Generating "hits" is clearly what should define how good of a "hitter" someone is IMO. Therefore, Altuve is the best hitter in baseball, and the best hitter in Astros history. I don't like how there is a (national) perception that since he doesn't have the power of some of the other biggest names in the game, he is a lesser player. I understand though, if you judge greatness in terms of OPS, you could be lead to that conclusion. I don't, and I think minor differences in WAR are negligible as well. (even though Tuve's 5.8 leads baseball). My point being, determining the "greatest" baseball player is a subjective exercise. I have always said, If there was a single AB where a batter needed to drive a guy in from second, there were two outs, and it was a huge game, I would pick Tuve without question over anyone in the league. Power numbers be damned.
I think it's time to consider the very realistic possibility that Jose Altuve could go down as one of the greatest hitting 2nd baseman of all time. He's have a Rogers Hornsby type season right now against modern era pitching. What he's accomplishing right now is nothing short of extraordinary.
Slow your roll. Career OPS+ Hornsby 175 (23 years), he led MLB in that 12 times in his first 16 seasons (through age 35) Altuve: 125 (7 years) eta: I missed the "one of" part, there's no doubt about that
The ballparks were also ludicrously cavernous. Like the Polo Grounds, or the one in I think Cincy where the OF was so big they had equipment (batting cages, mowers, etc...) sitting out by the fences, in play. I just tried to find a pic of that one.
Side note: Tony Gwynn struck out 434 times....in his entire 20 year career. Altuve right now has 429.
Let's say you have two hitters: Player A: 100 at bats, 0.350 batting average, 35 singles Player B: 100 at bats, 0.340 batting average, 15 singles, 19 HRs Who is the better hitter? This seems like a really specific scenario. What about the same scenario, but the guy was on first instead of 2nd? Or you're down by 2?
That is an impossible hypothetical. Both players would be hitting for the same average being 35/100, player B couldn't be hitting 340. But I suppose if they were both hitting 350, Player B would be considered the better hitter. But in reality, Altuve has 32 more hits than the closest MVP candidate (Judge), and a much higher average, and should be considered the better hitter without question. As for my scenario, it was meant to be specific. It was meant to infer that you needed a guy up there to get a hit, It wouldn't necessarily matter what kind of hit. Give me Altuve over anyone. Edit: I missed Harper, who has a few more hits than Judge, but my point remains the same.
I have heard several people say Altuve's career started slow. He didn't play much in the upper minors and if I remember correctly he didn't play in AAA at all and was a starter at like 20-21 years old. Under those circumstances he didn't really struggle. If anything he seemed to struggle with the grind of a long season... then again most midgets would have issues.
Altuve will be 30 when team options run out; Correa could hit free agency at 27 (Altuve's current age). If the Astros can only invest in one $25-$30MM/year player, it should be Correa. The next 3-5 years should be fun; after that, this becomes a bloodbath around here. And all the fans jumping up and down for a trade need to keep this in mind. There's a perfectly rational justification for not liquidating your system - the Astros are going to need reinforcements. At his current rate of production, he'd need to get to nearly 14,000 PAs; assuming 714 PAs/year, he'd need to play 19 more seasons - again, at his current rate of production, to hit 4,000. IOW ain't gonna happen. As is, 3,000's not going to be easy: ~ 14 more seasons at his current rate of production.
He is at 1185 hits as of today he is 27. Lets say he average 200 hits for next 5 season. He is at 2185. They he starts to drop of he would need to average 163 hits over the next 5 years to get to 3000. That looks like a very doable. I would say 10 years. He basically needs to average about 182 hits for the next 10 seasons which given altuve's pace doesn't look too bad.
How did you get that math, did you include his earlier seasons? He's getting 200 hits a year like nothing right now. If he gets exactly 200 this year (which is pretty conservative) he will have 1246. At 200 hits a year that's about 9 seasons to 3000, and 15 to 4000 (at 41/42 years old) Obviously any discussion of this magnitude assumes health and no significant drop off in performance, that assumption is the huge question mark. But it's not a crazy topic to discuss when a guy has 4 consecutive 200 hit seasons.
Altuve will be 30. Correa will be 27. They aren't going to cost the same thing... 14 more seasons? At 200 hits per season (something he has done the last 3 seasons and is on pace to do again this season) he will hit 2000 at age 31, which is 4 seasons. The next 1000 shouldn't take 10 seasons, if they do it will mean he had to become a part-time player. He's essentially played 6 seasons (his debut was exactly 6 years ago last week). He has 1185 hits. If he can maintain the pace he's had the 3.5 years he will hit 3000 in 1327 games, which would be about 8.5 seasons for him.
BTW, Pete Rose had 1109 hits through his age 27 season. 4K a long way away and it remains unlikely, but not unfathomable. 3K seems very likely at this point.
Altuve still has over 1/3 of this year left. He's gonna be almost 150 hits ahead of Rose at the same age.
Not only that, but when you look at Pete Rose's 24 seasons they aren't overly impressive looking at the hit totals compared to Altuve. He can do it. And we don't yet have swing limits to limit mental disorders like that of Steve Sax. 3,000 hits follows a Craig Biggio like trajectory which is very different. Biggio................Rose................. Altuve............... Year Age H...... Year Age H...….. Year Age H 1987 21 000 ….. 1962 21 000 ….. 2011 21 061 1988 22 026 ….. 1963 22 170 ….. 2012 22 167 1989 23 114 ….. 1964 23 139 ….. 2013 23 177 1990 24 153 ….. 1965 24 209 ….. 2014 24 225 1991 25 161 ….. 1966 25 205 ….. 2015 25 200 1992 26 170 ….. 1967 26 176 ….. 2016 26 216 1993 27 175 ….. 1968 27 210 ….. 2017 27 139 1994 28 139 ….. 1969 28 218 ….. 1995 29 167 ….. 1970 29 205 ….. 1996 30 174 ….. 1971 30 192 ….. 1997 31 191 ….. 1972 31 198 ….. 1998 32 210 ….. 1973 32 230 ….. 1999 33 188 ….. 1974 33 185 ….. 2000 34 101 ….. 1975 34 210 ….. 2001 35 180 ….. 1976 35 215 ….. 2002 36 146 ….. 1977 36 204 ….. 2003 37 166 ….. 1978 37 198 ….. 2004 38 178 ….. 1979 38 208 ….. 2005 39 156 ….. 1980 39 185 ….. 2006 40 135 ….. 1981 40 140 ….. 2007 41 130 ….. 1982 41 172 ….. 2008 42 000 ….. 1983 42 121 ….. 2009 43 000 ….. 1984 43 107 ….. 2010 44 000 ….. 1985 44 107 ….. 2011 45 000 ….. 1986 45 052 …..
You know what? I based it career on H/PA - to get to 3,000, he'd need to total 10,362 PA - total. I forgot to subtract his current total. So, yeah - left out a step: he'll need ~8.5 MORE seasons* (at current career H/PA pace) to reach 3,000. And ~14.5 MORE seasons to hit 4,000.
Semantics. They're both going to cost a ton of money, which is why I put the range at $25-30MM/year. If Altuve gets $25MM and Correa $30MM, I'd much rather pay an extra $15MM for Correa's 28-31 seasons.
