[bigboydan]

Okay, who would you rather have on your team and why...Rod Carew or Tony Gwynn?...Both won a few batting titles...both hitting machines...with 3,000 lifetime hits ...both singles hitters...both had speed at one time...they are pretty much the same type of player...I persoanly would go with Rod Carew myself, but who would you take?

[Willie Bee]

Guess it would depend on whether I needed someone to play 1B/2B or someone to play the outfield.

Both players are a bit underrated in my book. Before Gwynn became Fat Tony, he could run very well and played pretty good OF defense. I only got to see Carew live and in person a few times, but loved how he approached each at bat. He also was faster than some people realize, at least in his prime.

If you're asking me which one of the two was the better pure hitter, I'd say Carew by a whisker.

[Mudcat]

Gotta say Gwynn.

Those are two great hitters. I used to love to watch Carew bat with that loose, fluid style.

The difference is anything but dramatic but Gwynn did have more power and also a bit higher average so he gets the nod.

[onlooker]

I would have to say Gwynn.

Just on the fact that I seen him play, and didnt see Carew play. So I have to be bias and say Gwynn.

[scottyy11]

Gwynn

[pags11]

very good question...I'd take Gwynn because he had slightly more power and was a little stronger defensively...both were great players though...

[Illusion]

Gwynn made baseball look way too easy. Also, since I grew up watching him I am gonna have to say Gwynn

[bigboydan]

ok you youngsters. what about Boggs or Gwynn then ?

[pags11]

that one becomes a tougher decision because of the number of gold gloves that Boggs won...I'm not sure I could decide between the two, but gun to my head I still go with Gwynn...

[Mudcat]

ok you youngsters. what about Boggs or Gwynn then ?

I probably don't qualify as a youngster in this crowd but I would take Boggs. Boggs was spectacular in the on-base percentage department. It was truly maddening to play against him. Apart from the great batting average, he would scrap, and make the pitcher throw a lot of pitches, and draw the walks.

Even his outs were more useful than most guys. I remember once he went an entire season without a single pop-up to the infield. Think about that. Insane.

Gwynn obviously made a lot of contact too and was great, but I take Boggs.

[Willie Bee]

ok you youngsters. what about Boggs or Gwynn then ?

Well, thanks for the 'youngster' comment, Dan. But I hardly qualify. I've got shoes that are of legal gambling age.

I would say Gwynn and Boggs compare favorably as far as the 'pure hitter' idea goes. But Gwynn had a little more pop and a lot more speed in his prime.

[isetcap]

I'd have to go with Carew.

Gwynn was a machine.
Carew was a player.

[Willie Bee]

that one becomes a tougher decision because of the number of gold gloves that Boggs won...I'm not sure I could decide between the two, but gun to my head I still go with Gwynn...

Not sure what you mean by this, Pags, or maybe if you typed one name while thinking of the other.

Gwynn beat Boggs, 5-2, in Gold Gloves. Boggs was a better fielder than a lot of people give him credit for. But Gwynn had a very accurate, though not super strong in the way that Clemente and Evans did, arm from right field.

[bigboydan]

I'd have to go with Carew.

Gwynn was a machine.
Carew was a player.

well said cap.

[Willie Bee]

There's at least one member of the BBWAA who votes on the HOF who would disagree with most of us here with regards to Rod Carew and Wade Boggs.

This is an excerpt from an interview Rich Lederer (RL below) did with Tracy Ringolsby (TR below) about a year-&-a-half ago for BaseballAnalysts.com.

RL: I saw your ballot and was curious as to why you voted for Dave Concepcion over Wade Boggs?

TR: I didn't vote Dave Concepcion over Wade Boggs. That's not a fair statement. I had three open spots on my ballot so it wasn't a matter of choosing any individual over the other.

RL: OK. Let me rephrase the question. Why did you vote for Concepcion?

TR: I feel Concepcion was a dominant player at his position in his time, very underrated for intangibles, and things he -- along with Tony Perez -- did to keep the egos on those Reds teams from tearing the team apart. Concepcion and Perez were the settling influences. Concepcion also was a marvelous shortstop and handled the bat extremely well.

RL: I would rank Boggs as the fourth-best third baseman ever and am not convinced that Concepcion is even one of the game's top 15 shortstops.

TR: I am sure there is a statistical comparison that allows you to say you feel Boggs is the fourth-best third baseman ever, and I respect your opinion. I, however, see major fallacies in the comparsion of stats over generations because the emphasis of the game changes dramatically. Guys can benefit statistically or be hurt in terms of stats based off their park. A left-handed hitter at Fenway Park probably has as much a stat edge as any hitter at Coors Field. I don't think of Boggs among the dominant players at his position during his era, much less all time. This comes from personal observations and feelings from having covered the American League during the bulk of Boggs' career. I never felt Boggs was a threat in game situations, much like Rod Carew, and I'm sure this will be another black mark against me, but I didn't vote for Carew either.

RL: At least you're consistent. Boggs and Carew are very comparable offensively. I even pointed this out in an article I wrote earlier this month in support of Boggs. However, I believe Boggs was a superior player overall because he was a better than average third baseman most of his career whereas Carew split time between first and second base and was no better than average defensively.

TR: While Boggs did win two Gold Gloves, I don't know that you'd say he was exceptional as a third baseman. He worked to become a decent third baseman.

RL: Do you look at factors besides statistics and awards?

TR: Despite how easy it is for those who don't know me to pass off everything I write as being anti-stats, I have been a member of SABR for roughly 25 years. Stats are the tool I can use to feel I have a handle on a player. I do not pretend to be able to visually break down a player like a scout.

I see intangibles as counting along with tangibles in determining a player's greatness. I look for players who their teammates felt would make them better in a tough situation. I look for players who played the game to win and didn't care about the personal aspects, realizing that if they succeeded the personal accolades and stats would be there. Boggs was a corner infielder. For him to be dominant, in my opinion -- and it's just my opinion -- he had to be a power guy.

RL: I don't know why you have to be a power guy to be considered a "dominant" third baseman. I love power, but I value players who make a habit of getting approximately 200 hits and 100 walks every year very highly, too.

TR: Well, third basemen, first basemen need to be power guys or else they get a lineup out of whack. You can afford to carry a non-power guy at one of the corners if you have an A-Rod at shortstop or a Carlton Fisk behind the plate or Fred Lynn in center field, but that's a situation where you have to adjust for the lack of what you normally want from a position.

RL: I also noticed that you voted for Jack Morris and not Bert Blyleven.

TR: Jack Morris has always been an easy choice for me. He was the pitcher that you wanted on the mound in a big game throughout his career. He had that extra sense of how to win. He didn't let big games get away from him.

RL: Have you ever voted for Blyleven? If not, why not?

TR: I felt Blyleven was a pretty darn good pitcher but never felt he was dominating or intimidating or the best in the game. He was able to build up quality numbers because he was good for a long period of time -- which is an excellent accomplishment -- but I don't see him as great at his position in his era.

RL: Are you comfortable denying Hall of Fame honors from a pitcher who is 5th on the all-time list in strikeouts, 9th in shutouts, and 24th in wins?

TR: The fact that I don't vote for a Boggs or Blyleven doesn't mean they were bad players. Let's remember, in voting on the Hall of Fame we are talking about the elite of the elite. So I do get a bit uncomfortable in trying to explain why I didn't vote for somebody because then it makes it look like I am belittling the player's accomplishment. I'm much more comfortable explaning why I did vote for a player.