STLtoday.com

Boooyah wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 11:29 am Comparing Hornsby and Pujols Cardinal career (I find this to be an interesting comparison)


Stat | Rogers Hornsby | Albert Pujols
-----------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------
Games Played | 1,580 | 1,814
Batting Average | .359 | .328
On-Base Percentage | .427 | .420
Slugging Percentage | .568 | .617
OPS | .995 | 1.037
OPS+ | 177 | 169
Home Runs | 193 | 469
RBIs | 1,072 | 1,397
Hits | 2,110 | 2,156
Runs | 1,089 | 1,333
Walks | 660 | 1,003
MVP Awards | 2 | 3
Batting Titles | 7 | 1
.400+ Seasons | 3 | 0
World Series Titles | 1 (1926) | 2 (2006, 2011)

Can’t go wrong either way but I think Pujols edges out Hornsby. Pujols had more power and a higher ops(although Hornsby had a slightly higher ops+). Pujols leads in every offensive category except BA while playing gold glove defense.

Monsieur De Treville wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 11:20 am

Catfish4U wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 11:09 am

1_12_1968 wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 11:55 am

Shady wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 11:29 am

OldRed wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 11:26 am I would flop him and Brock. That would make Albert #4 and Brock #5.

Was Hornsby really an even better RH hitter than Pujols? Wonder if Hornsby faced the pitching velocity that Pujols did. Hornsby did have some eye-popping batting averages.

I hate post like this. Hornsby faced the best players of his era and did things nobody did before or after.

Babe Ruth was in the same era. Babe Ruth hit over .372 six seasons and over .341 ten seasons. His career ops+ was 206. Rogers career batting average was .358 and his ops+ was 175. Hornsby was certainly a great hitter but not a lot better than other hitters of his era or all time hitters. jmho

Simply wrong. Not one NL player from Hornsby's era even comes close to a career 175 OPS+. It's the 5th best in MLB history behind Ruth, Williams, Bonds, and Gehrig. And Hornsby is the only RH hitter of these top 5.

Ponder this...from 1917 until 1929, Hornsby led the NL in WAR in 11 of 13 seasons! He was head & shoulders above every NL hitter. No one was really even close!

Shady wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 11:22 am Who are you surprised that's not on this list? Ted Simmons maybe? https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/ra ... b8b7&ei=11

Catfish4U wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 13:01 pm

Monsieur De Treville wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 11:20 am

Catfish4U wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 11:09 am

1_12_1968 wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 11:55 am

Shady wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 11:29 am

OldRed wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 11:26 am I would flop him and Brock. That would make Albert #4 and Brock #5.

Was Hornsby really an even better RH hitter than Pujols? Wonder if Hornsby faced the pitching velocity that Pujols did. Hornsby did have some eye-popping batting averages.

I hate post like this. Hornsby faced the best players of his era and did things nobody did before or after.

Babe Ruth was in the same era. Babe Ruth hit over .372 six seasons and over .341 ten seasons. His career ops+ was 206. Rogers career batting average was .358 and his ops+ was 175. Hornsby was certainly a great hitter but not a lot better than other hitters of his era or all time hitters. jmho

Simply wrong. Not one NL player from Hornsby's era even comes close to a career 175 OPS+. It's the 5th best in MLB history behind Ruth, Williams, Bonds, and Gehrig. And Hornsby is the only RH hitter of these top 5.

Ponder this...from 1917 until 1929, Hornsby led the NL in WAR in 11 of 13 seasons! He was head & shoulders above every NL hitter. No one was really even close!

You are pointing toward a very narrow range. National League AND Right handed hitters?

Monsieur De Treville wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 13:42 pm 2. Large difference between the leagues in that era. No inter league play and players rarely switched leagues.

Catfish4U wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 13:55 pm

Monsieur De Treville wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 13:42 pm 2. Large difference between the leagues in that era. No inter league play and players rarely switched leagues.

Are you trying to say that the National League was SUPERIOR to the American League?

rockondlouie wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 11:59 am

Shady wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 13:55 pm

Cusecards wrote: ↑29 Mar 2025 12:13 pm Agree on Stan/Hornsby/Gibson/Albert
I understand the sentiment toward Albert who was a generational hitter.
But I have read many who have called Hornsby the greatest RH of All Time!
Over a five year period in his prime he AVERAGED:
.402
29 HR’s
120 RBI’s

That's phenomenal, indeed. Were Ted Williams' top five year averages in these categories about as close to Hornsby's as any other player in MLB history?

In average that would be Ty Cobb 1909 -1913 but he had no power to match Hornsby:
.396 .454 .563 1.017

But for BA and Power that would be Babe Ruth 1920 -1924:
47 HR
131 RBI
.370 .511 .777 1.288

Monsieur De Treville wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 12:20 pm

Boooyah wrote: ↑30 Mar 2025 11:29 am Comparing Hornsby and Pujols Cardinal career (I find this to be an interesting comparison)


Stat | Rogers Hornsby | Albert Pujols
-----------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------
Games Played | 1,580 | 1,814
Batting Average | .359 | .328
On-Base Percentage | .427 | .420
Slugging Percentage | .568 | .617
OPS | .995 | 1.037
OPS+ | 177 | 169
Home Runs | 193 | 469
RBIs | 1,072 | 1,397
Hits | 2,110 | 2,156
Runs | 1,089 | 1,333
Walks | 660 | 1,003
MVP Awards | 2 | 3
Batting Titles | 7 | 1
.400+ Seasons | 3 | 0
World Series Titles | 1 (1926) | 2 (2006, 2011)

Can’t go wrong either way but I think Pujols edges out Hornsby. Pujols had more power and a higher ops(although Hornsby had a slightly higher ops+). Pujols leads in every offensive category except BA while playing gold glove defense.

Let's keep in mind that the first few seasons of Hornsby's career were in the dead ball era, when no one was hitting home runs. Also, Hornsby (due to the rules at the time) was not allowed to win back to back MVPS. And finally...gotta give Hornsby credit as a player/manager in 1926. Could not have been easy.