most underrated players

prompted by a recent perusal of the statistics of active leaders in WAR, in which 19 and 20 stood out:

1. Alex Rodriguez (34) 101.50 R
2. Albert Pujols (30) 81.40 R
3. Chipper Jones (38) 80.00 B
4. Ken Griffey (40) 78.40 L
5. Derek Jeter (36) 70.00 R
6. Jim Thome (39) 69.00 L
7. Jim Edmonds (40) 68.00 L
8. Manny Ramirez (38) 67.30 R
Ivan Rodriguez (38) 67.30 R
10. Scott Rolen (35) 65.70 R
11. Andruw Jones (33) 59.10 R
12. Vladimir Guerrero (35) 58.40 R
13. Bobby Abreu (36) 57.70 L
14. Todd Helton (36) 57.50 L
15. Carlos Beltran (33) 55.40 B
16. Ichiro Suzuki (36) 53.10 L
17. Jason Giambi (39) 52.90 L
18. Johnny Damon (36) 48.10 L
19. Mike Cameron (37) 47.40 R
20. J.D. Drew (34) 46.80 L

also pondering a guy like Paul Konerko, who has been hiding away on the south side of chicago for a decade+ now and whose stats are definitely not on the same level w/other guys of his era, but who probably doesn't deserve to be forgotten come HOF voting time (by "not forgotten" i mean he deserves to stick around on the ballot for away before dropping away.)

favorite all time underrated/illest batting stance: mickey tettleton

Dang, Alex has a big lead on Pujols there.

if you consider that a-rod has had 15 full seasons at the end of '10 to pujols' 10 full seasons, it's a surmountable one imo

Is WAR a cumulative stat?

i think Griffey can come off that list - which would leave Posada at 20.

oops, he sure can

also, leaders in adjusted OPS+, which has a-rod at #4 just behind jim tho-

jim thome

50. Matt Stairs (42)

0_o

Well, if you take WAR as gospel, the two guys who jump out at me are Scott Rolen and Andruw Jones. Jones was a big deal five years ago, but you don't hear much about him anymore; Rolen bounces around from team to team. Yet they're right there with a bunch of Hall of Famers, and ahead of much more publicized players like Helton, Beltran, Damon, etc.

My favourite underrated player ever is Tom Henke. He was as good year-in and year-out as other relievers who got far more attention.

hey speaking of WAR, i read a blog entry today that noted that dante bichette's career WAR was a robust 2.0 because of his horrendous fielding.

there was a blog post on baseball reference a couple of weeks ago about how is WAR was, i believe, -0.2 in the year that he finished second in MVP voting, because of his horrendous fielding

we read the very same entry in that case. i love the comments on that w/people rhapsodizing about his epic offensive numbers that year. people still don't quite get the whole notion of how such offensive contributions can be wiped out in other areas of the same player's game.

billy wagner

almost 12k per 9 innings for his career and has a shot at getting his career WHIP below 1.00 by the end of his season (supposedly his final one)

i realize he's not really underrated by those who know what he's done but i feel like he doesn't get enough credit for his career sometimes.

special credit for:

Wagner was a natural-born right-handed person, but after breaking his right arm twice in accidents, he taught himself to throw baseballs using his left arm by throwing thousands of balls against the wall of a barn, and then fielding the rebounds, and repeating.

he's on both my fantasy teams for a reason!

I was just looking at Wagner's career stats yesterday and thinking, "Wow--he's a serious HOF candidate." One bad year (2000), and good-to-great-to-brilliant the whole rest of the way. The career batting average against him is 0.188. You never know where the HOF line is with relievers, but he's got to be third in line after Rivera and Hoffman, and you probably wouldn't have to work too hard to make a case that he's a better pitcher than Hoffman. (Only real negative is that he's been awful in postseason, which based on 11 innings is hardly a big deal.)

Wagner is 100+ IP short to qualify for this:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/whip_career.shtml

Look at Pedro!

All-time WHIP leader Addie Joss' K/9 was 3.6.

Wagner was a natural-born right-handed person, but after breaking his right arm twice in accidents, he taught himself to throw baseballs using his left arm by throwing thousands of balls against the wall of a barn, and then fielding the rebounds, and repeating.

Holy $***! I had no idea.

