Stats for that year aside, I think Rickey Henderson is by far the best player left off the game. Simple solution: Henderson instead of Randolph leading off, Fisk 6th instead of Baines and Harold Reynolds 8th instead of Suckass schroder. It all works out position wise what were they thinking at Tengen?? Henderson Changed the game of baseball and was dominate all through the 80s and early 90s
Don't be stupid, Henderson didn't change the game of baseball.
Nothing offends me more than when people refer to a modern baseball player and claim that they revolutionized baseball or changed it in some way.
Slow ur roll dude all I meant by changed the game is: its just not played the same anymore, manufacturing runs and all, I mean 130 sbs in one year, are you serious that's like at least 2 years for the best today, he has nearly 1500 career sbs that's 50 a year for 30 years, that will never EVER be touched or even competed for. Rickey Henderson kicks ass that's all I meant by it, sorry to offend you or anybody else for that matter
so it's impossible for any present (and possibly by assocation, future) player to change the game? i highly doubt that
You're right, nobody ever stole bases or manufactured runs before Rickey Henderson was around, and nobody will ever steal bases of manufacture runs now that Rickey's gone.
Quote from: Strassy on 07/10/06, 11:47:04 PM
so it's impossible for any present (and possibly by assocation, future) player to change the game? i highly doubt that
I just don't see it happening, no one player (nowadays) is above the game. Everything's been done before
QuoteNothing offends me more than when people refer to a modern baseball player and claim that they revolutionized baseball or changed it in some way.
And nothing offends me more when new posters are trying to start quality threads on the RBI board and someone jumps all over them for expressing their opinon, calling them stupid. Nothing wrong with disagreeing with his statement, but tone down the hostility. Thanks...
Johnny - Henderson would be a quality pick for a missing RBI'er, especially given the state of the AL's leadoff hitters. For 86/87, he was a .280s/22/85 steals guy making him a right-handed Tim Raines. Heck, throw him on the bench over Seitzer or Franco...
For my money, I like the raw power guys. In 1986, Jessie Barfield had 40 dingers and 146 strikeouts. That's the kind of player that excels in RBI, raw all-or-nothing power. He'd have a power # into the 900s and would fit quite nicely into the 5th spot. Move Ripken down one and take out Baines...
Anyone else?
Kevin McReynolds, of course.
As much as I like Sandberg, Juan Samuel would have been an excellent #2 hitter. His 1987 was spectacular.
Wow, looking at Samuel's stats now (http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/samueju01.shtml) I couldn't agree more. I don't remember him having such a good season, but then again I remember his 1985 Topps card (which I believe was his "FTC" not his rookie card) getting to that $1.50 level. Another notable 1985 Topps FTC to hit $1.50 was Ron Darling. Man, am I a loser...
I second the call for Rickey - Raines is my favorite player in RBI, and Henderson would've been virtually the same player.
Winfield would've been a pretty decent RBIer as well - he'd stopped stealing bases much by '87, but he had 27 homers.
I would go with Henderson as well - doesn't seem like there's enough of the power/speed guys in the game but plenty of Armas-type guys
Samuel was good enough to dethrone Sandberg from Starting the '87 game, or so I assume due to Samuel's 1988 Topps All Star Card.
Here's the roster. (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/asgbox/yr1987as.shtml) Sandberg started; Samuel made the team as his backup.
well then fuck Topps for not making a 1988 All Star card for Sandberg.
What's weird is that Topps put Sandberg on their glossy inserts (in cello and rack packs), but not on the regular all star card.
Quote from: Gantry on 07/11/06, 09:26:04 AM
QuoteNothing offends me more than when people refer to a modern baseball player and claim that they revolutionized baseball or changed it in some way.
And nothing offends me more when new posters are trying to start quality threads on the RBI board and someone jumps all over them for expressing their opinon, calling them stupid. Nothing wrong with disagreeing with his statement, but tone down the hostility. Thanks...
Apologies, I thought this was the same guy that had attacked the other guy who put together the Tengen field projections.
(Although I wouldn't be surprised if it still is the same guy).
So, apologies to Gantry and apologies to Johnny.
(But it still offends me)
Barry Bonds
Quote from: Ryno on 07/11/06, 10:14:19 AM
well then fuck Topps for not making a 1988 All Star card for Sandberg.
