MLAM said:
....because most of you seem to missed it the first time (though I give Herodotus credit for an actual rational response)
There are ELEVEN PLAYERS ALL TIME who can claim both a .300 career average AND 400+ home runs. The absolute rarest elite group in baseball...to balance between power and hitting for average. There are more guys with 500 home runs...there are more guys with 3000 hits...there are more guys with 300 wins...none of the other "magic career number" groups has fewer members than the .300 / 400 club.
For those of you who are unclear on the concept...those are CAREER NUMBERS...so talk about "decline" and "last few seasons" is meaningless.
Of that list of ELEVEN PLAYERS ALL TIME....not ONE has ever spent more than some meaningless token number of games at catcher (if any..I am just covering my ass here)...not one...save for Mike Piazza.
Now go back and read the top post on this page and show me where I said Piazza was the greatest CATCHER of all time....re read it several times if that helps.
(BTW....Piazza spent virtually all his career in Dodger Stadium and Shea Stadium...neither are exactly hitter parks).
First of all, numbers from this era are proving to be somewhat irrelevant in historic terms. Mark McGwire is not one of the greatest hitters of all time, even if he has 583 home runs, 8th best of all time. Barry Bonds isn't the greatest hitter, even with his batting average, OBP and home runs.
The reason is simple: you failed to acknowledge that Piazza played in a hitters' era - brought on by expansion (4 teams, 3 in the NL) and the subsequent shallow talent pool in the majors, realignment/scheduling and the edge that gave to players in weak divisions, and the small ballparks of the era. The fact that he was part of the steroids era further devalues his numbers. 427 home runs in this era do not mean the same as they do from previous eras.
Add to that that he played about 200 games (of 1912) of his career at first base or DH and you have to adjust for that when figuring into his numbers as a catcher.
As for the "Career Numbers" emphasis - again, you fail to recognize the importance of different eras or the fact that just hanging on to collect paycheques and accumulate stats devalues numbers in its own right. How do you quantify the numbers of Josh Gibson or Roy Campanella? Playing an extra five years, four of which were totally subpar, just to accumulate numbers to push oneself over some arbitrary career home run number is meaningless. And it takes away from his overall career.
Then the era factor comes back into play - because in the old days, Piazza would have been out of a job in 2003. There were fewer teams and a greater talent pool and guys couldn't hang around if they didn't produce.
The 1990s-early 2000s will forever be tainted by the steroid era. All numbers have to be heavily scrutinized and at a minimum, one must subtract about (at least?) 10% from power numbers.
I'll say it again: Piazza's a top-5 hitting catcher or all time and a top-20 overall catcher just on his offence.
(And if you go by some New York media reports, he was quite the "catcher" in other areas too - just kidding! LOL!)