Wagner is definitely underrated -- I remember it being a really big deal when he imploded in 2000 and he never seemed to regain his aura after that (I mean, 124 K's in 74 IP in 1999? That's insane) even though he was still a great pitcher. A huge strike against his HOF case is that he never played for a "winner". Are there any closers in the HOF who weren't considered cornerstone players on WS-winning teams? (besides Bruce Sutter, who's mainly in because he got the credit for inventing a pitch)

He not only didn't win, but he closed for a bunch of teams who are perceived as underachievers and chokers -- the B&B Astros, mid-2000's Phillies, late-2000's Mets. And he was a disaster in the postseason when his teams did manage to make the playoffs.

And BTW, I think it's U&K to rely on postseason numbers to make a HOF case for a closer. A closer's job is a lot more important in the postseason (not just the importance of the games, but the fact that closers need to pitch a higher %age of their team's innings compared with the regular season).

most underrated '70s/80s player: Bobby Grich

Ken Singleton's also name gets mentioned for the same time period

I agree that a closer's role is magnified in the postseason (everyone's is, to a degree), but I just have a hard time giving great weight to an 11-inning sample in a guy's HOF resume. I made the same point with regards to Dawson on another thread. And with Wagner, it comes down to about half of those 11.2 innings; in 5.2 of them, he gave up 11 runs. So you're looking at 5.2 innings in a 16-year career.

Let me put it another way: I'm a lot more in favour of using a great post-season career to make a case for somebody (again, based on a decent sample) than I am the reverse.

Well, if you take WAR as gospel, the two guys who jump out at me are Scott Rolen and Andruw Jones. Jones was a big deal five years ago, but you don't hear much about him anymore; Rolen bounces around from team to team. Yet they're right there with a bunch of Hall of Famers, and ahead of much more publicized players like Helton, Beltran, Damon, etc.

both these guys played all-time-great defense at their positions, especially jones, which is why their numbers are so high

Brian Roberts seemed hugely underrated for a long time

That's what happens when you're competing with David Eckstein!

In the age of WAR and VORP and all that stuff, I wonder if the whole idea of an underrated baseball player is becoming antiquated. I can't see players flying under the radar anymore to the degree they might have 30 years ago. I suppose "underpublicized" will always be a fact of life, depending upon where you play, but underrated, I'm not so sure.

I agree that a closer's role is magnified in the postseason (everyone's is, to a degree)

Not really though ... I think the average closer pitches about 5% of his team's innings in the regular season. In the playoffs it's 10-11%. No other type of player gets twice as much PT in the playoffs.

Let me put it another way: I'm a lot more in favour of using a great post-season career to make a case for somebody (again, based on a decent sample) than I am the reverse.

For the most part I agree, but the outcome of a season hinges a lot more on what the closer does. The team is hurt a lot more by a blown save than by a star hitter going 0-4. And your math on Wagner's career is seriously shady ... he was brutal in more than half of his postseason appearances, that's a huge failure rate for a closer. You can't just focus on the other appearances when he didn't suck, any more than you can say that, I don't know, if you eliminate Ryan Howard's strikeouts then he'd be a .420 hitter.

Well, we disagree. I don't think I'm misrepresenting his numbers, though. In 5.2 of his 11.1 postseason innings--exactly half--Wagner gave up 4 hits, 0 walks, 2 earned runs, struck out 8, saved 3, and had an E.R.A. of 3.18. Not spectactular, but pretty solid. In the other 5.2 innings, he was an absolute nightmare: 16 hits, 2 walks, 5 strikeouts, 11 earned runs, no saves, and an E.R.A. of 17.47. It's not an exact parallel, because there's no postseason in the education business, but when I retire in about 12 years, I hope I'm not judged by my five worst days as a teacher--I'd have been out of a job long ago.

In the age of WAR and VORP and all that stuff, I wonder if the whole idea of an underrated baseball player is becoming antiquated. I can't see players flying under the radar anymore to the degree they might have 30 years ago. I suppose "underpublicized" will always be a fact of life, depending upon where you play, but underrated, I'm not so sure.

in terms of quantified, context-neutral baseball value you might be right, but there's plenty of other ways to 'rate' a player imo

xpost it's not just his five worst days, it's *half* of his postseason record. You can't pick and choose the half that happens to support your case, the bad half counted just as much.

