Most underrated hitter of all time?

Question

Actually take some time to think about this one, don't just blurt out the first thing to come to mind. I'd like to see some reasoning behind your answers too.

I already know that no one will say the one I have in mind, so I'll see what ya'll have to say about it. Jimmie Foxx, one of the game's most ferocious sluggers, was so strong that other players used to say "even his sweat has muscles." A three-time MVP, he won the Triple Crown in 1933, and his 534 career home runs put him second behing Ruth when he retired.
Yet Foxx doesn't come to mind when fans discuss the greats, mostly because he had terrible luck. Foxx had the misfortune of having to compete directly against Ruth and Gehrig. While chasing Ruth during his stellar 1932 season, Foxx lost two homers when games were rained out before they became official. And a wire screen atop Sportsman's Park's rightfield wall (a screen that hadn't been in place when Ruth set the home run record in 1927) turned at least three more would-be homers into doubles.
Sixty HR were all Foxx needed for immortality, he finished with 58.

That wasn't all me by the way...alot of that information came from Dingers by Peter Keating, MLB.com, and the Baseball-Almanac.com

Answer 1

I'd go with Rod Carew. He could flat out hit. He did not have a ton of power, but is 20th all-time in hits, with the ability to hit to all fields. He led the league in batting average 7 times, he never struck out more than 91 times in a season, finished with a .328 batting average, and his 1977 season was sick: .388 avg (led league), .449 OBP(led league), 14 HR, 16 Triples(led league), 38 Doubles, 100 RBI, 128 runs (led league).

Answer 2

I actually believe Babe Ruth is the most underrated, simply because the enormity of his accomplishments dims today when every shortstop in the league can pop 20 homers. Ruth outhomered every other TEAM in MLB a couple times. When he hit 60 homers, I believe the previous record was 29. His OBP and BA (.342) and Slugging pct. are staggering today, but even more so back then when a guy who hit 20 homers was considered a dangerous power hitter. To put his hitting in todays numbers, imagine a guy hitting 200 homers in a season - or more- outhomering every other team in the league. The reason I think he was so underrated is that some people today actually argue whether Ruth or Bonds were better hitters and some people say even a guy like Joe DiMaggio was a better ballplayer by far than Ruth. Not to mention, he started out as a pitcher. How weird is that???//

Answer 3

I don't know about all time, but certainly recently Mark Grace was terribly underrated. Few people realize that he led the major leagues with the most hits in the 1990s.

Another serious answer to this question in the modern world of baseball fans is . . . Babe Ruth. Granted, Aaron passed his all-time home run total, and he did so amid pressure that Ruth would have had no idea about. But when you go back and look at what Ruth did in the context of his time, and then see how long most of his records stood, and wonder how many of them would still stand minus the steroid-studs, it is truly amazing.

In maybe his most amazing year, 1921, he hit the then unbelievable total of 59 home runs. Two AL players tied for second at 24. The NL leader had 23. Another interesting statistic for this year was that he hit more home runs than half the TEAMS in major league baseball.

In 1926, he led the AL with 47 homers. Second place was Al Simmons with 19. Hack Wilson had 21 to lead the NL. In 1927, when he peaked with 60, Gehrig gave him a run for his money with 47. Lazerri finish third with 19. In the NL, Wilson and William both hit 30.

When he finished his career with 714 home runs, no one else had come close to hitting 500. His lifetime batting average of .342 was quite respectable (Bonds: .299), putting him about tenth on the all time list. And his 2,873 hits wasn't exactly shabby, especially considering what percentage of them went for extra bases (including 506 doubles and 136 triples, hence his .690 career slugging average--Bonds is at .609).

How could Babe Ruth be underrated? Just consider how often he is dismissed these days for consideration as the greatest player of all time. "He played in the lively ball era," they say. No--he created the lively ball era . . . and then he dominated it like no one has since.

Answer 4

I can't say for all time. I can only talk about what I have seen. And I will go with Fred McGriff and Garrett Anderson. McGriff went out consistently and put up 30+ homeruns every year, hit .300, scored and brought in runs, and did it during the steroid era and clearly was not on the juice (Ever look at his wiry frame?). I feel bad he fell just a few homers short of 500 because it will make it very tough for him to make the hall. Anderson is second because of the same reason. Came out every day, did his job, did it quietly, and put up solid numbers. All this was done in the steroid era and these two were clearly clean. They showed class, they showed consistency, and they always put the team first.

Answer 5

Harry Heilmann, who was an outfielder with the Tigers in the late teens and throughout the 20's. A HOFamer, he had a lifetime BA of .342 and averaged over 120 rbis a yr during the 1920s . Lost in the power game and not playing in New York, he is also one of the awnsers to a great trivia question..."Name the only man to win 4 batting titles with an average over .390.". Most everyone says Cobb or Hornsby, but it was Harry with .394 in 1921, .403 in 1923( the last American Leaguer to hit .400 before Ted Williams).393 in 1925 and .398 in 1927, just one hit away from .400. Its not aname that comes up when you talk about great hitters.

Answer 6

I’ll say Jimmie Foxx or good old Double X. with a .325 career average, 534 Home Runs, 1922 RBIs, plus a .344 average in the Postseason. A triple crown winner, who lead the league in homeruns, 3 times in RBIs, and 2 batting Titles I understand anyone in the Hall of Fame can’t really be underrated, but he’s really not anyone’s choice of best first baseman or outfielder, or third base or catcher.

Answer 7

I would go with Pete Rose. He is the all time hits leader but that seems to get lost today with all of the off the field problems he had. He was a great all around player and the definition of a gamer. What he did after his playing career was done was a shame because it caused people to be blinded to how great of a player he actually was. I think its crazy that the all time hits leader is banned from the HOF for gambling on the sport but a known cheater like Palmeiro still gets his name on the ballot. Just shows how messed up baseball can be some times.

Answer 8

Personally I think Hank Greenberg is the most underrated player in MLB history. He nearly broke Babe Ruth's season home run record in 1938, and was a consistant power hitter throughout his career. His totals are far lower than could have been, because of military service in 1940 and 1941 to 1945. This caused him to lose most of 1941, all of 1942/43/44, and half of 1945; years in which he was 30,31,32,33,and 34.

He did bat .313, with 331 home runs and 1628 hits in 1394 games during his 13 year career.

Answer 9

I would have to say Paul Waner - a too-often overlooked phenomenal hitter. 3100+ hits, .333 career average, 200+ hits 8 times, .350+ average 6 times. With all due respect to Gwynn (a great hitter - no argument), Waner - in approximately the same number of At Bats - had more: Runs, Doubles, twice as many Triples, RBI's and Walks; fewer Strikeouts; higher On-Base & Slugging Percentages. Waner was truly one of the legendary hitters of the game and, sadly, nearly forgotten.

Answer 10

In addition to Jimmie Foxx I would have to say "Mr.Cub" Ernie Banks. The only shortstop in MLB history to hit over 500 homeruns. 2-Time MVP, 11 Time All-Star, Hit 40+hr's 5 times, and was named to the All-Century Team. Those are astounding numbers for a shortstop.