Top 10 Second Basemen of All-Time: Nos. 5-1

Disclaimer: When I use WAR without a "b" or "f" in front of it, I am referring to my modified version which calculates park factors differently from Baseball-Reference and FanGraphs. Additionally, "wRC+" also refers to my own calculation, slightly different from FG (in that I separate the leagues and also include IBBs). Finally, using my calculations of WAR and wRC+, I have calculated waaWL% separate from BRef. However, versions of WAR, wRC+, and waaWL% are close to what those aforementioned sites have.

We started this series looking at the top 10 second basemen of all-time, with numbers 10-6 getting their opportunity in the spotlight. Now, we head to the top 5, and amongst this group are, in my view, the second greatest top 5 of any position (only behind the top 5 CFs). We have arguably the best RH hitter ever, the first superstar in the history of the AL, two elite speedsters with terrific hitting peaks, and the man who broke the color barrier and is arguably the most important athlete in all of sports. With all that said, let's kick this off with number 5.

5. Nap Lajoie: 1901 was one of the most important years in the history of American sports. It was when the American League officially became recognized as a major league, the first time since 1891 when there were two operating. That was the year the American Association held its final campaign, and after its dissolution, the National League had what was effectively a monopoly on the sport from a professional standpoint. That changed at the turn of the century, and many of the best players in the NL went over to the upstart AL. Stars such as Cy Young, Jimmy Collins, and John McGraw became American Leaguers (and in 1902, Ed Delahanty and Jesse Burkett joined them), in no small part due to the maximum salary of $2,400 in the National League being superseded by AL clubs. Of all these players, though, the one who who would prove most influential and the first superstar for the nascent upstart league was Napoleon "Nap" Lajoie.

Lajoie got his start with the Phillies in 1896 at the age of 21, and over his first five seasons, he had developed into a great hitter. He led the league in SLG in 1897 with a .569 mark on the strength of 9 home runs and 23 triples (it was a different game back then), and from 1897-1900, he had a .896 OPS and 148 OPS+ with 135 doubles and a slash line of .347/.377/.518. His WAR totals in that five-year stretch were 16.8 bWAR and 16.9 fWAR, impressive figures for a young player who only once exceeded 600 PAs in a season during that period. Lajoie was well on his way to a very good career, and if he had stayed with the Phillies, perhaps he would have formed a nice 1-2 punch with Gavvy Cravath. However, that did not end up coming to pass. In 1901, Lajoie stayed in Philly, but as alluded to in the previous paragraph, he signed with Connie Mack's Philadelphia A's for the exorbitant fee of $6,000 per year. He announced himself to the new league with one of the greatest hitting seasons the sport had seen up to that point. From the advent of professional baseball in 1871 with the National Association to 1901, Lajoie's 198 OPS+ was 8th among all seasons with at least 400 PAs. His OPS of 1.106 was 6th, as was his .643 SLG. His 8.3 bWAR was also the best of any position player up to that point, and he led the majors (not just the AL) in the following stats: hits, doubles, total bases, fWAR, bWAR, BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wOBA, Rbat, and BtWins. In pretty much any relevant hitting category, Lajoie was the gold medalist. In the thirtieth anniversary of professional baseball, Lajoie reset the standard of what it meant to be a dominant hitter. He also ushered in the Cambrian Explosion of offensively-inclined second basemen. Before Nap, second basemen had some good hitting seasons (most notably Fred Dunlap in 1884 in the Union Association), but none had attained the consistency of a position like first base (where Dan Brouthers, Roger Connor, Dave Orr, and Cap Anson amassed prodigious numbers). Once Lajoie entered the collective baseball consciousness, second base became the premier hitting position in the infield over the next three decades, with numbers 3 and 1 joining him in the pre-integration era.

