essentially you are correct, but -- compare Biggio against 2B all-time, and he stacks up quite nicely. Bagwell, all-time, is surpassed pretty much by AL 1Bmen only (and he's certainly a cut below those guys!). But he has an argument as the greatest NL 1B all-time, until Pujols came along, anyway. no, that's a fifteen-year era in one professional league that happens to play the game I love. steroids, Yankee-FA-crap, labor bickering, etc. can't take away all those years of playing ball with my Dad and Grandad. They can't take away all those years in the dugout with my friends. They can't take away Hatcher's bomb, or throwing the ball with my son now. best. game. ever. (for me!)
Baggy isn't because of the bum shoulder or he might have challenged for 600 homers. Biggio is in a very exclusive club, 3k hits are uncommon enough to have their space on the mountain tops so I'll say he would be the closest to baseball royalty.
Nolan might be top-20 All-Time among starting pitchers. He might be below that #, but he's probably at least top 30. Biggio, every list I've seen has him a top-10 second baseman, all time. And Bags, a top-20 first baseman. Bagwell won a (unanimous) MVP award and rookie of the year. Biggio had 3000 hits while playing the majority of his career at 2B, a tough defensive position. You should read up more on baseball history if you think that Bags and Biggio don't stack up as immortals. They do.
Like Nolan Ryan was a childhood hero for a lot of you, Biggio and Bagwell were childhood heroes in mine. To me, they are definitely baseball legends.
I'd rate him behind Foxx, Gherig and Pujols for sure. Also, probably Frank Thomas and Mark McGwire, steroids and all, for his play on the field. Murray and Mize and Greenberg were all excellent. Willie McCovey, Killebrew, Cepeda, maybe Palmeiro (again with the steroids though) all deserve consideration. Honestly, I'd probably put Bags #6 or #7, but I've seen lists ranking him much lower. All of the guys I listed could reasonably be ranked ahead of Bagwell by some. That would place him 13, worst case.
I'm with you for the most part, with the notable exceptions of McGwire and Thomas. No way those one-trick ponies rate ahead of Bagwell. Hell not. Unless only half of the game matters.
McGwire and Thomas can't even do half. Thomas to me is a DH. I've been through this before about McGwire, the guy for most of his career could do nothing but hit HRs and he really only had 7 or so quality seasons, but he hit a lot of HRs in those years. Now he is also an admitted steroid user. Bagwell was not only a better defensive player than both, he was also a vastly superior base runner.
Bags and Thomas became linked in that strike season. Both were gunning for MVPs and insane triple crown numbers. Thomas' injury situation really screwed him up at first base. Bags was fortunate to get his injuries late in his career. For Thomas they came in his prime. Really ended the debates that were around in the mid 90s.
indeed (until Thomas returned from his career threatening injury and had a couple nice seasons) -- even down to being born the precise same day. the only thing that is in no way eerily similar is how they played on the basepaths or in the field. Thomas can not carry Bagwell's jock. He is nowhere near the same player. Not even close. Unless, of course, the only thing you can see are HR totals. Then they're "similar".
FWIW - Sean Smith has Bagwell 35th among all players regardless of position. Among firstbasemen he is 4th unless I missed somebody. Rankings 13. Gehrig 118.3 23. Foxx 94.0 31. Brouthers 83.7 35. Bagwell 79.9 40. Pujols 76.5 44. Thomas 75.9
I still think Pujols will be ahead of Bags eventually, although he is TERRIBLE at base running. Seems to have the "think I'm right" all the time type of attitude.
Too bad the media decides on the HOF. Thomas is a slam dunk and Bagwell is considered borderline. Both *should* get there barring any concrete steroid evidence.
You know, I'll give you McGwire. He wasn't one dimensional (I hate the introduction of the most overrated stat ever, batting average, into any meaningful baseball discussion) because he could definitely get on base, but he wasn't the runner Bags was and he couldn't field either. I'm not entirely sure that I'd put Bagwell ahead of Thomas, still. Although you could say the same for his career as McGwire, Thomas played more games than Bagwell by a margin, and was still a very dangerous hitter at the ages of 38-39 when Jeff was retired. The stolen bases were a factor but Bags only was a real base thief for about 7 seasons. Defense edge to Bagwell by quite a bit, but 1B isn't a primary defensive position. Frank won 2 MVPs to 1 for Jeff, with 4 other top-5 finishes (2 for Bags). All things considered, very close for two great, contemporary players.
Pujols belongs ahead of Bags. He is a better offensive player, and Pujols has become a good defensive first baseman. Of course Pujols has a very good chance of going down as the best first baseman ever.
McGwire didn't get on base at a HOF level throughout half of his career. At 28 McGwire posted a .201/.330/.383 line. That is supposed to be the prime of your career.
Wins Above Replacement is cumulative. Pujols should pass Bagwell next year. Still, you can make a very good argument that from 1900-2000 there was no better NL firstbaseman than Jeff Bagwell.