What's weird is that Topps put Sandberg on their glossy inserts (in cello and rack packs), but not on the regular all star card.
The base AS cards where "Topps" all stars. The glossy inserts where the voted in All stars from the previous season.
Barry Bonds didn't change the way the game is played? You see a shitload more IBBs today than you used to...
Also, while I think Henderson is a great answer to the question and I think Johnny's revised Am all star roster is solid, I don't find Henderson to be all that great in the arcade version...
Quote from: Gantry on 07/11/06, 09:26:04 AM
For my money, I like the raw power guys. In 1986, Jessie Barfield had 40 dingers and 146 strikeouts. That's the kind of player that excels in RBI, raw all-or-nothing power. He'd have a power # into the 900s and would fit quite nicely into the 5th spot. Move Ripken down one and take out Baines...
Anyone else?
all the talk about baines having no alliances...well he has one with Baines. not a good call gan-man...not a good call at all.
BTW, if baines wasnt baines, then who would he be? this should be a Puhl.
Quote from: JoeDirt on 07/11/06, 06:17:36 PM
Barry Bonds didn't change the way the game is played? You see a shitload more IBBs today than you used to...
Also, while I think Henderson is a great answer to the question and I think Johnny's revised Am all star roster is solid, I don't find Henderson to be all that great in the arcade version...
I didn't mean Bonds changed the game, just he was a good leadoff hitter missing from the game.
I agree that Rickey does suck on the arcade version though.
I meant that Bonds DID change the game...
He changed the way pitchers pitch 500 times a year.
Barry Bonds hitting home runs and being intentionally walked has zero effect on Brad Hawpe, or Jamie Moyer.
Quote from: Gantry on 07/11/06, 09:26:04 AM
Move Ripken down one and take out Baines...
I don't like your tone...
Quote from: JoeDirt on 07/11/06, 10:19:11 PM
I meant that steroids DID change the game...
Danny Tartabull '87 And Dave Parker '86
Even before I opened this thread, I was thinking Rickey Henderson.
And I would have to agree with Attezz (although more calmly) that although Rickey was an awesome player, he didn't really change the way the game was played (except for his own team).
Sentimental player thats most missing in the game is Fisk.
I know that it was before he became a star in baseball, but I'd really like to see Bo Jackson in RBI. I think that he was an All-Star in 89.
Bo Jackson would be a tremendous RBI player...
Neither Bonds nor Rickey changed the way the game is played. As mentioned by Attez, Bonds changes the way pitchers pitch to Bonds. That's it. Rickey didn't do anything that wasn't also being done by players like Tim Raines, Eric Davis and others. He did it better than them, for a longer period of time, but that's it.
The death of the stolen base has everything to do with the rise of the home run, and nothing to do with the retirement of Rickey. When offensive levels go down (which they will, eventually), small ball will start coming back again and the steal will once again be important.
I'm touched that Dryden agrees with me.
:)
First time for everything.
Bo played in 87. He should be in the game.
Quote from: Ryno on 07/12/06, 11:22:14 AM
Bo Paul Noce played in 87. He should be in the game.
Oh, and my vote for best player missing from the game is Gary Redus.
Quote from: Dryden on 07/12/06, 11:45:22 AM
Oh, and my vote for best player missing from the game is Gary Redus.
Now you and Attez agree on 2 things
Quote from: Dryden on 07/12/06, 11:45:22 AM
Oh, and my vote for best player missing from the game is Gary Redus.
I was always partial to Eddie Milner
ron blomberg changed the game of baseball forever.
Mitch Williams
miked.
Quote from: ericdavisfan on 07/12/06, 12:45:36 PM
Quote from: Dryden on 07/12/06, 11:45:22 AM
Oh, and my vote for best player missing from the game is Gary Redus.
I was always partial to Eddie Milner
I was more of a Max Venable guy.
I did meet Redus and Milner at a baseball camp when I was a kid though.
Paul Noce can thank RBI Legend Jack Clark for his call to the big leagues.
I still think Bonds changed the way the game is played...you look at Pujols, and they're now starting it IBB him a shitload more. DLee was starting to see it...Just because Brad Hawpe isn't an extreme power hitter and thus doesn't see a ton more IBBs than Ps used to pitch, doesn't mean that Bonds didn't change the game in the regard that now super hot, extreme power hitters get IBBs a ton more often. And just because Jamie Moyer is a lefty who gets lefties out more than righties doesn't mean that Bonds didn't change the game. You can say pick two players from the 20s, one who had zero power and one who didn't give up many HRs and claim that Ruth didn't affect them so therefore he didn't change the game...