And ten appearances aren't a huge sample size, but it's spread over a number of years. He had a bad year every year!

Ciderpress: We're probably coming from the same place here. I'm not especially hung up on WAR/VORP; I'm a stats guy, but more traditional OBP/SA stuff. (Hah--now OBP and SA are "traditional.") And I hope you're right; not being able to argue about over/underrated players would be a big loss to what it means to be a fan. But I think it's much more unlikely that a Bobby Grich would happen today. Anyone who keeps reasonably well informed would know all about him; Neyer and Posnanski and Baseball Prospectus would make sure of that. More casual fans would miss him, so maybe you're right--maybe things haven't changed that much after all. (I've gotta be honest: I'm looking at Grich's lifetime stats, and Bill James and Morbius notwithstanding, I'm not clear on why Bobby Grich was so underrated. He was excellent in '79 and '81. The rest of time, agreeing that he drew a lot of walks for a second baseman, I'm not seeing what makes him so noteworthy--not as a hitter, anyway.)

NoTime: I've conceded that Wagner was brutal for half his postseason innings. No argument whatsoever. I just don't see that that's reason to keep him out of the Hall of Fame--not if you believe he deserves to be there based on his in-season play. (If you don't, then sure, the postseason becomes one more argument against him.) When Winfield was up for induction, I don't think the voters gave much weight to his postseason performance, which basically amounted to one huge hit in the '92 Series and not a whole lot else.

i don't see any reason to keep wagner out of the hall of fame based on 11 innings out of almost 900 pitched. whether his entire peformance record is good enough is a separate question, but that's the one that should be discussed.

Just to be totally honest, and argue against myself, one of the reasons Wagner's IP total is so low for the postseason is that half the time, he couldn't get anybody out. You've got to get some people out to pile up innings. Apparently, they just kept running guys up to the plate who'd hit safely.

First, I'll reiterate that Wagner probably doesn't have much chance of getting voted in because he didn't pitch for "winning" teams (fairly or unfairly). In the three-tiered playoff system, guys play a lot more postseason games than they used to, so postseason performance is going to figure more strongly into HOF voting (which to me seems fair). Also, nobody really has any idea what the HOF standard is for closers because their role is constantly changing. But it's safe to say that everyone from this era will measured against Rivera and Hoffman, and Wagner looks set to be the Tim Raines to their Rickey Henderson.

I also think that there will always be underrated players ... Neyer and Posnanski and BP are a really small piece of the pie. Chase Utley hit five homers in last year's WS and was STILL underrated -- everyone talked about ARod becoming a "true Yankee" and the "Yankee Four" and Pedro and by the last game, Matsui.

Cart way before horse: a Braves WS win this year would cinch Wagner for the HoF, y/n?

The fate of bordlerline cases like Wagner may be affected by how the whole steroids issue resolves itself with regards to the HOF. If, as seems to be the case right now, PED-associated players are locked out, then I think the Wagners and Damons and Smoltzes will inevitably benefit. Enough to push some of them over the line, I don't know.

not necessarily, at all

xp

Not necessarily, no. As a practical matter, though, I think that keeping PEDs out will do two things: one, it will free up space, and I think the voters will instinctively want to fill that space; and two, psychologically, "clean" players may start to be over-valued. You've indicated this yourself, right, in connection to the deification of Griffey?

Oops--you were responding to WmC!

can't wait until the 2012 HoF voting when the writers inevitably lock out the 2nd best hitter of all time and the 2nd best pitcher of all time by WAR

the upcoming ballots are pretty loaded though so unless they start letting in more than 2-3 guys a year i think a lot of the borderline cases are gonna slip away

for '13 you've got biggio, bonds, clemens, piazza, and sosa. two of them will get in right away, right? or maybe only one?

