Table of Contents
In the rich tapestry of the American Baseball League’s history, myriad names have left their indelible marks. Among these, George Brett and Mike Schmidt are comfortably nestled within the pantheon of third baseman legends.
However, this article aims to elucidate five reasons why the former might be considered superior to the latter.
George Brett
Firstly, considering the raw statistical prominence, George Brett of the Kansas City Royals appears to have the upper hand.
Brett’s lifetime batting average towers at .305, something few players have achieved historically, compared to Schmidt’s .267.
This batting prowess extends to more than just average; Brett amassed 3,154 hits in his career, fitting into the elite group of players with over 3,000 hits— a distinction befitting his skill and persistence— a benchmark that Schmidt, with 2,234 hits, struggled to attain.
Secondly, Brett distinguishes himself through his performance versatility. While third base was his repute, he showed comparable competence at first base and as a designated hitter, demonstrating his adaptability.
On the other hand, Schmidt was known solely as a third baseman, thus demonstrating less versatility on the field.
The third consideration lies in the realm of valuable awards and recognition. Brett was a thirteen-time All-Star, one-time MVP, and one-time Gold Glove winner, reflecting his broad recognition and respect among his peers.
Comparatively, Schmidt, despite being an impressive twelve-time All-Star, three-time MVP, and ten-time Gold Glove winner, never achieved the status of a batting champion.
Brett shone in this department, earning three batting titles, demonstrating an unusual skill for a power-hitting third baseman that Schmidt could not replicate.
Fourth, the intrinsic sportsmanship and leadership of the players is another key differential. Brett is famed for his sportive spirit, positioning himself as a team player and leading through example. His charming personality both on and off the field earned him respect and adulation, a trait that amplified his prowess beyond statistics, fostering team camaraderie.
In contrast, Schmidt, despite comparable leadership on-field, struggled with a more aloof and less engaging demeanor, lessening his influence as a team player.
Clutch!
Lastly, the performance of each player under pressure offers important insight. Looking at World Series metrics, Brett’s numbers prove superior: a .373 batting average with 8 RBIs and 10 hits in two series.
Schmidt, admittedly playing in one more series, hit a meager .220 with 9 RBIs and 9 total hits. Team success under high-pressure situations arguably reflects the true performance of a player, and Brett’s ability to perform at his best, when it mattered the most, exemplifies the clutch quality that defines a player’s greatness.
My Take ake
Appreciating the value of each player is not to diminish their collective contributions, as they are undoubtedly legends within their own right.
However, for the reasons stated— superior batting average and hit tally, wider versatility, more well-rounded recognition, better sportsmanship, and superior performance under pressure— the argument for George Brett being five times better than third baseman Mike Schmidt of the Philadelphia Phillies seems to hold substantial validity.
Certainly, such comparison invites passionate debate underlining the subjectivity inherent in sports analysis, leaving a final verdict elusive. Ultimately, both Brett and Schmidt are legends in the hearts of baseball fans and it would be unjust to mitigate one’s accomplishment to elevate the other. It is essential to understand that this comparison is not aimed at discrediting or downplaying the intensity, skill, and dedication of either player.
Rather, it shines a spotlight on the magnificence of Brett’s career, elucidating why he maintains a slight edge over Schmidt in the grand tableau of baseball glory. Not to mention Brett is the greatest Royals baseball player ever.
I like this web site it’s a master piece! Glad I detected this on google.
Euro travel guide
I was studying some of your posts on this internet site and I conceive this internet site is real informative!
Keep posting.?
Good post and straight to the point. I am not sure if this is in fact the best place to ask but
do you guys have any thoughts on where to get some professional writers?
Thank you :) Lista escape roomów
I made a mistake in my previous reply…
The Career WAR says it all — Schmidt (106.8) is far better than Brett (88.6).
Schmidt wins this portion of who is the better Third Baseman.
I’m sorry but I do not agree
Baseball Almanac calls Michael Jack Schmidt the greatest third baseman in history. I will take the judgement of the people on the staff of Baseball Almanc any day.
“On the other hand, Schmidt was known solely as a third baseman, thus demonstrating less versatility on the field.”
You only move a Third Baseman to First Base when they cannot handle the more demanding position! Brett was a DH for the last three seasons because he couldn’t even handle First Base! Schmidt stayed at Third Base because he could still handle Third Base! So, Schmidt wins this portion of who is the better Third Baseman!!!
There is more to hitting than just singles and average. It’s like saying Ted Williams is not the greatest hitter ever because he only got 2,654 hits. Schmidt got on base more despite not achieving 3,000+ hits. Schmidt hit over 500 Home Runs, 231 more than Brett! Brett has 1 more RBI than Schmidt despite playing 2 more seasons. Brett’s last three seasons was spent as a DH, by then his “versatility” was gone. So, Brett was able to get his 3,000+ hits because he was a DH (he had 447 hits as a DH). Brett only played 1,692 games at Third Base, whereas Schmidt played 2,212 games at Third Base. The Career WAR says it all — Schmidt (106.8) is far better than Brett (88.6).
Brett wins this portion of who is the better Third Baseman
I also laugh at the author when they write:
“thirteen-time All-Star, one-time MVP, and one-time Gold Glove winner, *reflecting his broad recognition and respect among his peers* ().”
Yet, they dismiss Schmidt:
“being an impressive twelve-time All-Star, three-time MVP, and ten-time Gold Glove winner”
because Schmidt :
“never achieved the status of a batting champion.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but:
☆ 3 MVPs is better than 1 MVP
☆ 10 GGs is way better than 1 GG
Schmidt wins this portion of the who’s the better Third Baseman argument!
The only place you can cite Brett as possibly being better than Schmidt is in post-season performance. Schmidt was up and down, But, he did perform outstanding in his one WS ring by hitting .381 and winning the WS MVP! calling it a tie here!
Baseball Almanac calls Michael Jack Schmidt the greatest third baseman in history. I will take the judgement of the people on the staff of Baseball Almanacany day.