Let's find the flaw in this theory.
2004, Intentional walks, national league.
Bonds-SFG 120
Thome-PHI 26
Helton-COL 19
Berkman-HOU 14
Piazza-NYM 14
Edmonds-STL 12
Pujols-STL 12
2005
Pujols-STL 27
Lee-CHC 23
Helton-COL 22
Delgado-FLA 20
Abreu-PHI 15
Dunn-CIN 14
Lieberthal-PHI 14
2006
Bonds 31
Cabrera 16
Pujols 15
Helton 9
Soriano 9
Berkman 9
Hank Aaron, IBB
1957 15
1958 16
1959 17
1960 13
1961 20
1962 14
1963 18
1964 9
1965 10
1966 15
1967 19
1968 23
1969 19
1970 15
1971 21
1972 15
1973 13
The only player out of line with the intentional walk patterns given to batters over the last 50 years is Barry Bonds.
Willie McCovey
1966 10
1967 17
1968 20
1969 45
1970 40
1971 21
1972 5
1973 25
George Brett
1979 14
1980 16
1981 7
1982 14
1983 13
1984 6
1985 31
1986 18
1987 14
1988 15
1989 14
1990 14
1991 10
Oh, and the reason for Pujols' spike in walks last year probably has more to do with the decline of Jim Edmonds (and Rolen's being injured) than it has anything to do with him. Giambi, ARod - these guys don't get walked much, mostly because the Yankees lineup is too good. No one walks David Ortiz, because Manny Ramirez is usually hitting behind him.
I hope you realize you can intentionally walk a batter without having your catcher stand up with his arm out to the side...
Quote from: JoeDirt on 07/13/06, 05:19:48 PM
I hope you realize you can intentionally walk a batter without having your catcher stand up with his arm out to the side...
Not Vlad, he'll swing at anything
Quote from: JoeDirt on 07/13/06, 05:19:48 PM
I hope you realize you can intentionally walk a batter without having your catcher stand up with his arm out to the side...
sometimes even this doesn't work
Quote from: JoeDirt on 07/13/06, 05:19:48 PM
I hope you realize you can intentionally walk a batter without having your catcher stand up with his arm out to the side...
I hope you realize that there's never been a time in baseball where the best home run hitters were pitched to identically to the worst hitters.
(Well, other than 1998)
Uh, yeah, duh...
Quote from: Attezzobal on 07/13/06, 06:38:11 PM
Quote from: JoeDirt on 07/13/06, 05:19:48 PM
I hope you realize you can intentionally walk a batter without having your catcher stand up with his arm out to the side...
I hope you realize that there's never been a time in baseball where the best home run hitters were pitched to identically to the worst hitters.
(Well, other than 1998)
lima time?
Quote from: JoeDirt on 07/13/06, 07:28:46 PM
Uh, yeah, duh...
So your argument is that because of Bonds, pitchers don't groove pitches to power hitters?
no, that sounds stupid.
Quote from: johnnyblaze on 07/10/06, 11:37:04 PM
its just not played the same anymore, manufacturing runs and all,
Go watch some high school baseball for that. Or go back to 1903 to watch that kind of ball.
Or just wait a few years, things will come back around.
When pitchers catch up to the hitters, small ball will make a come back.
Quote from: Ryno on 07/14/06, 01:25:24 PM
When pitchers catch up to the hitters, small ball will make a come back.
HGH doesn't seem to help pitchers, look at Grimsley he sucked.
...for 17 (or whatever) years...
Back on topic.
I would go with either Danny Tartabull or Joe Carter for offensive players, and Teddy Higuera for a pitcher.
Also, I think it's fair to say that Jose Canseco changed the way that players inject massive amounts of steroids into their bodies in order to get an advantage.
I think that it's fair to say that Rickey Henderson changed the game, but not because of stolen bases (that's what lead-off men were//are expected to do). Anyway, I'd say that he made the lead-off spot a legitimate power spot.
Tim Raines changed the way people slide with vials of crack in their back pocket.