I think there'll be four tiers: 1) the Bonds/Clemens/A-Rod tier, where the writers (grudgingly) decide they were HOF-clear pre-PED and put them in; 2) the McGwire/Palmeiro/Ramirez tier, the guys who are punished; 3) the Bagwell/I-Rod/Thome tier, players who've never been named and who never failed a test but who seem suspicious anyway (this is a tier completely of my own making; I have doubts about all three)--not sure what happens with them; 4) everybody else.

i think Wagner's HOF case will be made in the coming years. if he can move up on the all time saves list (he's - um, 6th right now?) he could make it in as long as he stays productive for a few more years. the only person ahead of him still pitching well is Rivera (as Hoff seems to have lost it this year).

xpost

somebody wrote a column abt this today, will link later

back to the thread topic, i think the prototype 'underrated players' in terms of WAR are the guys who are consistently worth 3-5 WAR each year but aren't flashy enough to build a reputation as great players

david dejesus and nick markakis are the first two that come to mind

Holy cow--I need serious CliffsNotes there.

Watching the Dodgers series I definitely had the thought “whotf is this guy and why is he the best guy on the team?”

Then I googled Eric Soggard to check if they actually looked like each other or if they both just wore glasses. Turns out it was the second option

Anyone who plays in L.A.--especially in the middle of this dynasty--is always going to get a certain amount of attention, but Will Smith is definitely underrated. (Yes, it took his 3-HR game yesterday for me to post.) In six years, he's made one ASG (this year will probably be his second) and never received an MVP vote. Statistically:

-- a career OPS+ of 128; never under 115, 140 this year
-- 17.8 WAR in five-and-a-half seasons, COVID year included; 5.2/162 games

How are they a dynasty? They only have one short season WS and that was four years ago.

*ahem* 2017

I don't think WS titles are the only way to measure a dynasty; long-term success in general works for me. This is their 8th consecutive year of .600+ baseball (how many teams have ever done that?), 12th consecutive year of .550+, 14th consecutive year of .500+. Surely that's a dynasty.

When the World Series switched to Houston for Games 3, 4, and 5, top Dodgers brass met with the starting pitchers for those games: Yu Darvish, Alex Wood, and Clayton Kershaw. The Dodgers brain trust didn’t want to freak out their pitchers, but they delivered a message: we have suspicions that the Astros are up to something, so let’s use multiple signs even when no one is on base. Kershaw and Darvish both declined to heed that advice. The only pitcher who agreed to deviate was the least-renowned pitcher of the bunch, Wood. It just so happened that Wood fared the best: he didn’t allow the Astros a hit until the sixth inning of Game 4, which wound up a 6–2 Dodgers win, evening the series at two games apiece.

Wikipedia lists agreed baseball dynasties as winning multiple titles:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynasty_(sports)

I just don't agree. Dynasty can be a matter of degree. When I think of the '70s, I don't just think of the A's, Yankees, and Reds, who won seven of the decade's WS titles; there was also the Pirates, Orioles, Dodgers, Phillies, and Royals, they were all dynasties to a degree. What the Dodgers have done the last eight years, even though it's been almost entirely driven by spending, is remarkable I think.

Your favourite writer, Bill James, actually devised a system a few years ago for measuring dynasties. Tried to find it, but all I could get was a Reddit link, and I learned that I've been blocked by Reddit. Which is interesting, because I access Reddit about once every two years.

Apologies, mookieproof--the Pirates of course won two WS during the '70s. I should have said four teams were responsible for 9/10 WS wins (all but the Orioles in '70).

Fourth HR in a row for Smith.

I think you could use a few things to quantify the concept of underratedness. Two I mentioned above, the most obvious two: ASG appearances and MVP support. You could look at a large sample of fantasy leagues, see if a player consistently gets drafted lower than his value suggests he should. I don't know if it would work now, but there was a time when card values probably identified someone who was underrated; in the late '90s, when Craig Biggio was at his peak, I'm sure his cards would have been considerably cheaper than Juan Gonzalez cards. I don't know if salary would work. With some players there might be a strong correlation between being underrated and being underpaid, but maybe some players are underpaid just because they have lousy agents. (Also, hardly anybody's actually underpaid anymore--some players are just less overpaid than others.)

After retirement, HOF voting would be an important indicator: Lou Whittaker, Bobby Grich, Rick Reuschel, etc.

people are absolutely sleeping on the season jarren duran is having

More generally, I'd say his season points to a couple of other reasons players are underrated: 1) doing a number of things well instead of one thing noticably well (the Amos Otis Rule); 2) having a breakthrough season a few years into your career, past the age of 25. Big seasons by 22-year-olds get noticed--people (like me!) start thinking about the HOF; a 27-year-old having his first MVP-type season might get missed.

