I don't think you can cut off the era for Thome at 2000, it's gotta go back to around 1995. And he was probably #1 in that 1995-2000 stretch.
Even in the 1995-2000 stretch, I would have to pick Jeff Bagwell over Thome.
I don't think you can cut off the era for Thome at 2000, it's gotta go back to around 1995. And he was probably #1 in that 1995-2000 stretch.
Even in the 1995-2000 stretch, I would have to pick Jeff Bagwell over Thome.
Even in the 1995-2000 stretch, I would have to pick Jeff Bagwell over Thome.
...Thome was never one of the greatest players in any one season during his time, but once you consider his longevity and success over that time he has to be a HOF'er and I'd argue he should at least get strong consideration for first ballot.
This is not quite accurate. Jim had a number of great years. He is a 5-time All Star. Check his stats. 4 different times he finished high in the voting for the MVP award, and 9 times he has gotten votes.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/thomeji01.shtml
In 2001 he batted .291, hit 49 HR, and had 124 RBI.
In 2002 he batted .304, hit 52 homers, and had 118 RBI. He lead the AL in walks (122), slugging percentage (.677), and OPS (1.122).
In 2003 for the Phillies he lead the NL in homers with 47, had 131 RBI, 111 walks.
In Jim's most productive years from 1996 through 2004 it is hard to find many players who had better numbers who were not using steroids.
Regular and post season success!!! Look all their numbers in the post season...You will see he is one of the greatest in his era!!
He had a .217 batting average in the playoffs.........and a .320 OBP...maybe playoff success wasn't the best example.
BUT, Thome played clean (which puts him ahead of McGwire and Giambi), didn't play in Coor's Field (which puts him ahead of Todd Helton) and wasn't crazy (which puts him ahead of Mo Vaughn).
Saying he wasn't one of the top players at his position is kind of weak, since first base has always been the position of many of the most talented offensive players (so they didn't have exert so much effort on defense).
But he was consistent. He always had great power numbers and was almost always in the top 10 in on-base percentage (which in my humble opinion shows the value of a hitter better then any other stat.)
And bagwell is highly suspected to be a roid guy.
No, he's not Frank Thomas, Albert Pujols and the difference between he and Bagwell is debatable since Jim Thome's prime lasted just about as long as Bagwell's career.
Not to mention, it's highly suspected that Bagwell was a roid guy.
I never said he was the top player at his position. But you stated-
"Thome was never one of the greatest players in any one season during his time"
And that is what I was disputing. Jim was clearly one of the top players for several of those seasons noted. Also it should be noted that the many of the players you would say were ahead of Jim were those who were juicing.
Pujols...Bagwell and Helton...Frank Thomas... Who juiced there?
I have mentioned only one player who juiced (McGwire) and readily admitted that... so I don't know how you say many... everyplayer but one (that I acknowledged) listed is believed clean.
This is not quite accurate. Jim had a number of great years. He is a 5-time All Star. Check his stats. 4 different times he finished high in the voting for the MVP award, and 9 times he has gotten votes.
Helton's power numbers dropped dramatically exactly at the same time the Rockies started storing the baseballs in a roomed sized humidor, effectively ending the offensive advantages of playing in the thin. So suggesting that he is using steroids is ignoring some significant facts.