Impressive. It only took him 2.5 extra years to pass Ichiro.

I wonder if Ichiro would have challenged Pete if he started in the bigs in 94 and not 01. Probably not, but he could have been top 5.

Wabs said:

---

I was thinking bring Beltre to the Astros as DH. But Gattis......so NM.

---

LMAO this was such a Gattis-type homerun. Goofy/caveman fundamentals, yet it still demonstrates how much raw power he has.

He certainly could have at least made a run. He fell off big time after 2012 (granted, he was 38 in 2012, so it's understandable). Ichiro was just a freakish hit machine.

Heck, there are a ton of guys w/ 20+ years looking up at Ichiro in the all-time hits standings. Biggio played 20 and is right behind him. Rickey Henderson played 7 more seasons and trails Ichiro. The list of players in the 3,000-hit club that played less than 20 seasons is rather short (Ichiro, Carew, Pujols, Brock, Boggs, Clemente).

Wabs said:

---

I was thinking bring Beltre to the Astros as DH. But Gattis......so NM.

---

I'd like to see him go to Houston at the deadline just to see him have a chance to win because the Rangers don't look like they are going to get this thing turned around in time.

But Beltre is still an awesome 3rd baseman. He made a ridiculous barehanded play last night.

Was curious about how many members of the 3,000-hit club that are trailing Beltre but had more at-bats than Beltre:

Biggio
Henderson

Henderson, though, also had the 2,000+ walks which is absolutely insane. Especially given that Beltre hasn't even reached 900.

Quote:

---

But Beltre is still an awesome 3rd baseman

---

Indeed. It's been fun to watch the conversation evolve from "is he a HOFer?" to "is he a first ballot HOEFer?" to "surely he gets over 90% on the first ballot, right?".

What is interesting with Beltre is that most players slip later in their career. Beltre is a career .287 hitter. From age 35-39 he's hitting .305. He's not even having a power drop off either. His career HR per 162 is 27. From age 35-39 its 25.

Farmer1906 said:

---

What is interesting with Beltre is that most players slip later in their career. Beltre is a career .287 hitter. From age 35-39 he's hitting .305. He's not even having a power drop off either. His career HR per 162 is 27. From age 35-39 its 25.

---

Oh lordy. Now you done it. There will be triggered people here all day.

Nah, the PED implication is a lazy one, especially given there's not a single shred of evidence to support it.

Heck, out of curiosity I looked at Hank Aaron's stats. From his age-25 to age-34 seasons (prime), his 162-game average was:
39 HR
.313 BA
.569 SLG

From his age-35 to age-39 seasons (same range used previously for Beltre), his 162-game average was:
48 HR
.299 BA
.601 SLG.

Sometimes guys don't tail off like others. Sometimes it's because they're just good hitters who adjust to the effects of age. Sometimes their 162-game average looks greater because they aren't playing as many games due to their bodies breaking down. It's just lazy to assume that it's PEDs.

Who said anything about PEDs? Outside of the outstanding 2004 season the guys prime just happens to be from ages 33 to 39 and not 27-32 like most.

My apologies for inferring something that was apparently not implied. I just recall some sports media personality (Doug Gottlieb I believe) who made the accusations last year.

Your right. People are different. Though not common It is not entirely unusual for some people to not reach their physical peak in their mid or late thirties. Thats not to say someone may have been quicker or faster at 22 than at 38, but they are certainly bigger at 38 and that can more than overcome any loss of speed, especially playing a position like 3B.

Sam Mills did it in Football. Other players say he was better when he retired than when he started. Vijay Singh did it in golf. Federer won two grand slam events at 35. Ray Bourque had 59 points at 40.

Its really fun to watch. Especially since I am 41.

RetiredAg said:

---

All-time hits leader among international players.

Adrian Beltre Is Now MLB's International Hit King

Quote:

---

he's compiled Hall of Fame offensive numbers (464 homers to go with his 3,090 hits) while winning five Gold Gloves and staking his claim as the best defensive third baseman since Brooks Robinson. His 71.7 JAWS (94.3 career rWAR, 49.3 peak rWAR) ranks fourth at the position behind only Mike Schmidt, Eddie Mathews and Wade Boggs.

---

Current all-time rank among 3B:

RBI: 1st
WAR: 3rd (currently 2.5 behind Mathews)
JAWS: 4th (currently 2.2 behind Boggs)

On top of that, he's arguably the best defensive 3B since Brooks, and is tied for the highest single season WAR among 3B in baseball history (9.7 - tied w/ Darrell Evans).

He's been a joy to watch and has become my most favorite Ranger ever. Gonna miss him.

---

What a great accomplishment.

A couple note, though...

This comment is a bit misleading:

Quote:

---

Current all-time rank among 3B:

---

These...