For whatever reason, Will wasn't held to be the primo game caller earlier in his dodger career. Kershaw starts would nearly always have Austin Barnes behind the plate (who I love, but he's has no bat). Whether this "subpar game caller" narrative was true or not, it's basically disappeared for Will in the past couple years and so he really has become a catcher with no downsides. Power, contact, plate discipline (Will and Muncy's ability to determine balls and strikes has me amazed), game calling, not "catcher-slow" on the bases, serviceable arm on the pick-offs. 10 year 140mil was money very well spent by the dodgers locking him up. He played with broken ribs for a couple months last year and still managed to pose the question whether he's the best catcher in baseball (no disrespect to Sean Murphy).

Not underrated in his day, but quite forgotten: Gil McDougald. Played 10 seasons, '51-60.

- WARs ranging from 2.5 (never lower) to 5.8; 4.9/162 games
- played 500 games each at second and third, another 300 at short
- ROY, five AS games, five seasons with MVP votes (highest finish 5th)
- Yankees won five WS, lost two

You hear about Mantle, Berra, Ford, Rizzuto, maybe Hank Bauer; McDougald, hardly ever.

Not underrated this year, but Max Fried is putting together some kind of a career under the radar. He's never really had a bad season, just an injury-shortened 2023. His career box reminds me of someone like Don Gullett or Andy Messersmith, great pitchers with impressive stats and shortened careers. Fried's career rate states are excellent across the board.

Thought this revive would be for Cal Raleigh, dominant season whether he’s behind or next to the plate.

Jeremy Peña. Didn't break in till he was 24, got a fair amount of attention his rookie year: GG, ALCS and World Series MVP. Not much since--he was good in both 2023 and 2024, playing 150+ games each season--having his best season yet in 2025, and now stands at 5.2 bWAR per 162 games.

Thought this revive would be for Cal Raleigh, dominant season whether he’s behind or next to the plate.

― imperial frfr (Steve Shasta), Monday, May 26, 2025 12:08 PM (six days ago)

Making the case for being far more valuable than Judge?

Looks like he has a definite shot at breaking the record for HR as a catcher. The year Perez hit 48, only 33 were as a catcher; the year Bench hit 45, 38 were while catching. Maybe that's the record, not sure. But so far, 20 of Raleigh's 22 have been hit while catching.

More valuable than Judge still seems like a reach...Judge is leading the league (and usually MLB) in almost every offensive category that matters, and he's ahead of Raleigh in bWAR 4.7 to 3.3. Not that that's gospel, and Raleigh will have the advantage of writers preferring to award someone new who's got a great story (cf. all the MVPs Bonds, Mays, Trout, etc. didn't win but probably deserved).

Mariners are in 1st largely due to Cal's game-calling and offensive production. IMHO he is responsible for a larger share of the Mariners' success than Judge is to the Yanks.

As someone who's often made old-school arguments when it comes to awards, I don't think that's an unreasonable case to make, even if, at the moment, I would vote for Judge.

Grant Brisbee agrees with me:

Make him an All-Star: SS Jeremy Peña

Peña had one of the most conspicuous beginnings to a big-league career in the past decade, if not in baseball history. He took over for a franchise icon and clubhouse leader at one of the most important positions in the sport, and all he did was immediately win a Gold Glove and a World Series MVP. Nobody expected him to do that every year, but the counterpoint is that he’d never not done it. Maybe he’d just keep getting better.

Instead, he had a couple aggressively good-not-great seasons, where he accumulated the WAR totals of a perennial All-Star without the acclaim or flashy numbers. The flashy numbers are here now. It’s time to retroactively reimburse him some of the acclaim. He’s been that guy the whole time. — Brisbee

Oh you mean former ILB poster Grant Bisbee? lol, let's see if we can get him back, and I can press him on why Cal should win ALMVP.

when did you come to ILX my darling Clementineza?

2010...Had no idea. Okay, I'm leaving today and taking my wisdom over to The Athletic.

The 9th thread on I Love Baseball pointed to his then-active blog in the OP, and he would chat with me & Leee:

Best Blogs?

