Wow, Twice in One Week

Mark Potash must be on some sort of mission. A mission to share ill-informed opinions about Chicago baseball. Poor town. So Potash spits out this article continuing his evaluation of Chicago baseball players:

Sorry White Sox fans, but Mr. Cub is Mr. Chicago.
Ernie Banks was an easy choice as the No. 1 Cubs player of all-time when the Sun-Times rated the top players in each of the city's major pro teams in February and March. Frank Thomas was an easy choice as the No. 1 player in Sox history.
But in a Cubs vs. Sox list of best players in the wake of the BP Crosstown Cup series at U.S. Cellular Field this weekend,

Wait, wait, wait. Chicago named their series the BP Crosstown Cup series? Brilliant timing Chi-Town. I'm planning on having a crosstown bicycle race here in Bronson, MI called the Kellogg's Special K Bowl.

Banks gets the edge over Big Frank as the best Chicago player of all-time. And actually, it's not that close.

I am vaguely familiar with each players career. I doubt that last sentence very much.

Banks put up unprecedented numbers as a shortstop -- from 1955-60 he averaged 41 homers and 116 RBI, won two home run titles, two RBI titles and back-to-back MVP awards in 1958-59.

That is a crazy 5 year period. It really is, especially for a short-stop. He put up a WAR of 48.8 during those 6 years. Thomas peak would be around 41.1. Looking deeper Banks WAR is being carrier by his fielding, which is equally hurting Thomas. Seriously as good as Banks was a fielding, Thomas was as bad.

And in 1960 he led the NL in home runs with 41 and won the Gold Glove at shortstop.

Neat-o!
Banks extended his career by playing first base. Thomas started at first base, tired of it and extended his career as a DH. In fact, Banks played more games at first base (1,259) than Thomas (971).

Don't care about any of that. Games played at first? Great. Was a DH? That's up to how you feel about DHing. If you hate it you're going to give Banks the edge.

But Thomas still gets his due in our position-by-position list of best Sox/Cubs of all-time. With Banks at shortstop, Thomas is the clear choice at first base over the great Dick Allen and the the Cubs' Phil Cavaretta, the pride of Lane Tech. And he deserves it. Thomas batted .275 with 29 home runs and 117 RBI per 500 at-bats as a first baseman with the White Sox. It's not like he couldn't play the position. He just preferred to hit.

I'm trying to decide how to make the case for Thomas. Stat by stat? Or one their lines on top of each other? Let's do both.

Banks .274/.330/.500/.830 OPS+ 122 WOBA .358 WAR 74.1 Fielding 54

Thomas .301/.419/.555/.974 OPS+156 WOBA .379 WAR 79.1 Fielding -68.2


I would say offensively it's not even close. When it comes to fielding Banks is so far superior they're not even playing the same game. The DH probably saves Thomas in WAR since his fielding constantly hurt him. My point though is, it's a close call. If you're a Cubs fan, you'll say Banks because he was the complete player. If you're a Sox fan you'll say Thomas because he was one of the greatest hitters of all time, far beyond Banks.

What I'm trying to say is this:
Banks gets the edge over Big Frank as the best Chicago player of all-time. And actually, it's not that close.
is bull.

Case Closed.