Historical Matchups: Cal Ripken vs. Ernie Banks

[oakland2001]

Erine Banks:

SS-1B/1954-1971
.274 BA
512 HR
1,636 RBI
Led NL in HR 1958, 60
Led NL in RBI 1958-59
Gold Glove in 1960
NL MVP in 1958-59
Hall of Fame 1977

Chicago might be Michael Jordan's town now, but from 1953 through 1971, Ernie Banks -- affectionately dubbed 'Mr. Cub' -- was Chicago. Cubs fans, not having much else to cheer about, rallied behind their power-hitting shortstop. Like Hank Aaron, Banks was deceptively slim for a power hitter but lethal with the bat. In 1958, he became the first shortstop ever to slug 40 homers in a season -- a feat he accomplished twice more before he hung up his spikes. Banks was never lucky enough to play on a pennant winner, but he worked hard on the field and went about his business with a smile on his face and made sure he had time to fraternize with his adoring public.

http://www.pubdim.net/baseballlibrar...anks_Ernie.stm



Cal Ripken:

[quote]SS-3B/1981-
.278 BA
402 HR
1,571 RBI
Most consecutive games, all time
Gold Glove in 1991-92
AL MVP in 1983, 91
AL Rookie of the Year 1982

Forever enshrined in baseball history as the man who broke Lou Gehrig's unbreakable record of 2,130 consecutive games played, Cal Ripken is one of the greatest athletes to have ever put on a uniform. Originally drafted as a pitcher, Ripken has hit more home runs than any shortstop in history, owns the highest single-season fielding percentage for a shortstop, and at 6'4" is the tallest man ever to have played short. The first player to win the Rookie of the Year and Most Valuable Player Awards in consecutive seasons, Ripken has started in 16 consecutive All-Star Games. In 1999, at the of 39, he overcame two trips to the disabled list (remarkably, the first two of his career) and the death of his father to set career highs with a .340 batting average and .584 slugging percentage.

http://www.pubdim.net/baseballlibrar...ayers/2730.stm



Who is the better player?

[kl0pper]

Ripken, because he was so consistent throughout his career.

[Hotwheelz]

Id have to go with Ripken on that too. The numbers arent too far of, except for the homeruns, but Ripken was so darn consistent. The consecutive games streak doesnt hurt him too much either.

[TwinCubs]

Banks, i think.

[BigRedMachine]

Two stats were left out. Ripken played in almost 500 more games and had over 2000 more AB's.
Banks' stats are much more impressive when you factor these two in.

[knucklehead7]

Well, Ripken was a much better defensive player, and that has to be taken into consideration....I think Banks was a better power hitter, and probably better hitter all around, but Ripken is not that far off, and then you add that he was so much better defensively, plus he played more of his career at shortstop, a more valuable and harder position to play, I would go with Ripken...

Both of these guys were great ambassadors of the game...

[BigRedMachine]

Ripken was better defensively but he didn't even come close to Banks in the power department. Ripken only had one season where he hit more than 30 HRs. Banks had 5 seasons where he hit more than 40 and two others where he hit at least 30. I'd call it a push. Ripken gets the nod defensively and Banks gets the nod offensively.

[emath]

I have to agree with N7, and BigRedMachine. I like Banks offense, but Ripkens defense. If I had to choose, I'd go with Banks though. Strictly a Cubs thing.

[knucklehead7]

Power numbers definately go to banks, but I was saying they are not that far off in terms of other offensive numbers...I still give a slight edge to Ripken because he not only was a better defensive player, but he played shortstop so much longer than Banks...so not only was he better defensively, but he played a more valuable defensive postion for so long...no matter how Ripken was hitting he was valuable day in and day out as a shortstop...

[mhp9983]

Originally posted by knucklehead7
Power numbers definately go to banks, but I was saying they are not that far off in terms of other offensive numbers...I still give a slight edge to Ripken because he not only was a better defensive player, but he played shortstop so much longer than Banks...so not only was he better defensively, but he played a more valuable defensive postion for so long...no matter how Ripken was hitting he was valuable day in and day out as a shortstop...

Yeah I agree. I also vote for Ripken.