Nice...so which poster is Grant? Not gygax!, right? (I also noticed Gerard Cosloy in that thread.) I mentioned that my friend Steven Rubio, who recently passed, was also a Prospectus contributor and Giants fan; there may be some overlap there.

Nice...so which poster is Grant?

Mymbad I should have mentioned his username was... "Grant".

He must have focus-grouped that...will search for some posts.

Skimmed the thread quickly, so I missed his two comments...Looks like they were the only two ILX comments he ever posted.

iirc he posted around here a little bit, but then his blog got picked up by some wider mlb-focused blog syndicate where he became the "official" Giants blogger and then i lost track of him. good to hear he's still writing.

I've already mentioned Will Smith on this thread, but in a year where he's leading the NL in BA, OBP, and OPS (and slugging over .550), he's being overshadowed by another catcher.

There is no planet in our known universe where a Dodgers player would be considered underrated lmao

for REAL underrated players, go here:

James Wood aims good

You think Will Smith gets lots of attention? I mean, James Wood is great, but he's having his first big season--it does take the world more than a season to catch up to you. Will Smith has been doing this for seven years, the catcher on a dynastic team, 5.3 WAR per 162 games, and he has yet to earn a single MVP vote.

Honestly, that's an absurd comparison.

Seems to me that playing on a team with Shohei Ohtani and Mookie Betts increases the likelihood that you're going to get overlooked.

At the very least and I'm being extremely generous, Smith is properly rated with 3.5M* all-star votes and counting...?

*.5M more votes than Cal who is having the greatest season a catcher has ever had fwiw.

Mookie is mid AF... fWAR has his offense as below replacement level, file in the extremely overrated but a Dodger so he gets instant recognition. Also a right-wing sympathizer.

ERA by Catcher (active C fielding, non-DH role):

Cal Raleigh: 4.05 ERA
Will Smith: 4.11 ERA

Imagine catching for a pitching roster making $139M* a year (that is only the pitchers!) and not being able to hold down a sub-4.00 ERA (2025 league average is 4.00). And catching in a pitcher's park!

*That pitching payroll would amount to #10 in all total (hitters + pitchers) MLB team payrolls.

Raleigh's great, but I doubt very much he's having the greatest offensive season ever by a catcher, not hitting .268. My guess would be that belongs to Piazza or Mauer. But again--overratedness is a concept that builds over time. Raleigh (who I've been reading about every day for the past two weeks, by the way; deservedly, but what he's doing is hardly escaping notice) is having his first great season, ditto James Wood. I use this thread to talk about players who are a little farther along on a timeline.

I think my biggest objection here is your idea that playing in L.A. precludes being underrated. Smith is playing alongside four guaranteed HOF'ers--they take up most all of the oxygen in the room. The Dodgers of the '70s drew three million a year (or close) and appeared in two WS; Reggie Smith, Ron Cey, and Jimmy Wynn were all underrated I'd say, with Garvey getting far more attention.

And catching in a pitcher's park!

Raleigh’s framing is still good this year, 87th percentile but his blocking has fallen off but again partway through the season. Could be playing through something, could be fatigue due to workload - the backup is Mitch Garver, who isn’t great.

Actually Savant tells me his blocking was shit in 2024 too and he won the AL Platinum Glove last year, so. Going by this year’s direction of travel Alejandro Kirk is going to walk it. (He can’t run with those little legs.)

If I sound like I'm not amazed by Raleigh's year, I am. My original post--Will Smith is underrated--had nothing to do with Cal Raleigh or James Wood or anybody except Will Smith. It seemed like a very uncontroversial statement.

Ok, let me phrase it in another way: Will Smith is not underrated.

Only Shohei Ohtani received more all-star votes in the NL (3.9M vs 3.5M votes).

If that is your idea of underrated, I don't think I can help you with this on either a practical nor a conceptual level any longer.

Why are you giving more weight to all-star voting--which historically has been subject to all sorts of mitigating whims (and it's not like an internet-based activity would produce spurious results)--than to MVP voting? Again: 5+ WAR per 162 games, catcher for a team that has won two WS and 100+ games a year, 0 MVP votes. If that isn't your idea of underrated...well, I'll leave the condescension to you.

oh right, the BBWAA certainly are immune to any mitigating whims whatsoever!

Such as never giving a vote to Will Smith--you're right.