Quote from: ericdavisfan on 07/16/06, 09:40:38 PM
I think that it's fair to say that Rickey Henderson changed the game by always referring to himself in the third person.
Quote from: ericdavisfan on 07/16/06, 09:40:38 PM
I think that it's fair to say that Rickey Henderson changed the game, but not because of stolen bases (that's what lead-off men were//are expected to do). Anyway, I'd say that he made the lead-off spot a legitimate power spot.
Followed by who? And what about Lou Brock, who was busy hitting 15-20 homers out of the leadoff spot back in the 60's?
I guess I'm talking about managers trying to put a "legitimate" power threat in the lead off spot. Brady Anderson, Soriano, Corey Patterson, Johnny Damon come to mind off the top of my head. I'm just saying that the traditional leadoff hitter was up there to bunt, walk, or slap a basehit and then run. Maybe Lou Brock changed it and Rickey carried it on. I'm just saying that I can see someone saying that he changed the game in the fact that the leadoff is expected to drive the ball more now than then.
Quote from: ericdavisfan on 07/17/06, 12:02:01 PM
I guess I'm talking about managers trying to put a "legitimate" power threat in the lead off spot. Brady Anderson, Soriano, Corey Patterson, Johnny Damon come to mind off the top of my head. I'm just saying that the traditional leadoff hitter was up there to bunt, walk, or slap a basehit and then run. Maybe Lou Brock changed it and Rickey carried it on. I'm just saying that I can see someone saying that he changed the game in the fact that the leadoff is expected to drive the ball more now than then.
Juan Pierre
No one tries to put a legitimate power threat in the leadoff spot in and of itself. Corey Patterson batted leadoff because he could run and because Dusty Baker is a moron. Johnny Damon doesn't really hit homers, but he runs/ran better than anyone else on the Red Sox. More importantly, he got on base a lot. Same goes for Brady Anderson. Managers (intelligent ones, anyway) put guys with high OBPs (which Rickey obviously had) in the leadoff spot, and if they can run well, so much the better. If those guys happen to have a little power, so much the better. If they had a lot of power, they'd be mostly hitting third...
Soriano is a weird exception. I can't explain what Joe Torre was doing with him in the leadoff spot, other than the fact that Mr. Jeter only bats second and plays shortstop, and the world revolves around him.
Lenny Harris is the world's bestest most ultimate lead off hitter.
I know that the best power threat doesn't go in the leadoff spot, but I was just saying that it's more common to have a guy in the leadoff spot who has a little pop in his bat. Kind of like Rickey
My rants on some players MIA in :
Where the fuck is Terry Kennedy (Kenedy-American Stars), Harold Reynolds (Rnolds - American Stars) and Hubie Brooks (National Stars)? Brooks had a decent career, Reynolds may look like a weak lead-off guy, but his bat, speed and contact would make him nearly as broken as Raines, Trammell and Vince Coleman. Also, why the fuck is Harold Baines in the game, but not Dave Winfield?
Quote from: ericdavisfan on 07/17/06, 01:45:37 PM
I know that the best power threat doesn't go in the leadoff spot, but I was just saying that it's more common to have a guy in the leadoff spot who has a little pop in his bat. Kind of like Rickey
Isn't that more a function of the fact that, aside from the Cubs, most players currently in the majors who aren't #8 hitters have more pop in their bats then they did 15 or 20 years ago? There just aren't many guys with under 10 HRs a year who are major league regulars who hit well enought to bat first.
Quote from: Dryden on 07/18/06, 01:49:21 PM
Quote from: ericdavisfan on 07/17/06, 01:45:37 PM
I know that the best power threat doesn't go in the leadoff spot, but I was just saying that it's more common to have a guy in the leadoff spot who has a little pop in his bat. Kind of like Rickey
Isn't that more a function of the fact that, aside from the Cubs, most players currently in the majors who aren't #8 hitters have more pop in their bats then they did 15 or 20 years ago? There just aren't many guys with under 10 HRs a year who are major league regulars who hit well enought to bat first.
Possibly
I say it's me
Probably Henderson, Winfield, or Parker. Tartabull also had a great year in either '86 or '87. Even though the Yankees, Reds, and Royals aren't on the NES version it'd still be cool to have them. I guess you guys are talking about the arcade version too.