For as fantastic as Nap's 1901 was, it was not close to the peak of his career WAR-wise, or even with the bat. From that year through his age 35 season in 1910, Lajoie would have a 170 OPS+ and accrue 74.6 bWAR, or 8.9 per 650 PAs, remarkable stuff. In seven of those ten years, he would finish with over 7.5 bWAR and 7.0 fWAR. And underrated part of his game was his defense, in which over the course of his time in the Bigs, he would have 83 Rfield, good for 10.1 dWAR. Lajoie's average waaWL% those years was .543, which is all-time great. In 1902, he was traded to the then-Cleveland Blues, where he slashed .375/.419/.565 for a 175 OPS+ and a 163 wRC+ for 5.3 fWAR and 5.1 bWAR over only 385 PAs, good for 8.9 fWAR and 8.6 bWAR over 650, both of which would have led the majors (and he still came in 9th in fWAR and bWAR in a shortened year). He bounced back to lead both leagues in bWAR with 7.9 and the AL in fWAR with 7.6 in 1903 (incredibly, with only 525 PAs), and he had a 168 OPS+ that season. And then 1904 happened. Lajoie had arguably the best hitting season of his career, setting personal bests in OPS+ and wRC+. While from a birds-eye view, his 1901 handily beats what he accomplished in 1904, context is key here. The Deadball Era had fully commenced, and if you think 2022 was rough for MLB offenses, it's got nothing on the early 1900s American League. The league-wide OPS that year was .616 (and that would be "beat" four additional times from 1905-1909), so Lajoie's .959 mark was otherworldly; second-place Harry Davis had an .840 figure. Lajoie's .546 SLG was way ahead of the .490 mark that Davis again got silver for, and Nap's 200 OPS+ was 43 points higher than Davis's 157, and his 198 wRC+ was 42 points better than Elmer Flick. He just dominated the American League in a way that wouldn't be seen until Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth. Lajoie attained 8.5 bWAR and 8.8 fWAR, and if the MVP existed, he would have been the unanimous choice for the Junior Circuit. His waaWL% was .542, the third time since 1901 that he superseded the .540 threshold (a totally arbitrary mark that I've determined as the mark of an elite season). He had a down (for his standards) 1905, but in only 269 PAs, he still managed 3.0 bWAR and 2.9 fWAR on the back of a 148 OPS+ and 150 wRC+.

So that was 1901-1905, and entering his age-31 season, one could be forgiven if they thought his best baseball was in the rearview mirror. Well, Lajoie exposed such thoughts as premature in 1906. In what was another brutal year for AL hitters, Lajoie had an exceptional campaign. His hitting was great, as his normal, with a 168 OPS+ and 164 wRC+, but now he combined his bat with terrific defense, with 20 fielding runs. In total, he garnered a career-high 10.0 bWAR and 9.4 fWAR. His waaWL% was a career-best .546, and he also had 7.6 WAA which, you guessed it, was the most of his illustrious career. Keep in mind that Lajoie was trading the mantle of the best player in baseball with Honus Wagner, and in many instances, bested the Flying Dutchman in both hitting and WAR. Considering that Wagner was, at the absolute worst, a top 3 infielder of all-time, for Nap to hold his own against such a force is remarkable. 1906 would peak Lajoie's peak in many ways, but he still had several great seasons left. From 1907-1909, Nap accrued 22.0 bWAR and 20.0 fWAR, and had a 141 OPS+ in that span. Then, in 1910, he had his last elite season. Lajoie was a grizzled 35, and in the same league as Eddie Collins (more on him in a bit and the ferocious Ty Cobb, Nap won his fifth batting title with a .383 BA to go along with a 197 OPS+ and 194 wRC+. Lajoie was good for 9.8 bWAR and 9.3 fWAR, both second-best of his career, and he had a .544 waaWL%. His .444 OBP was the second-best of his career (after 1901), and adjusted for the league's environment, was actually the best of his career, at 44% than AL average. Nap would finish third in the majors in both bWAR and fWAR, and his 10.0 oWAR was the best in baseball. This season officially ended his time as an elite player, and while he would have several more productive years thereafter (particularly 1912 and 1913), he would not reach the heights that he did during the 1900s.

"Larry" (not quite sure how he got that nickname, but he evidently did) Lajoie retired after the 1916 season, and though he never won a World Series, he had ingrained himself so deeply into Cleveland's sports scene that the team named itself after him from 1902-1914, only taking upon the Indians moniker in 1915. Over the course of a wonderful 21-year career, Lajoie had a .338/.380/.466 slash line and a 150 OPS+/144 wRC+. He was the premier hitter of the American League from its inception until the rise of Ty Cobb, and Lajoie's .426 BA in 1901 is still (and probably will forever remain) the AL record for a single season. His career bWAR of 106.9 and fWAR of 102.2 are both third all-time for second basemen, and he will most likely remain in that spot for a long time. Lajoie was a truly phenomenal ballplayer, and well-deserving of the distinction of the AL's second-best 2B.

4. Jackie Robinson: There really is nothing more that can be said about Jackie Robinson that hasn't already been stated, at least for his impact off the diamond. He broke the color barrier for the most popular sport in the US at the time, and his activism is well-known outside of the field. For the purposes of this post, I won't dive into his personal life nor the withering personal attacks he had to endure. Those encounters are well-documented and can be easily found. What I want to highlight was how incredible Robinson was at actually playing baseball, because this guy was so, so, so good.

