Tavish wrote:noseeum wrote:Tavish wrote:Those stats compare what Larkin accomplished in 12 seasons (one being his rookie call-up, one being a strike shortened season) compared with what Jeter did in 11 (one being his rookie call-up season). Jeter being in the lineup more doesn't make him better (or the equal) of someone who outperformed him when healthy.
I took off one year for each to get rid of the rookie season. Where did you get 12 from? He played 19 seasons. Take off rookie and strike, and you get 17. 17 compared to 10.
The stats I posted were Larkin's first 1500+ games (ie his first 12 seasons with the rookie call-up and strike season) matched against Jeter's first 1500+ games (ie his first 11 seasons with rookie callup). I 100% agree with you that Jeter plays in a greater percentage of his team games.Of course Jeter being in the lineup more makes him better. Do you think Prior is one of the best pitchers of the last 5 years? Sure, he's one of the most talented, but when you're talking about who's the better player, it's about what they did, not what they could have done if they weren't hurt.
Put another way, Jeter has 763 RBI. That's an average of about 75 RBI per season. Larkin has 718 RBI. That's an average of 42 per season. Runs? 115 vs. 56.
Getting more ABs per game doesn't make Jeter better. It gives him more oppurtunity to accumulate counting stats. ABs per game (like RBI and R) is determined almost completely by where you bat in the order, the team you are on and the offensive rate of the era you play in. Jeter had a leg up in the two latter departments. You completely misunderstood the point.
Per game Jeter and Larkin were almost identical offensively. Rated out over 162 games Jeter would get you 1 more HR, 1 less triple, and steal 10 less bases (while getting caught the same number of times). All this ignores the difference in era which is another slight bonus in Larkin's favor (as evidenced by the 124 to 121 OPS+ advantage for Larkin), plus Larkin was the superior defensive player at a premium defensive position.Durability is key in assessing a player's ranking. Larkin never finished higher than fifth in runs in a given season. Jeter's done that 7 times, and two other times he was sixth. I could go on and on here.
Durability is a factor, one that Jeter wins. Production is a much larger factor and Jeter is on par or slightly below Larkin in that regard. Close enough that the comparison between the two is very valid.
Ah, you didn't post his career totals. Just those 12 years. I see. I used your numbers, so my per season numbers are off. I'll edit.
Still, I think having so few full seasons is a big minus for Larkin. Really talented and unfortunate for him, but true. So long as Jeter has 5 more typical years like he should, I don't think there will be a contest between the two.