Just about all of the other players mentioned on this thread can be used in RBI 2 & 3.
Interesting topic, I went and looked up players stats from 86 and 87, thinking I'd find several deserving players, and I was surprised that I couldn't really find many. There are definitely a few, like Henderson and Barfield, but overall I gotta hand it to RBI for covering most of it. Of course, Pedriq will always be a glaring disgrace, but what are you gonna do.
Al Pedrique wasn't even an actual All-Star. In 1987 combined with the Pirates & Mets, he had his 1 hr and .294 average. Could they not think of anyone better???
edavisfan hit it on the head. power in the leadoff spot changed the game.
btw, i LOVE the comment someone made about why corey patterson leads off (dusty baker is an idiot).
how can dusty baker let prior/ wood throw so many pitches? terrible.
Quote from: Dryden on 07/18/06, 01:49:21 PM
Quote from: ericdavisfan on 07/17/06, 01:45:37 PM
I know that the best power threat doesn't go in the leadoff spot, but I was just saying that it's more common to have a guy in the leadoff spot who has a little pop in his bat. Kind of like Rickey
Isn't that more a function of the fact that, aside from the Cubs, most players currently in the majors who aren't #8 hitters have more pop in their bats then they did 15 or 20 years ago? There just aren't many guys with under 10 HRs a year who are major league regulars who hit well enought to bat first.
Soriano doesn't have pop in his bat?
no... he has soda!
Dave Kingman ... I love this line .210 35HR 94RBI 126Ks. That was in 86. Your standard one dimensional RBI dominator. And an asshole to boot
We could have also used Rob Deer, Mike Pagliarulo, Steve Balboni, Pete Incaviglia, Cory Snyder ... you could make a whole team out these long ball stiffs that werent in the game.
One guy I'm surprised nobody has mentioned yet is Mike Greenwell. I think we could use him a little better than stinkbath sullivan
Isn't that more a function of the fact that, aside from the Cubs, most players currently in the majors who aren't #8 hitters have more pop in their bats then they did 15 or 20 years ago? There just aren't many guys with under 10 HRs a year who are major league regulars who hit well enought to bat first.
[/quote]
Very good point...that's definitely true. Although there are still a lot of managers who put crappy hitters at the top of the lineup just because they're fast. If you ask me, put your best OBP guy at the top of the order while still keeping your big boppers at the 3 and 4 spot. For example, any team but the Yankees should be batting Bobby Abreu first in the lineup. He gets on base half the time, so why not. Now on the Yankees, he's better fitted for the 2 or 3 spot, simply because Johnny Damon is such a great leadoff hitter...but almost any other team, I'd honestly hit him first.
Screw it, I still don't know how to make those quotes work where it shows up in the special writing and fonts and crap so you know it's a quote. Mine up there shows up as if I wrote it, and not a quote. Screw it.
click the quote button from the post you want to quote
Quote from: GreatScott on 11/30/06, 03:40:32 PM
Dave Kingman ... I love this line .210 35HR 94RBI 126Ks. That was in 86. Your standard one dimensional RBI dominator. And an asshole to boot
We could have also used Rob Deer, Mike Pagliarulo, Steve Balboni, Pete Incaviglia, Cory Snyder ... you could make a whole team out these long ball stiffs that werent in the game.
One guy I'm surprised nobody has mentioned yet is Mike Greenwell. I think we could use him a little better than stinkbath sullivan
This is a great post. I'd love to have Rob Deer on the AM team.
wow, i smell a new ROM.
In Boston, Greenwell instead of Sullivan and Oil Can Boyd instead of Schiraldi
In California, John Candelaria instead of Doug Corbett
In Detroit, Frank Tanana or Mike Henneman instead of Eric King
Others who could have been considered as All Stars: from '87 NL: Hubie Brooks for Al Pedrique, Juan Samuel for John Kruk
AL: '86 Tony Bernazard or Frank White for Willie Randolph (more punch), '87 Carlton Fisk for Bill Schroeder, '87 Danny Tartabull for Julio Franco,'87 Mark Langston for Jimmy Key.
How about Johnny Bench????????
well, let's see... he retired after the 1983 season. so i would say he wasn't included in the national league all-star team becuase he had been retired for a few years before the game came out. the all-star team is (mostly) based on the 1987 mid-summer classic roster.