Jackie Robinson was a first-ballot HOFer when he was elected in 1972 with 77.5% of the votes. Back 51 years ago, voters did not have sabermetrics or the advanced stats that we enjoy today, and perhaps that was among the reasons why he didn't get more support. His raw totals are not exceptionally impressive for a HOF second basemen, with 137 home runs (141 including his lone season in the Negro Leagues, but at the time of his election, MLB didn't consider the NLs as major leagues), 197 stolen bases, 734 RBI, and a .311 batting average. That .311 BA is pretty nice, but other 2Bs had superior marks, specifically numbers 1, 3, and 5 on this list. However, the stats that we have now shine incredibly favorable on Robinson, and they really show how fantastic a player he was. Starting with his fielding, Robinson was one of the greatest infielders of his generation. He had a high fielding percentage compared to league-average second basemen during his time, and while his range may not have been exceptional at that spot, you can't say the same for his time at third base. Robinson had a RF/9 of 3.27 at that position for his career along with a .964 fielding percentage, contrasted with a 3.10 RF/9 and .953 FP for the NL during his time. Pete Rose gets a lot of credit for his moving around different positions, but Robinson was much better at it. With stolen bases, #42 was also exceptionally efficient with good volume. While compared to the league-wide 81% success rate in 2023, Robinson's 72% SB% may be subpar, context is paramount here. From 1947 to 1956, the highest NL SB% was 61.07% in 1953: Robinson had a mark of 80.95% that season. The NL average in those ten years was 57.56%, and Robinson's 72.16% was 14.60% higher. Combined with the fact that he finished at least top-7 in SBs nine times in his ten seasons in the NL, it's no wonder that his Base Running runs mark was a very impressive 32 for his career.

Robinson's best skill as a hitter was his superb on-base ability. For his career, he had a .410 mark, including a .428 figure from 1949-1954. Robinson was top-8 each of those six years in OBP relative to league average, and he led MLB in OBP with .440 in 1952. Robinson was good at drawing walks, taking a free pass at a rate 38% higher than the NL average throughout his career, and combined with his very good batting average (.311 mark compared to a .275 league average through his time in the majors), it added up to his having an OBP 24% greater than the NL during the time period of 1947-1956 (excluding his 1955 season when he only had 390 PAs). In that aforementioned 1952 season, his OBP was 36% above average, second-highest across all of MLB. And in 1949, even though George Kell and Ted Williams had a .343 BA, Robinson actually led all of baseball when you compare it to how they performed against their individual league, with Jackie being 30% greater. Robinson was also decent at slugging: though he was never known as a HR hitter, he was slightly above-average in that throughout his career, 13% more frequent than NL average, and he led the Negro American League with 4 in 1945 (Negro Leagues seasons were shorter than the AL and NL, and like those leagues, offense was very low during the war years). Robinson was also great when it came to avoiding striking out, as his K-rate was 53% lower than league average during his qualified years. In totality, over his qualifying seasons, Robinson had a 139 wRC+ (including IBBs) for his career, a great mark for any player, but especially for a second basemen who played superb defense.

It was that 1949 season which he established himself as maybe the best player in baseball, no small feat during a time that included Williams, Musial, and DiMaggio. From 1949-1953, no hitter accrued more bWAR than Robinson's 41.6, and his 146 OPS+ during that time ranks 6th among all players with at least 1,000 PAs. Robinson's Total Zone Rating/TZR (basically an estimate of how many runs a player saved from his defense) in these five years was 54, second only to Yankees SS Phil Rizzuto. Jackie also tied with his DP partner Pee Wee Reese for dWAR in that timeframe at 7.9, second again to Rizzuto. In 1949, Robinson led baseball with 9.3 bWAR and the NL with 9.6 fWAR (though he surpassed Williams when you pro-rate to 650 PAs). His wRC+ of 156 was 4th in MLB that season, and he had 10 TZR. The Dodgers won the pennant, but just like in 1947, the Yankees beat them. Robinson took home the MVP for his troubles in the best season from a 2B since Rogers Hornsby 20 years earlier. He also led the majors in SBs with 37, and his SB% of 69.8% was 16% better than the NL average of 53.8% (for comparison's sake, Ronald Acuna Jr. has an 84.0% SB success rate with the NL average being 81.6%, so much closer to what everyone else is doing). He followed that up with a 6.8 fWAR and 7.4 bWAR season in 1950 with a 139 OPS+. Then in 1951, he had what I consider his best season of his illustrious career: 9.7 bWAR, 9.0 fWAR, 154 OPS+, 159 wRC+, 16 TZR, and a career-high 7.2 WAA. Robinson also stole 25 bases while only being caught 8 times, a 75.8% success rate that was 15% greater than the NL's average. His teammate Campanella won NL MVP even though Robinson was three wins ahead of him in bWAR, and he was also robbed the following season in 1952, when he led all NL position players with 8.4 bWAR, but Hank Sauer took home the award in a decision that's one of the worst in the history of the voting. In that year, Robinson put forth an MLB-best .440 OBP to go along with a 149 OPS+. In a season where the NL stolen base success rate was a paltry 56.1%, his 24/31 ratio was 21.3% higher, a remarkable figure. The next year, in 1953, he had his last great season with 6.9 bWAR over 136 games with a .927 OPS and a .536 waaWL%.