Quote:

---

Hits: 2nd (currently 62 behind Brett)

2B: 2nd (currently 44 behind Brett)

---

Brett played the following positions:
3B: 1685 GP, 2044 Hits, 424 Doubles
DH: 54 GP, 538 Hits, 132 Doubles
1B: 460 GP, 529 Hits, 104 Doubles
among other positions.

Here:

Quote:

---

HR: 4th (currently 4 behind Chipper)

---

Chipper played the following positions:
3B: 1983 GP, 389 HRs
LF: 356 GP, 63 HRs
among other positions.

Beltre has the following splits:
3B: 2693 GP, 435 HRs, 598 Doubles
DH: 120 GP, 27 HRs, 24 Doubles
among other positions.

I haven't kept up with all of the categories, but Betre was 1st or 2nd in almost every offensive category for stats while playing 3B.

One of the reasons the Rangers will play him at 3B as much as possible without using him at DH is to accumulate the stats as a 3B. When you isolate that... his numbers are quite incredible.

Good point.

What? No it's not. It's more impressive to play multiple positions and that guys were willing to help their team by being flexible. At best it's meaningless.

Farmer1906 said:

---

What? No it's not. It's more impressive to play multiple positions and that guys were willing to help their team by being flexible. At best it's meaningless.

---

This implies that Beltre was unwilling. He's one of the greatest defensive 3B in the history of the game. Where could he have possibly helped the team more than at 3B? As we're seeing this year as he's moved to more of a DH role than he's had in the past, he's shown he is willing to move.

It's a good point because 3B is one of the most physically demanding positions to play. That he's played far more games there than people like Brett and Chipper, while putting up similar, or better, offensive numbers is a valid point in evaluating his standing among 3B all-time.

Those guys played other positions because they were replaceable defensively at third base. Looking at defensive WAR, Brett and Jones both fail to crack the top 1,000 all-time. Beltre is top 10, regardless of position. That's why Beltre hasn't moved around, but they did.

Don't get me wrong he's a great defensive 3rd baseman. The only better guys defensively recently that come to mind are Rolen & Corey Koskie. But to credit him because he played there more is kind of pointless. Credit him because he's good at it. While 3rd base in DH or First it's still less important than Catcher, CF, SS, & 2B. The point i was making in the earlier post was that in general I wouldn't discount a player for playing multiple positions.

Farmer1906 said:

---

The point i was making in the earlier post was that in general I wouldn't discount a player for playing multiple positions.

---

No, that's not the point you made though. You said " It's more impressive to play multiple positions and that guys were willing to help their team by being flexible." You were discounting a player for not playing multiple positions, implying that one who doesn't wasn't willing to help their team by being flexible. Beltre didn't play other positions because he's arguably the greatest defensive 3B since Brooks Robinson. Brett and Chipper didn't play other positions because they were that flexible or willing to help their team win. They played other positions because their defensive abilities at 3B were average....at best. Chipper had a dWAR of -.9 and Brett was at a meager 2.2. They were replaceable at that position, so they would get moved around. Now, they certainly wanted to help their teams win and they were flexible. To say that's more impressive though, is silly.

But, in evaluating where 3B rank all-time, it is useful to look at their stats that they accumulated while actually playing 3B, especially given how physically demanding the position is. For example, on baseball reference's JAWS rankings for 3B, they have Paul Molitor on the list at #9. But he played more games at DH than 3B, so is it really fair to include him in any evaluation of 3B? Are the stats they accumulate solely while playing 3B the final determining value? Of course not. It's a valid piece of the puzzle though. Nobody is discounting them because they played elsewhere, but simply using an additional metric as part of the whole body of evaluation.

Quote:

---

One of the reasons the Rangers will play him at 3B as much as possible without using him at DH is to accumulate the stats as a 3B.

---

Do you believe that?

Quote:

---

You were discounting a player for not playing multiple positions

---

No, I wasn't.

Farmer1906 said:

---

Quote:

---

You were discounting a player for not playing multiple positions

---

No, I wasn't.

---

Uh, that's exactly what this statement does: "It's more impressive to play multiple positions and that guys were willing to help their team by being flexible."

By saying it's "more impressive to play multiple positions" you're also saying it's less impressive to not do so.

RetiredAg said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

Quote:

---

You were discounting a player for not playing multiple positions

---

No, I wasn't.

---

Uh, that's exactly what this statement does: "It's more impressive to play multiple positions and that guys were willing to help their team by being flexible."

By saying it's "more impressive to play multiple positions" you're also saying it's less impressive to not do so.

---

I was speaking more in a general term. I wasn't speaking in great detail about 3rd baseman's all-time history. I find Dallas Ag's analysis to be laughable 99% of the time.

Quote:

---

I was speaking more in a general term. I wasn't speaking in great detail about 3rd baseman's all-time history.

---

Well, that would be an odd shift given the context of the discussion was 3B all-time and was in response to the breakdown provided by DallasAg.