stats again slick

[reese125]

and before you go and Google for 15 minutes and throw out 90 stats for me IGY, remember that just because you think Schmidt was the best of 3rd baseman of all-time, doesnt mean your word is gold my man. Its an opinion and there is supporting evidence on Brooks and Hall of Famers who agree.

[ice grillin you]

trust me ive done it many times...its not close...schmidt destroys brooks in some categories and would in EVERY category were it not for the fact that brooks has like 3000 more at bats than schmitty

you have no argument...belee dat

[Wingspan]

and before you go and Google for 15 minutes and throw out 90 stats for me IGY, remember that just because you think Schmidt was the best of 3rd baseman of all-time, doesnt mean your word is gold my man. Its an opinion and there is supporting evidence on Brooks and Hall of Famers who agree.

career average
schmidt = .267
robinson = .267

high/low average, min 81 games
schmidt = .316 (1981)/.196 (first full year, 1973)
robinson = .317 (1964)/.201(last full year, 1975)

career HR
schmidt = 548
robinson = 268

Career Feilding
schmidt = .961 feilding %, 328 errors
robinson = .971 feilding %, 264 errors

high/low career errors (100+games)
schmidt = 27 E 1980 / 8 E 1986
robinson = 22 E 1957 / 11 E 1962

career awards
schmidt = 12 All Star, 8x HR leader, 4x RBI leader, 3x MVP, 10x Gold Glove, 1980 WS MVP
robinson = 15 All Star, rbi leader 1964, 1964 AL MVP, 1970 World Series MVP, 16x Gold Glove

[reese125]

thats the thing Wing, I never proclaimed it to be so with such conviction like IGY. I could care less, but when you get put on blast that "you have to be a crack addict and retarded" to believe Brooks is better, then there is a debate....as your stats prove there

[ice grillin you]

yeah if you chose fielding % as one of your numbers

weve already said he was a better fielder...but not by miles...where as schmidt was so much better offensively it wasnt even funny

schmidt was the best hr hitter of his time and still hit for average as well as brooks

youre actually posting some numbers that hurt your case

again schimdt has some offensive numbers that were better than brooks in 3000 less at bats...thats like five six seasons worth

brooks wasnt even as good as eddie mathews or george brett much less mike schmidt...brooks was more on par with a buddy bell or wade boggs

[reese125]

brooks wasnt even as good as eddie mathews or george brett much less mike schmidt...brooks was more on par with a buddy bell or wade boggs


You looooooove Google....hahaha

[ice grillin you]

google told me mike schmidt was better than brooks robinson??

basically your argument is blown out of the water so you flip mo...i dont blame you

trust me ive been in theis argument with many orioles fans over the years more times than i can count...and i get most of them seeing the truth by the end just as you are now

[Wingspan]

brooks wasnt even as good as eddie mathews or george brett much less mike schmidt...brooks was more on par with a buddy bell or wade boggs


You looooooove Google....hahaha

research is not a bad thing.

[ice grillin you]

research is not a bad thing.

precisely...thats what makes baseball so great...comparing numbers...its what these discussions are all about...and like i said ive researched this along long time ago after the first time it came up

[Geowhizzer]

We're heading to 3 pages anyway. 

Here is my summarization:

Fielding

Brooks Robinson: 

• Best fielding 3rd baseman ever
• 16 gold gloves
• Lifetime Fielding %:  .971 (League Avg. .953)
• Range Factor:  3.10 (League Avg. 2.74)

Mike Schmidt:   

• 2nd best fielding 3rd baseman ever
• 10 gold gloves
• Fielding %:  .955 (League Avg. .949
• Range Factor:  3.00 (League Avg. 2.45)

Note:  Scott Rolen is probably also entering this argument (better fielding percentage but less range than Schmidt).

TELLING STAT:  Schmidt had two seasons (at 3B) where his fielding average was better than Robinson's career average.  While their range was comparable, Robinson was much more consistent.

Offense

Robinson: 

• Above average power (268 HRS)
• 1357 RBI in 23 season (19 full)
• .267 lifetime average
• .322 OBP / .401 SLG / .723 OPS
• was not the centerpiece of the lineup (Frank Robinson, arguably Boog Powell both ahead of him offensively)
• 2 100+ RBI seasons
• ZERO seasons 30+ HR
• 6 seasons 20+ HR
• 15 Time All-Star
• 1 MVP
• Top 3 similar hitters:  Rusty Staub, Budy Bell, Robin Yount

Schmidt:   

• Great power (548 HR)
• 1595 RBI in 18 seasons (16 full)
• .267 lifetime average
• .380 OBP / .527 SLG / .908 OPS
• was THE centerpiece of the lineup 1979-1988 (From 1974-1978, Greg Luzinski above or equal)
• 9 100+ RBI seasons
• 3 seasons 40+ HR
• 10 additional seasons 30+ HR
• Only 2 full seasons less than 20 HR (18 in 1973, 12 in 1988)
• 12 time all-star
• 3 time MVP
• Top 3 similar hitters:  Eddie Matthews, Sammy Sosa, Ken Griffey Jr.

Telling stat:  Brooks Robinson's BEST Slugging Percentage (.521 in 1964) and BEST OPS (.889 in 1964) in any one season are both lower that Schmidt's CAREER AVERAGE (.527 and .908).

Argument Summary:

DISCLAIMER:  No, Wingspan, I did not get to see Robinson play more than a couple of times (I was 6 when he retired).

If you want to argue who was the better fielding third baseman, Robinson will win hands down.  He did things with the glove that no one has equalled.  Schmidt approached it- he was brilliant in the field, but less consistent statistically than Robinson.  However, the disparity in their fielding prowess is more than made up for by the grand canyon  that separates them offensively.  While their career batting averages were equal, Schmidt was on base much more often (nearly .060 difference in OBP- Schmidt walked over 500 more times than Robinson in 5 less - 3 less complete- seasons), and was much more productive (nearly 300 more runs scored, nearly 250 more RBI, more than double the number of homers).  In his earlier career, Schmidt even had speed:  he had more stolen bases in 1975 (29) than Robinson did in his career (28).  To be completely fair, Robinson had more hits (2848 to 2234 in 2300+ additional at bats) doubles (482 to 408) and triples (68 to 59).

Robinson's superiority with the glove is more than made up for by Schmidt's dominance with the bat.

Advantage: Schmidt.