[Lefty Noob]

Jeff Bagwell's days with the Houston Astros are over. The team has declined to pick up the 2007 option on the four-time All-Star.

Bagwell leaves his mark on Astros organization | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle
By JOSE DE JESUS ORTIZ
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

One of only nine players to win the NL's Rookie of the Year and MVP awards, Bagwell had a .297 career average, with 449 home runs, 488 doubles, 32 triples and 1,529 RBIs over 2,150 games.

He also is the only first baseman and one of only 10 players in major league history to collect at least 400 home runs and 200 stolen bases. In Houston, though, he'll be remembered for more than his statistics.

Does Bagwell retire, or try to play elsewhere? Personally, I'd hate to see him with anyone but the Astros.

[JackAigner]

I think he's done. I think he might think about going somewhere else to DH if there was a possibility he could still swing the bat. I mean, let's be honest, this guy had a few seriously good years swinging one-handed. At this point, though, I don't think he's got anything left. From what I hear, he's constantly in pain and any further surgery would be more for quality of life concerns, not baseball. Plus, he hasn't played at all in over a year.

If he could come back, as much as I'd hate to see him somewhere else, I'd love to see him take a crack at 500 homers. He should have made it there easily, but baseball mirrors life (that's why it's so great), and life isn't fair (neither was the Astrodome). Without it, he's should be a sure Hall of Famer, anyway. He's the 4th best 1st baseman of all time, according to Bill James, and I'd be inclined to agree.

He was the soul and Biggio was the heart of the baseball teams of my youth, and both of them will always be special in the eyes of Houston fans. They turned Houston into a baseball city.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

4th best of all time is going waaay out there on a limb...I think he is Hall of Fame material...a 1st baseman that could do it all (including steal) at the pick of his career...

in any case Mr. James has him rated higher than some heavy hitters and good fielders...I mean Bags over Greenberg?...Ted Kluszenski doesn't make the top 30?...George Sisler not in the 20?...

Come on now...how can we take these rankings seriously...

Player Rankings for First Basemen | The BASEBALL Page

[Gotham Dark Knight]

PS Tony Fernandez the 24th best short stop of all times... ...aoh brother, is this guy for real?

[JackAigner]

This is actually fun. Now that I've talked about Biggio until I'm blue in the face, I can start on Bagwell.

You make good points and bring up the questions that have to be asked. I think Bill James' first baseman rankings are one of his more suspect grounps, but that's because they're about the hardest group of players to rate, except pitchers. To start off, we should say that Bagwell was probably the greatest baserunner of any first basemen, especially those he has to be compared to. He stole 202 out of 280 bases. I don't know the exact stats for first to third on base hits, but they are outstanding. He even won games with great slides. As for fielding, Keith Hernandez and Mark Grace...or heck, even J.T. Snow were better fielders, but of the elite hitting first basemen, Bagwell was the probably the best fielder. He had great reflexes, extensive range to both sides, great hands, and was one of the best throwing first basemen of all time. Of course, these qualities are not values that highly in a first baseman, but they are significant, especially in comparison to the other greats.

We can start by comparing him to the greatest of his contemporaries, Frank Thomas. Starting with baserunning and defense, Bagwell jumps out far ahead. Thomas was a bad fielder and a bad, station to station baserunner, though he was better when he was younger. As far as raw hitting goes, Thomas is a bit better, but not all that much. They were dead even in home runs before this year, but it's probably safe to say Bagwell would be on top if it weren't for the Astrodome, where he played the best years of his career. If you look at the 162 game average, they're comparable for the most part, except in triples and SBs, where Bagwell kills. If you take away the mediocre and injury-marred years Thomas had, he might pull way ahead. Then again, if Bagwell had been able to swing with two arms and play more years, it might be close again.

As far as the guys you mentioned, Greenberg...well, it's difficult to compare the two eras...but he didn't have a whole lot of good years. His good years were extremely good, but there were only about eight, and most of them weren't significantly better than Bagwell's, and Bagwell kills him in accumulated stats. Even though he didn't himself have a long career, it was a full one.

It's very hard to compare him to Sisler, but Bill James makes a good argument for Sisler being overrated.

Kluszenski didn't have many good years, either, and was certainly no better than Bagwell during his good years.

Because they compare so much better, let's compare Bagwell to the first basemen of his era. Out of that group, I don't think anyone but McGwire, Thomas, and Murray could be even mentioned with Bagwell. Of course, Bagwell was the best baserunner and fielder out of all these guys by far.

First comes McGwire...I won't ignore him because of the cloud of controversy surrounding him. Their careers were about as long. McGwire out homered Bagwell by 134, which is a huge number, and eclipsed Bagwell in SLG by 40 points. Bagwell was better at everything else. He had more hits (2314 to 1626), more runs (1517 to 1167), more doubles (488 to 252), triples (23 to 6), stolen bases (202 to 12), over a hundred more RBIs, a higher BA and OBP. I think Bagwell passed this guy up.

Eddie Murray makes it close...really close, actually. I think Bagwell was a more talented hitter, but Murray beats him in sheer numbers. We can look closely at their best seasons...Bagwell's best were better than Murray's, but Murray had basically no bad years. Bagwell had more 40-plus HR years (3 to 0), more 100-plus RBI years (8 to 6), more 100-plus R years (9 to 3), more 100-plus BB seasons (7 to 1). They're close, really close. I think Bagwell has the edge.

I mean, I just don't know that there's anyone clearly better besides Gehrig and Foxx. Certainly Thomas and Murray are close and a case can be made for guys like McCovey, but Bagwell is the best all-around player out of all of them. He ranks up there with his hitting and the other aspects of his game put him over them, I think.

As far as intangibles, every knows how much Bagwell meant to his team. He was a great leader, a respected and loved teammate. Just no bull at all. He played all out every day.

These kind of debates can go on forever and there's no exact science to it, but any way you cut it, Bagwell ranks up there with the best of the best.

Great subject, about which I'm very passionate...only slightly less than the Biggio debate.