13 thoughts on “The 100 Greatest Baseball Players of All-Time”

1. 

   Bonds is a steroid cheat so is Clemens and others in that era ? Get them off the list foo

2. 

   PEDs are NOT factored in. Here’s why:

   https://www.the100greatest.com/2021/02/10/making-the-cut-baseball/#PEDs

3. 

   How is George Brett, cal ripken, and Nolan Ryan so far down on list?

4. 

   Hey Patrick!

   I appreciate the question. I guess it’s a matter of perspective but I don’t consider them low on the list. All three are in the top 70 or in the 99.65 percentile of players to ever suit up for a MLB team. However, to address why they aren’t rated higher than they are, I’ll go one at a time…

   George Brett

   Brett at #49 is pretty lofty. The next 3b I have ahead of him is Chipper Jones. Chipper has a pretty substantial advantage in OPS+ which is fueled by his superiority in getting on base and hitting for power. Chipper also gets the advantage in degree of difficulty as he played in a league that was experiencing an influx of international talent. There are a few players ranked ahead of Brett who I could make an argument for moving Brett ahead of on the strength of era (Cy Young, Tris Speaker, and Honus Wagner to name a few) but there aren’t many.

   Nolan Ryan

   Nolan was one of a kind, for better or worse. Nobody was more unhittable, but nobody walked more batters. In fact, Nolan led the league in walks eight times. In 27 years, he won zero Cy Youngs and finished second just once. There are just too many great pitchers with much better command and substantially better resumes for Ryan to rate higher on the list.

   Cal Ripken Jr.

   Cal deserves major kudos for showing up to play for 2,632 consecutive games. That’s bananas. Still, it’s important to recognize that Cal’s greatest achievement doesn’t really have anything to do with on-field performance. When we examine what he did on the field, it starts to become evident why it’s more appropriate to rate him outside of the top 50. Ripken, of course, started his career with 10 consecutive 20 home runs seasons which was unheard of for a shortstop. While he proved that shortstops could hit home runs, his career OPS+ is a pedestrian 112 which represents one of the lowest marks in the top 100. His .340 OBP also leaves a lot to be desired.

5. 

   Where is Brian Downing?

6. 

   Also, John Kruk

7. 

   Hi Laura!

   I love me some Kruk but he only had 1,100 career hits. That’s not gonna fly in the top 100 let alone the top 500.
   Downing has a stronger case but he falls well short of the top 100 as well. Consider that his score on the Gray-Ink Test (which measures the number of times a player finished in the top 10 in a significant category) is 25. The average score for a Hall of Famer is 144.

8. 

   I’m not a big baseball guy, but why aren’t Shohei Ohtani, Aaron Judge, or any other current player not on the list?

   P.S. I’m not sure why, but I still see the 1890-2011 Cy Young typo (I’m using iOS and Safari)

   1. 

      Hey Nic,

      Ohtani and Judge are unique cases. Ohtani had 878 career hits following the 2024 seasons. Judge had 1026. Those would be, by far, the lowest totals of anyone on the list. Instead of rushing them onto the list after last season, I decided to wait for more balance in peak vs. longevity. Ohtani and Judge are set for massive debuts. It’ll happen after this year if both stay healthy.

      The Cy Young typo should be fixed permanently. I had to copy and paste an old spreadsheet where the typo wasn’t fixed, which is why it came back.

9. 

   Hi Jake,
   This is a great list and I respect your brave call to put Bonds at No. 1. I think if you don’t consider PEDS, that it the right call. I also understand the position on PEDS – very tough to penalize those that got caught in an era when a lot of guys were at it. My issue in the case of Bonds is that it’s quite easy to see when the PEDs kicked in and the inflationary impact it had on his career. He was 35, in decline, then starts juicing, resulting in the best 3-4 year stretch anyone has ever had. I tend to take the approach to discount these seasons, at least by a bit, so that his decline phase looks a bit more typical. He still lands at No. 2 by my count, but I don’t think he’d have an argument for surpassing Ruth without the drugs.
   There’s a lot to unpack on your list, but I’m particularly interested in Lou Gehrig and Ted Williams. To me the numbers are pretty clear – Williams was the better hitter: better average, more home runs, better OPS+, more offensive WAR. Williams’ defense wasn’t great, but it’s hard to give Gehrig any big edge there given that he played first base, and was no better than average. Yes Gehrig was a great guy struck by a tragic illness and of course he had the games streak, but I don’t see that that’s enough to counter balance Ball Game’s clearly superior hitting. Worth remembering also that Williams lost three seasons at his absolute peak to the War, and parts of two others to Korea. He also played at least part of his career post-segregation, which Lou did not. Gehrig obviously won more, but he had some rather good teammates! Anyway, interested in your rationale.

   1. 

      Hey Stirlo, great questions!

