The Best of Brett Vs. The Best of Everyone Else

by royalsreview on Feb 19, 2007 11:33 PM EST Comment 7 comments

This is a very simple post, with a very simple message: George Brett is the man and the Royals aren't much without him historically.

Let me say that again: George Brett is more than man than any other man has ever been the man.

Inspired by the tournament going on over on Viva El Birdos, I wanted to setup a Brett versus Everyone battle, pitting George Brett's best 9 seasons against the best 9 seasons of every non-Brett Royal.

Well, turns out that would be like asking Nebraska to play Kansas again in basketball. Check this out, its unbelievably incredible.

Here are the best 9 Brett seasons, by OPS+, (which is OBP+SLG, adjusted for league)

Brett '80: 202
Brett '85: 178
Brett '83: 158
Brett '90: 153
Brett '88: 149
Brett '79: 148
Brett '76: 145
Brett '77: 144
Brett '82: 141

------

Now here are the best "everyone else" seasons, ranked by OPS+ (although a random year may have slipped the cracks):

Tartabull '91: 171
Mayberry '75: 168
Mayberry '72: 167
Hamelin '94: 146
Mayberry '73: 144
Sweeney '02: 142
Dye '00: 134
Sweeney '00: 130
Beltran '03: 126

Nothing fancy to say other than "damn!"

Ohh what the heck, lets roll it, and get more complicated. Brett's 8th best season is still better than anything Sweeney, Dye or Beltran ever managed. Brett also posted an OPS+ of 137 in 1986 and a 131 in 1987 which would have cracked the other guy lineup. And on and on...

Here are the steps:

1) I'll neutralize all the stats to a 750 runs per year environment using the tool on baseball-reference.

2) Using David Pinto's Lineup Toy, I'll run the run expectancy sims with the lineup in the same orders listed above. I'll also list what the best case scenario would be.

OK. Here are the results for the All-Brett Team:

All-Brett as listed above: 7.582 runs/game

Best All-Brett: 7.624 runs/game

There are two versions of the All-Brett lineup that post 7.624 a game, both with Brett '85 leading off and Brett '80 hitting #2.

With so many absolutely absurd OBPs in there, you really can't screw things up. The very worst All-Brett lineup still cranks out 7.368 runs/game.

Now for the other guys:

All-Everyone Else as listed above: 7.158
Best All-Everyone Else:7.246

The best lineup begins Mayberry '72, Tartabull '91, Hamelin '94. Wow, Hamelin was the ultimate flash in the pan... no?

Worst everyone else lineup? 6.98 per, with Hamelin, Beltran and Sweeney leading off.

So just to hammer home the point, over 162 games, we get this:

WORST All-Brett over 162: 1193 runs
BEST All-Everyone over 162: 1173 runs

So in sum, this franchise, at least at the plate, is George Brett, some forgotten John Mayberry seasons and random samplings of other guys that don't compare at all.

--------

Don't let the terrorists win, buy a RR T-Shirt Today!

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Dwamn.

I knew Brett was a great player, but still. Damn.

Where does the All-Luis Alicea Team rank?

by The Mustache of Balboni on Feb 20, 2007 1:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

This is what

seperates a HOF stats vs very good ballplayers stats I suppose. Who knows maybe we are developing the second coming in Alex Gordon? One can only hope.

lordbyronk

by lordbyronk on Feb 20, 2007 7:54 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I know the numbers were adjusted for league

and year context

but also consider the difference in the K back then as well

Tartabull in 1991? wow, had no memory of that

by LeoBloom on Feb 20, 2007 9:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I remember it well

It was a walk year for Tartabull, everyone knew the Royals couldn't afford to keep him, the Royals were far out of it, so the only fun that year was seeing Tartabull just go on a tear.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 20, 2007 10:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

George was the man

Nuff said!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 20, 2007 10:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

A travesty perpetrated during my younger years

was Mattingly winning the 85 MVP over Brett. I've probably griped about this one before, but it was ridiculous.

Yes, both had good seasons, but what separated Brett was how he put the team on his back down the stretch in a tight pennant race vs the Angels. Entering the last week of the season, we were one game down to the Angels, and played them 4 games at home, to be followed by a season ending series vs the A's. Brett proceeded to homer in 5 of the first 6 games in that stretch, and it was done. (And we would go on to win our only WS championship)

Throw in the gold glove season at 3B, while Mattingly played a less valuable defensive position, and to this day I still can't believe the vote. Probably a lot of East Coast bias involved; yet another reason to hate the Yankees.

by loyal2s dad on Feb 20, 2007 11:17 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

85 MVP

Not to mention that Brett was the only viable offensive weapon on that 85 team (maybe you can count Balboni).
But Mattingly was in a lineup with Griffey Sr., Ricky Henderson, Dave Winfield, and Willie Randolf. Mattingly probably wasn't even the MVP of that team, Ricky was (higher OPS+, as well as 70 more stolen bases).

Lee

by Lee on Feb 21, 2007 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs