By statistics, Hornsby is the greatest right-handed batter of all time. Many baseball fans are unaware of his records. I am only because my father, Homer Peel (St. Louis Cardinals, Philadelphia Phillies and NY Giants (1933 World Series champions) replaced Hornsby as the manager of the Oklahoma City Indians of the Texas League in 1941.
@skippeel4219 Stats are what everyone likes, so why is it even a question, Hornsby is the best right handed batter all-time. people love to debate the 10 best hitters all- time, well it's real simple. the top ten career averages are the best hitters all-time, and that makes Hornsby 2nd best life time. hagd👍
Yes. Rogers Hornsby was the greatest right handed hitter of all time -- the numbers prove it. . Ty Cobb won the triple crown In the American league before Rogers Hornsby.... Rogers Hornsby is the 1st player to lead the major leagues with the Triple crown.
I feel he doesn’t get the recognition he deserves because of his temperament. His 1920-1925 seasons are the best ever. Definitely the best right handed hitter in history.
The 46.3% was Hornsby's WINNING percentage as a manager, not his losing percentage. His losing percentage was 100% - 46.3% = 53.7%. A little 3rd grade math there.
@@deepcosmiclove ♥️ both baseball players battle of the baseball hitter titans bob feller baseball 98mph plus faster than speeding bullet fastball ; riger hoersby baseball hitter scientist
Bill, Jr. titled one of his books "Veeck As In Wreck." The bigger issue is that there is nothing unusual about moving Hornsby from shortstop to second base. With the exception of catcher, it is safe to assume that every MLB player who throws righthanded played shortstop at some point in their career.
If you're going to do these old-time baseball videos, you are going to come across the name of Bill Veeck from time to time. You should know that it's pronounced like VEK, not VEEK.
Ty Cobb won the triple crown in 1909. Although RBI didn't become an official stat until 1920, so perhaps that is why this video says Hornsby was the first. But I don't agree.
@@soyouthinkyouknowbaseball I don't know if this means anything or not but just for the fun of it I try to compare players from different eras but I try to take into account how players from different eras might stack up had they played in different times. Take two players, let's say Hornsby and player X. Both right handed, both 2nd basemen, both with power and both not liked in the clubhouse. Then I take what I call contact average: AB's - strikeouts to get the average. Hornsby,: per 162 games 586 AB's, 210 hits, 49 K's Strikeout percentage 8%. Contact average 537 AB's, 210 hits .391 Player B 599 AB's, 173 hits, 107 K's Strikeout percentage 18% Contact average 492 AB's 173 hits .351 Now I'm going to have them trade places with each keeping their contact average but because of the different eras, I'll switch the strikeout percentage between them. Hornsby: now has 105 strikeouts and makes contact 481 AB's 188 hits plus the 105 K's he now has and average of .321 586 AB 188 hits Player B: now has 48 strikeouts with contact 551 times for 193 hits in 599 AB's or an average of .322. Different eras but almost the same guy if this method has even the slightest chance of being close? Who was player B? The unforgettable Jeff Kent.
I'll take Hank Aaron. He had a much longer career as an effective hitter and hit for more power, more total bases, more runs, more RBI, and his lifetime average was a respectable .305 compared to Hornsby's .358. Aaron had almost 500 more extra-base hits than Hornsby and almost 2,000 more total bases. Hornsby had an amazing 4-year stretch, but Aaron had by far the greater career.
Aaron is in my top favorite players. Love the guy but he did play way more like you said. It took around 4000 more at bats then Ruth to get only 41 more home runs than Ruth. Also his other records were a result of having more at bats than anybody but Pete Rose I think. Hornsby went into mainly managing & playing only sometimes. If he didn't do that he would have played more into the 1930's. Again Hank was awesome & consistent but you gotta take that longevity into account with the records.
@@Diggerdog2nd The topic is the greatest right-handed hitter of all time, so Ruth isn't relevant. Hornsby had problems with his legs and feet from his early 30s on. He also alienated himself from his teams and owners which caused him to bounce from team to team.
How many more years did he play? Babe Ruth hit most of his home runs in a 12 year span as he played as a pitcher in the dead ball era. Aaron played for 24 years, was never in the military, Like Williams and DiMaggio, you are comparing apples to oranges. Take Aaron's best 15 years and compare that to Williams, Ruth, or Hornsby.
@@ggeorge4144 I wasn't comparing him to Ruth, Williams, or DiMaggio. And longevity counts for something, especially if you play at a high level for most of those years. As for their 15 best years, Hornsby's stats really trail off when you get past 10 years. Aaron's 15th-best year in hits was 168. Hornsby's was 117. Aaron's 15th-best year in doubles was 26. Hornsby's was 15. Aaron's 15th-best year in HRs was 32. Hornsby's was 5. Aaron's 15th-best year in RBIs was 115. Hornsby's was 60. Aaron's 15th-best year in Runs was 100. Hornsby's was 51. Aaron's 15th-best year in total bases was 302. Hornsby's was 173.
Because he batted right-handed, Hornsby is the greatest hitter of all time. Period. (Ruth, Cobb, Gehrig, Williams- all lefties.) And anyway, his 10-year stretch for the entirety of the 1920's is unparalleled.
@@wmg5852 Nobody is saying he's anything other than an all-time great. We are pointing out how ridiculous the idea is that any great hitter who was a lefty is automatically disqualified because of which side of the plate they stand on.
Hornsby and Ted Williams are the only ones to win the Triple Crown twice . Rogers Hornsby did it in 1922 and 1925 . Williams accomplished it in 1942 and 1947 . No doubt being a great hitter Ty Cobb must have accomplished it at least once in his career .
Were the hitters of yesteryear really that much better than those of the modern age? If so, why? Hitting is about seeing the ball, hitting the ball, and getting on base safely. Did the old players just have better hand-eye coordination? Did day-games only help the batters. Were pitching mound and strike zone changes a factor? What about a pitcher's arsenal of pitches? What about the lack of relief pitching? What about the quality of fielding equipment and baseball bats? Fielding equipment has evolved significantly over time, and should make it tougher on hitters. Did the old-timers juice their bats? What about paying field conditions. Most playing fields today are immaculate, and I doubt if they were that well-kept in the old days, which would have made it tougher on fielders. What about segregation? Would the inclusion of a few great black pitchers have made it tougher on hitters? I think some or all of the above could have had impact on the hitter stats of yesteryear. To what extent; I don't know, but I generally discount some of the old-time records due to these considerations. And that's not to diminish the abilities or accomplishments of players like Hornsby, Ruth, Ott, Cobb, etc., who certainly were the elite players of their time. But of all time? Maybe, but I'm not so sure.
No. One must consider context. Considering the league, stadium, and era they played, I'd take Honus Wagner and Josh Gibson over Hornsby every time. Both better hitters and FAR better defensive and overall players!!
There is absolutely no way you can say any player who played in any segregated league was the GOAT in any regard. Hank Aaron is the greatest right handed hitter ever.
No one from that time period can be called "The Greatest" anything as they did not have to face Black players. Think Hornsby could have hit Satchel Paige?
Since, integration, the best pitchers have generally been white. Obviously there were great black and latino pitchers, but by and large they have been white. No reason to think any different before integration, so Hornsby probably could have hit Satchel Paige, even with him being a great black pitcher.
Roger hornby could have hit any pitcher modern day,,, paul skenes,ahohei ohtanu, young lefty randy johnson etc etc roger hornby would have them roger hornby batting practice pitcher
Foxx should definitely be in consideration for the greatest right handed hitter of all time. For me, however, it's difficult to ignore Hornsby's 1920 to 1925 stretch. So it's Hornsby for me, but it is easy to make an argument for Foxx. And probably Wagner.
"Incredibly, he began his career as a shortstop" (0:54) What's so incredible about that? Many future major leaguers start out as shortstops at the lower levels, because they are typically the best athlete on the team. Mickey Mantle is an example of this. Nothing incredible about it.
That is correct. In Hornsby's case it's just that people consider him probably the greatest second baseman ever that it's difficult to think of him playing any other position.
YES HE IS THE GREATEST RIGHT HAND HITTER OF A TIME
Of a time; yes. Of that time.
By statistics, Hornsby is the greatest right-handed batter of all time. Many baseball fans are unaware of his records. I am only because my father, Homer Peel (St. Louis Cardinals, Philadelphia Phillies and NY Giants (1933 World Series champions) replaced Hornsby as the manager of the Oklahoma City Indians of the Texas League in 1941.
@skippeel4219 Stats are what everyone likes, so why is it even a question, Hornsby is the best right handed batter all-time.
people love to debate the 10 best hitters all- time, well it's real simple. the top ten career averages are the best hitters all-time, and that makes Hornsby 2nd best life time. hagd👍
.401 batting average, 152 RBI’s, 42 home runs. His 1922 season is very impressive.⚾️
He should have 10 MVPs
Roger hornsby was a baseball hitting scientist
He had quite a stretch of dominance! I like that he was a Cub for small time!
Yes. Rogers Hornsby was the greatest right handed hitter of all time -- the numbers prove it. . Ty Cobb won the triple crown In the American league before Rogers Hornsby.... Rogers Hornsby is the 1st player to lead the major leagues with the Triple crown.
Yes
I feel he doesn’t get the recognition he deserves because of his temperament. His 1920-1925 seasons are the best ever. Definitely the best right handed hitter in history.
The 46.3% was Hornsby's WINNING percentage as a manager, not his losing percentage. His losing percentage was 100% - 46.3% = 53.7%. A little 3rd grade math there.
Ted Williams said he might be the greatest hitter period. It's hard to argue.
as Mr. Veek said, "Veek as in wreak."
His whole damn life was baseball. And, yes The Raja was the best.
Roger hornsby was a baseball hitting scientist
Bob Feller faced Hornsby a few times in 1937. He said he was one of the toughest hitters he ever faced.
Hornsby was on another level as a hitter. Probably the greatest right handed hitter of all time.
Bob fellers 98mph plus bullet speed fastball& great curve
@@Loydstardeli2017 Hornsby was 41 years old and in his 23rd season. Feller was a rookie.
@@deepcosmiclove ♥️ both baseball players battle of the baseball hitter titans bob feller baseball 98mph plus faster than speeding bullet fastball ; riger hoersby baseball hitter scientist
He is just about the first modern player: Great average and great power, esp. in NL at the time.
He averaged.400 over a 5 year period, including .424 one year. Amazing
Bill, Jr. titled one of his books "Veeck As In Wreck." The bigger issue is that there is nothing unusual about moving Hornsby from shortstop to second base. With the exception of catcher, it is safe to assume that every MLB player who throws righthanded played shortstop at some point in their career.
When discussing great right-handed hitters we must not forget DiMaggio.
Jimmy Foxx would be after Hornsby then Joe D. His career too short.
If you're going to do these old-time baseball videos, you are going to come across the name of Bill Veeck from time to time. You should know that it's pronounced like VEK, not VEEK.
Would love to see a feature on Wally Pipp. Maybe Helene Britton as well.
Yes, am planning a video on Pipp. He drove in over 1,000 runs and had a decent career.
It still is second only to Ty Cobb's. Hornsby is the greates second baseman and right hand hitter ever.
I think that only Aaron and Mays are comparable.
I f it weren't for the AI voice...
The name's "Veeck, as in wreck."
Yes indeed ,358 lifetime Ave. Averaged .400 over a 5 year period
When did the Cardinals begin the "two birds on a bat" uniform logo?
He had a high of .424 and a .507 obp.
can you name anyone who's better? didnt think so.😊
In context, both Honus Wagner and Josh Gibson.
Bob feller would have strike out josh gibson on three pitches & put a hole in josh gibson bat
Ty Cobb won the triple crown in 1909. Although RBI didn't become an official stat until 1920, so perhaps that is why this video says Hornsby was the first. But I don't agree.
Good catch. Ty Cobb DET .377, 9 HR, 107 RBI
Along with:
1912 NL Heinie Zimmerman CHC .372, 14 HR, 104 RBI
1901 AL Nap Lajoie PHA .426, 14 HR, 125 RBI
1887 AA Tip O'Neill STL .435, 14 HR, 123 RBI
1878 NL Paul Hines PRO .358, 4 HR, 50 RBI
Yes, I forgot about both Cobb and Lajoie. Caught this during editing, but somehow forgot to change it. Thanks for pointing this out.
@@soyouthinkyouknowbaseball
I don't know if this means anything or not but just for the fun of it I try to compare players from different eras but I try to take into account how players from different eras might stack up had they played in different times.
Take two players, let's say Hornsby and player X. Both right handed, both 2nd basemen, both with power and both not liked in the clubhouse.
Then I take what I call contact average:
AB's - strikeouts to get the average.
Hornsby,: per 162 games 586 AB's, 210 hits, 49 K's Strikeout percentage 8%. Contact average 537 AB's, 210 hits .391
Player B 599 AB's, 173 hits, 107 K's Strikeout percentage 18% Contact average 492 AB's 173 hits .351
Now I'm going to have them trade places with each keeping their contact average but because of the different eras, I'll switch the strikeout percentage between them.
Hornsby: now has 105 strikeouts and makes contact 481 AB's 188 hits plus the 105 K's he now has and average of .321 586 AB 188 hits
Player B: now has 48 strikeouts with contact 551 times for 193 hits in 599 AB's or an average of .322.
Different eras but almost the same guy if this method has even the slightest chance of being close?
Who was player B?
The unforgettable Jeff Kent.
I'll take Hank Aaron. He had a much longer career as an effective hitter and hit for more power, more total bases, more runs, more RBI, and his lifetime average was a respectable .305 compared to Hornsby's .358. Aaron had almost 500 more extra-base hits than Hornsby and almost 2,000 more total bases. Hornsby had an amazing 4-year stretch, but Aaron had by far the greater career.
I agree with you. Aaron or Jimmy Foxx.
Aaron is in my top favorite players. Love the guy but he did play way more like you said. It took around 4000 more at bats then Ruth to get only 41 more home runs than Ruth. Also his other records were a result of having more at bats than anybody but Pete Rose I think. Hornsby went into mainly managing & playing only sometimes. If he didn't do that he would have played more into the 1930's. Again Hank was awesome & consistent but you gotta take that longevity into account with the records.
@@Diggerdog2nd The topic is the greatest right-handed hitter of all time, so Ruth isn't relevant. Hornsby had problems with his legs and feet from his early 30s on. He also alienated himself from his teams and owners which caused him to bounce from team to team.
How many more years did he play? Babe Ruth hit most of his home runs in a 12 year span as he played as a pitcher in the dead ball era. Aaron played for 24 years, was never in the military, Like Williams and DiMaggio, you are comparing apples to oranges. Take Aaron's best 15 years and compare that to Williams, Ruth, or Hornsby.
@@ggeorge4144 I wasn't comparing him to Ruth, Williams, or DiMaggio. And longevity counts for something, especially if you play at a high level for most of those years. As for their 15 best years, Hornsby's stats really trail off when you get past 10 years. Aaron's 15th-best year in hits was 168. Hornsby's was 117.
Aaron's 15th-best year in doubles was 26. Hornsby's was 15.
Aaron's 15th-best year in HRs was 32. Hornsby's was 5.
Aaron's 15th-best year in RBIs was 115. Hornsby's was 60.
Aaron's 15th-best year in Runs was 100. Hornsby's was 51.
Aaron's 15th-best year in total bases was 302. Hornsby's was 173.
Oh & Ty Cobb was the first to win the triple crown in 1909.In the modern era anyways I'm pretty sure. Hornsby would have been second.
Yes, that is correct. Thanks for pointing this out. I caught this error when editing but somehow forgot to correct it.
He had a 5 year stretch where he AVERAGED over .400. He was boring and miserable, however, that's why he doesn't get the acclaim he deserves.
Did I cry? No!
Because he batted right-handed, Hornsby is the greatest hitter of all time. Period. (Ruth, Cobb, Gehrig, Williams- all lefties.) And anyway, his 10-year stretch for the entirety of the 1920's is unparalleled.
You can't let lefties get this _one_ thing?
@@wvu05 LOL
Bullshit.
1920-1929 (10 years) 5451AB - 2085H BA -.3825.
1921-1925 (5 years) 2679AB - 1078H BA- .4024
@@wmg5852 Nobody is saying he's anything other than an all-time great. We are pointing out how ridiculous the idea is that any great hitter who was a lefty is automatically disqualified because of which side of the plate they stand on.
Veeck’s name is pronounced as “Veeck as in Wreck”…the title of one of his autobiographies.
Ty Cobb won the triple crown. Before Hornsby.
Hornsby and Ted Williams are the only ones to win the Triple Crown twice . Rogers Hornsby did it in 1922 and 1925 . Williams accomplished it in 1942 and 1947 . No doubt being a great hitter Ty Cobb must have accomplished it at least once in his career .
@@robertlosasso4222 He did in 1909. Fun fact: all nine of his home runs that year were inside the park.
Maybe yes, however, a "toxic" teammate.
“Veeck” as in “wreck”.
Were the hitters of yesteryear really that much better than those of the modern age? If so, why? Hitting is about seeing the ball, hitting the ball, and getting on base safely.
Did the old players just have better hand-eye coordination? Did day-games only help the batters.
Were pitching mound and strike zone changes a factor? What about a pitcher's arsenal of pitches?
What about the lack of relief pitching?
What about the quality of fielding equipment and baseball bats? Fielding equipment has evolved significantly over time, and should make it tougher on hitters. Did the old-timers juice their bats?
What about paying field conditions. Most playing fields today are immaculate, and I doubt if they were that well-kept in the old days, which would have made it tougher on fielders.
What about segregation? Would the inclusion of a few great black pitchers have made it tougher on hitters?
I think some or all of the above could have had impact on the hitter stats of yesteryear. To what extent; I don't know, but I generally discount some of the old-time records due to these considerations. And that's not to diminish the abilities or accomplishments of players like Hornsby, Ruth, Ott, Cobb, etc., who certainly were the elite players of their time. But of all time? Maybe, but I'm not so sure.
No. One must consider context. Considering the league, stadium, and era they played, I'd take Honus Wagner and Josh Gibson over Hornsby every time. Both better hitters and FAR better defensive and overall players!!
He was not the first player to win the triple crown, check the stats
There is absolutely no way you can say any player who played in any segregated league was the GOAT in any regard. Hank Aaron is the greatest right handed hitter ever.
During his era he was, but not all time
It's 'always' during an era. There's no such thing as 'all time.' That holds for everyone
No one from that time period can be called "The Greatest" anything as they did not have to face Black players. Think Hornsby could have hit Satchel Paige?
And Hispanic players.
@@bigredracingdog466 And Japanese players.
Since, integration, the best pitchers have generally been white. Obviously there were great black and latino pitchers, but by and large they have been white. No reason to think any different before integration, so Hornsby probably could have hit Satchel Paige, even with him being a great black pitcher.
Roger hornby could have hit any pitcher modern day,,, paul skenes,ahohei ohtanu, young lefty randy johnson etc etc roger hornby would have them roger hornby batting practice pitcher
Roger hornby would have hit satchel paige like a batting practice pitcher
What about XX Jimmy Foxx
Foxx should definitely be in consideration for the greatest right handed hitter of all time. For me, however, it's difficult to ignore Hornsby's 1920 to 1925 stretch. So it's Hornsby for me, but it is easy to make an argument for Foxx. And probably Wagner.
"Incredibly, he began his career as a shortstop" (0:54)
What's so incredible about that? Many future major leaguers start out as shortstops at the lower levels, because they are typically the best athlete on the team. Mickey Mantle is an example of this. Nothing incredible about it.
That is correct. In Hornsby's case it's just that people consider him probably the greatest second baseman ever that it's difficult to think of him playing any other position.
Please get a Human narrator.
Overrated
You are crazy ;;