      First, your take on Bonds is exactly what I’m hoping for with the decision to not factor PEDs. By the numbers, it’s Bonds. So Bonds is #1. However, I want each individual to make the determination on suspected PEDs users on their own. If you want to discount Bonds, then Ruth is #1. You’ll have to decide how much to discount and who else to discount, but you can adjust the list based on those determinations as you see fit. I understand that we have a pretty good idea of when it might have started, but even then, I don’t want to determine what Bonds would have done without help vs. how much the help inflated his statistics. There’s also the fact that the entire league was taking steroids. If Bonds did what he did in a league where everyone else was doing the same, then his accomplishments (leading the league in categories and MVPs) can still be taken at face value relative to the rest of the league. I don’t want to get into policing all of that.

      The Ted Williams/Lou Gehrig question is a great one, and I won’t begrudge anyone who has Williams over Gehrig. There is a lot of ammunition on each side. First, even though Williams was active when desegregation hit, the influx of black players was a slow trickle, so there wasn’t much of a difference in league demographics from the league that Gehrig played in to what Williams saw during his prime. The size of the league was the same and the general makeup of the league was the same. This is all to say that when I’m comparing Williams and Gehrig, there is no degree of difficulty factored in. It’s a straight statistical comparison. I’ll also point out that this may have been all moot had either Williams not missed three seasons in his prime due to military service, or had Gehrig not had his career tragically cut short. I do not factor in what a player might have done during missed seasons. It sucks, but I don’t know what would’ve happened, and I don’t want to get into projections. They may have gotten injured. They may have had a down year. We have an idea of what might have happened, but I don’t feel comfortable going beyond that.

      As for what put Gehrig over Williams for me:

      1). Playoff performance. You are correct that Gehrig played for better teams. However, this factor isn’t just about championships–it’s about how much of an impact Gehrig had on those championships. His playoff stat line over seven World Series is out of this world. Williams had an abysmal showing in his only World Series appearance. Obviously, Williams only had one shot at it, but the advantage for Gehrig when the games mattered the most is about as big of an advantage one player can have over another in any comparison.

      2). High-end production. Gehrig’s high-end seasons were astronomical. He drove in over 170 RBIs three times. Gehrig had seven seasons with 150+ RBIs. Williams had one. Gehrig had three seasons with at least 45 HRs. Williams had none. Gehrig had 5 seasons with 40+ HRs. Williams had one. I’m including a list of the high-end accomplishments on Gehrig’s ledger below.

      3). Gehrig’s availability. Gehrig played more than 150 games in a season 12 times. Williams did it twice. This can be shown with plate appearances, too.

      4). Gehrig’s lead leading instances came with Babe Ruth in the league. That is something that Ted Williams didn’t have to contend with when it came to leading the league in a category. The fact that Gehrig was able to lead the league in so many categories with Ruth in the league is a degree of difficulty advantage.

      Gehrig’s Remarkable List of Achievements

      It would be easy to lose sight of the Iron Horse’s significance given he played in the shadow of Babe Ruth, but the difference between the two is much smaller than the historical narrative indicates. Gehrig was eight years younger than Ruth. Ruth’s numbers were astronomical, no doubt, but it took some time for major league pitchers to adjust to hitters looking to hit home runs. By the time Gehrig reached his peak, pitchers had more tools to combat the changing game. We can only wonder what Gehrig’s numbers would’ve looked like had he arrived at the same time as Ruth and been able to feast on overmatched pitching. Although that’s fun speculation, the numbers Gehrig did put up are still almost too silly to believe. He had 13 consecutive seasons of 100 RBIs and 100 runs which is the all-time record. He had 11 seasons of at least 120 RBIs which is tied with Ruth for the all-time record. He had nine seasons of at least 140 RBIs which is the all-time record and two more than any other player. He had seven seasons of at least 150 RBIs and four seasons of at least 160 RBIs; both are the all-time records. There have only been seven seasons in history that yielded 170 RBIs and Gehrig has three of them. Unsurprisingly, that is also the all-time record. He drove in 185 RBIs in 1931 which is the second-highest single-season total of all time. Gehrig had nine seasons of at least 135 runs which are tied with Ruth for the all-time record. He had 12 consecutive seasons with at least 125 runs which is a ludicrous streak on its own but even more so considering the second-longest streak in history is four! Gehrig’s eight seasons of at least 135 runs and 135 RBIs are the most all-time. Babe Ruth is the only other player with more than two. Gehrig produced five seasons of at least 400 total bases which is the most in history and two more than any other player. He had seven seasons of at least 200 hits and 150 RBIs. Nobody else has more than three. He had four seasons of at least 200 hits and 165 RBIs. Nobody else has more than one. There have only been two seasons ever with at least 218 hits and 173 RBIs. Gehrig has both. Gehrig had seven seasons of at least 200 hits and a 1.100 OPS. Nobody else has more than four. His three seasons with at least 200 hits and an OPS+ of 200 is tied for the most ever. He had nine seasons with at least 80 extra-base hits and fewer than 80 strikeouts which is the most all-time, and he had seven seasons with at least 85 extra-base hits and fewer than 70 strikeouts which is also the most all-time. There have only been four seasons in history where a player had more home runs than strikeouts with at least 49 home runs. Gehrig has two of them. His 117 extra-base hits in 1927 are the second-highest single-season total of all-time. Gehrig is third all-time in slugging percentage, 4th in OPS+, and 5th in on-base percentage. He won two MVPs, finished runner-up twice, and had 8 top-5 finishes. Although Gehrig had one of the greatest regular-season careers in history, his production actually improved in the postseason. Among players with at least 150 postseason plate appearances, Gehrig’s .483 on-base percentage and .361 batting average are #1 in baseball history, and he’s tied for first with an otherworldly OPS of 1.214. He led the Yankees to six World Series titles in seven appearances. Of course, Gehrig’s career was tragically cut short while he was still firmly entrenched in his prime by the disease that would become synonymous with his name. Gehrig almost certainly would’ve blown past 2,000 runs, 2,000 RBIs, 3,000 hits, 600 home runs, and 600 doubles which would’ve put him in a club that would have made even the Babe envious.

