Mark McGwire vs. Jose Canseco

Crash Davis · Jan 12, 2010

Let me preface my future statement by saying that I am not a fan of either McGwire or Canseco; however, to make a case for McGwire's election to the Baseball Hall-of-Fame is comical without mentioning Canseco in the same breath.

Neither McGwire nor Canseco should be in the Hall-of-Fame, but the statistics are compelling:

McGwire:

batting avg - .263
hits - 1,626
runs - 1,167
HR - 583
RBI - 1,414
SB - 12
SLG - .588
OPS - .982

Canseco:

batting avg - .266
hits - 1,877
runs - 1,186
HR - 462
RBI - 1,407
SB - 200
SLG - .515
OPS - .867

Now for the assorted accolades:

McGwire - 12 all-star games; A.L. ROY; 1 gold glove; 3 silver sluggers; 4 HR titles; 1 RBI title; 1.94 MVP shares;

Canseco - 6 all-star games; A.L. ROY; A.L. MVP; 40-40 club member; 4 silver sluggers; 2 HR titles; 1 RBI title; 1.53 MVP shares

As you can see, if you remove the HRs, there isn't much of a difference between the two. Plus, Canseco was more of a complete player than McGwire was offensively.

Obviously, McGwire broke the "magical" 500 HR barrier; however, that number has been tarnished somewhat as of late thanks to the likes of Rafael Palmeiro, Gary Sheffield and all the alleged juicers who made a mockery of 400 HRs en route to falling just short of 500 HRs due to their bodies prematurely breaking down such as Albert Belle, Juan Gonzalez and Canseco.

To me, if you are going to debate McGwire's Hall-of-Fame qualifications, then based purely on statistics, Canseco deserves just as much consideration.

fengzhang · Jan 12, 2010

Not exactly. Yes, their totals are similar. But their averages are not. McGwire's slugging percentage, on base percentage, and HR/AB ratio are much much higher than Canseco. I'm a huge fan of looking at rates rather than totals so for me things like OPS or RBI/AB, HR/AB ratios are important. McGwire was more dominant.

zookerman182 · Jan 12, 2010

canseco's 200 steals are nothing to over look either. But niether belong in the hall.

Crash Davis · Jan 12, 2010

fengzhang said:
Not exactly. Yes, their totals are similar. But their averages are not. McGwire's slugging percentage, on base percentage, and HR/AB ratio are much much higher than Canseco. I'm a huge fan of looking at rates rather than totals so for me things like OPS or RBI/AB, HR/AB ratios are important. McGwire was more dominant.

Canseco played a much more physically-demanding position than McGwire. As such, he was constantly hurt and missed a lot of games in his career. McGwire, on the other hand, played first base.

Adamsince1981 · Jan 12, 2010

The ops numbers translate into overall production...McGwire with the upper-hand.

But thanks for the post, I had no idea how close their numbers were.

Big Mac McGwire · Jan 12, 2010

my 2 cents. Hall of Fame's standards are different now. With all the players from the 90's becoming eligable. Fred McGriff for a period of time was more consistent then Gary Sheffield. But because Shef broke 500, and he was linked to PED's, but remove that, is Shef a HOF'r because he hit 500 HR"s? He is a perfect case of someone reaching the number that was NEVER a Hall of Fame type player. Neither McGwire of Canseco are HOF'rs. Same can be said with Sheffield. 500 HR's is not a automatic anymore.

HoustonTeams4Me · Jan 12, 2010

Adamsince1981 said:
The ops numbers translate into overall production...McGwire with the upper-hand.

But thanks for the post, I had no idea how close their numbers were.

Exactly, I laughed when I first read the comparison in the title (little did I know of how close Canseco truly is in terms of overall statistic's)!

Thanks for the info, just goes to show you learn something new everyday!
Take care, Dave.

fengzhang · Jan 12, 2010

Crash Davis said:
fengzhang said:

Not exactly. Yes, their totals are similar. But their averages are not. McGwire's slugging percentage, on base percentage, and HR/AB ratio are much much higher than Canseco. I'm a huge fan of looking at rates rather than totals so for me things like OPS or RBI/AB, HR/AB ratios are important. McGwire was more dominant.

Click to expand...

Canseco played a much more physically-demanding position than McGwire. As such, he was constantly hurt and missed a lot of games in his career. McGwire, on the other hand, played first base.

Both first base and outfield are power positions. Therefore, it's not unfair to compare the offensive production of an outfielder to a third baseman or a first baseman. Let's face it: you run a couple of times and make a few throws a game. Outfielder is not very physically demanding. Neither position compares to 2nd base or catcher.

The argument about missing a lot of games just doesn't work because McGwire had fewer total at-bats in his career than Canseco. When evaluating players, there are two primary approaches: longevity and dominance. Longevity is roughly estimated by totals (the longer a player plays, the higher his totals). Dominance is roughly estimated by averages, which are independent of how long a player plays (and in fact, you can argue that the longer someone plays, the lower their averages will become as they age). McGwire and Conseco had roughly the same longevity but McGwire was far far more dominant. How much more dominant:

McGwire for every 535 at-bats averaged 50 HR's, 122 RBI, and 101 runs. Canseco for every 698 at-bats averaged 40 HR's, 121 RBI, and 102 runs. That is a huge huge difference. Same career totals with drastically different averages means that McGwire was substantially better.

Lars · Jan 12, 2010

If he wasn't a ****** and scumbag, Canseco should be considered a borderline HOFer - he was the better all-around ballplayer than McGwire ever was, steroids or not.

However he made his bed and now he has to lay on it. Canseco didn't like how he was being treated and came out about his use of steroids and PEDS as well as naming other players.

If the Steroid Era didn't come about and all fans heard about Canseco was some writer in 1988 chirping about Canseco's alleged steroid use, he'd probably be in the HOF like Andre Dawson is [with Canseco's speed/power combination].

McGwire would never have put up the big home run numbers, if he hadn't used PEDs. He'd hit 49 home runs in 1987, but was basically done after the 1993 or 1994 season.

McGwire claims steroids helped him get back on the field - so in his own words, he is implying he wouldn't have been able to play otherwise [and put up the numbers he did].

G $MONEY$ · Jan 12, 2010

Big Mac McGwire said:
is Shef a HOF'r because he hit 500 HR"s? He is a perfect case of someone reaching the number that was NEVER a Hall of Fame type player.

Are you serious? Sheff was one of the best players of his generation. He was the only player in the last 20-30 years who seriously contended for the triple crown. If Sheff didn't have the PEDs hanging over his head, hes a first ballot HOFer.

joey12508 · Jan 12, 2010

havent seen this for a while.

http://www.beaned.com/videoshow.php?id=998

Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Mark McGwire vs. Jose Canseco

Crash Davis

New member

fengzhang

New member

zookerman182

New member

Crash Davis

New member

Adamsince1981

New member

Big Mac McGwire

New member

HoustonTeams4Me

New member

fengzhang

New member

Lars

Active member

G $MONEY$

New member

joey12508

Well-known member

Similar threads

Members online

Latest posts