10. 

    I’m struggling by with this one, I’m afraid I just don’t see it with Genrig. I’m a pretty big convert to WAR, at least on the offensive side – I think it does a nice job compiling everything positive and negative a player does in context of his surroundings. Between them, Gehrig had the best single year, the next three belonged to Williams. Williams lead the league in OPS+ 9 times to Gehrig’s 3. Williams had 4 full seasons of over 200 OPS+, Gehrig 3. I just don’t see the argument that Gehrig had better peak seasons once you factor in context. The post season argument is valid, but it’s tough with MLB. Gehrig, for all his success played 34 post season games. That’s an awful small sample side. I don’t doubt Gehrig’s next Myers would have been even more impressive if he hadn’t got sick. But he was 36 and his best years were likely behind him. Williams’ missing years were smack bang in the middle of his prime. Bill James had an interesting stance on years’ lost. He didn’t give credit for time lost to injury or a career curtailed by illness and death, but he did give credit to war time years. His argument was that you don’t have speculate about Williams in say 1943 – he WAS a great player, he just didn’t happen to be playing. I’m not sure I completely buy that argument, but I’m certainly more confident is predicting Williams would have hit 100 more homers than I am in speculating what Gehrig would have done with a few more years.
    Anyway, if to a close call I agree, but I feel pretty good that I’m on the right side of this one. One final thing that bothers me a little. Ruth and Gehrig, purportedly two of the best few players ever played 12 or more seasons together and won the WS (in an era of few teams) just 3 times. I’m not certain that’s a great return.

    1. 

       Hey Stirlo,

       I’m familiar with James’s stance on missed seasons, and I don’t favor that approach. Players have down seasons. There are no guarantees. Gehrig led the league in OPS+ the year before he started showing symptoms. It would stand to reason that he was set to have another fantastic year. However, nobody knows what would’ve happened. Same for Williams. Even the great players have down years and get injured. I don’t feel comfortable giving Williams or anybody else credit for seasons that didn’t happen.
       ce
       WAR is great, but it’s a single interpretation of performance. Even then, you’re using it selectively. Gehrig had 9 seasons with 8+ WAR. Williams had 7. Gehrig had 11 seasons with 7+ WAR. Williams had 9. They both had five seasons of 9.5+, and Gehrig had the top season by 1.3 WAR which is a significant difference. Their 162-game averages for WAR are 8.6 to 8.5 which is a virtual wash. I view WAR as a metric, not the metric, but even then, Gehrig is not outclassed in a WAR comparison.

       As for OPS+, Gehrig led the league in OPS+ only three times because he played in a league with Babe Ruth. He finished second to Ruth four times. Had Williams played with Ruth, and Gehrig not, we would see the opposite occur. William’s OPS numbers rely significantly on his insane walk totals. Walks are great, but while Williams was walking, Gehrig was driving in runs by hitting more XBHs.

       Gehrig’s 162-game averages: 141 runs 204 hits 89 XBH 149 RBIs 8.5 WAR
       Williams’s 162-game averages: 127 runs 188 hits 79 XBH 130 RBIs 8.6 WAR

       I’ll take the guy who was more productive and who was the greatest post-season performer in the history of baseball. In every sport, legacies are forged in the playoffs. Baseball is no different. Pick a different sport and do the same comparison (Player A was an all-time great in the regular season and the GOAT of the playoffs, and Player B was an all-time great in the regular season and terrible in the playoffs). That’s like Michael Jordan or Shaq vs. James Harden. Williams had one chance and didn’t capitalize. Gehrig had several chances, and became arguably the greatest postseason player of all-time. Gehrig’s postseason performance should be a significant factor. The playoffs are the whole reason for playing. It’s worth noting that Gehrig led the Yankees to a threepeat right after Ruth left NY.

       I am happy with Gehrig where I have him. The argument that I can make for Gehrig is stronger than the one I can make for Williams. However, I won’t begrudge anyone who has Williams ahead.