Robinson would end his career 3 years later in 1956 after winning the 1955 WS and finishing his career with 63.8 bWAR and 59.9 fWAR in only 5,941 PAs. Had it not been for the color barrier and WW2, it's completely possible that he would have reached the 100 WAR milestone. And while he's *only* fourth in my rankings, I can see a valid argument for him being at the top. Numbers 4-1 are very close, and even though his longevity isn't nearly as impressive, there were obvious factors beyond his control that prevented him from getting the plate appearances necessary to accrue those mammoth volume totals that others in my top 5 put forth. At his best, no one in the game was better, and to think that baseball was not considered his best but fourth-best sport (after football, track and field, and basketball), he's arguably the best athlete to have success in MLB. He's a top-35 player for me all-time, and on the Mt. Rushmore of second basemen.

3. Eddie Collins: When one thinks of the great dynasties in MLB history, several come to mind. The Yankees (basically a choose-your-decade adventure), 1910s Red Sox, 1900s Cubs, 2010s Giants, 1960s Dodgers, mid-70s Big Red Machine, early 70s As, all are great choices. However, before the Athletics moved to Kansas City and then the Bay Area, they were an established franchise in Philadelphia, alongside the Phillies. That team was the first dynasty in the American League, and was home to the famed "$100,000 Infield," of which the likes of Home Run Baker at third, Stuffy McInnis at first, and Jack Barry at SS reigned. Of course, there was also second base, and at that position, Connie Mack had the greatest 2B in the history of the AL: Eddie Collins.

Collins came into a league in 1906 that was dominated by the No. 5 player on our list, Nap Lajoie. At the time, Lajoie was universally regarded as the best second basemen in baseball history, and second place, whoever that may be, wasn't close. Over the first 10 years of his career, Nap averaged a .361/.395/.537 slash line with a 165 OPS+ and accrued 50.4 bWAR over only 4,557 plate appearances, an average of 7.2 per 650 PAs. The thought that any second sacker could eclipse him during his own career was probably regarded as outlandish. Lajoie was the premier power hitting second basemen for his time; only Ross Barnes had a higher career SLG than Nap's .466 among 2Bs when he retired in 1916, and Barnes had fewer than 1/4 the number of PAs as Lajoie. Nap was also a beast of a man for the time, 6'1" and 195 lbs., huge for a 2B. Collins was more or less the opposite in every way, yet he not only matched, but exceeded Lajoie's offensive accomplishments, as well as besting his WAR totals by over 15 apiece.

Collins began his career in 1906 at the young age of 19, but was mostly a non-factor through his first three seasons, coming to bat only 415 times and recording a mere 1.4 bWAR and 1.6 fWAR. However, in 1909, he broke out to the tune of a 9.7 bWAR and 10.0 fWAR. Collins had a .347/.416/.450 slash line for a 170 OPS+ and 168 wRC+. While that .866 OPS may not look elite nowadays, this was the height of the Deadball era, when the league-wide OPS was .612, so Collins was 254 points better than the AL average. He was second in the AL in OBP, OPS, bWAR, third in SLG, and first in fWAR. Considering that he was facing Ty Cobb for the title of the AL's best player, that's pretty great company to keep. Collins would also accrue 11 fielding runs, making 5.13 plays per 9 innings with a fielding percentage 14 points higher than league average for second basemen. It was a great all-around season, and to put into perspective how great of a hitter Collins was in 1909, putting his numbers in the context of 2021, you get a .349/.434/.609 slash line with 49 doubles. This shows how important it is to adjust for era when looking into historical statistics, because in 2021, Xander Bogaerts had about the same OPS as did Collins, .863. However, because he played in a high-offensive year in a hitter's park, his OPS+ was 127, still good, but not close to Collins's 170. Collins added 7.3 WAA this season, and his .545 waaWL% was the best of his career to that point. 

The next year, Collins had either the best or second-best season of his career, depending on if you prefer bWAR or fWAR. Eddie had a 150 OPS+ and 148 wRC+, and 10.5 bWAR with 9.7 fWAR. The bWAR was the best of his time in the majors, and the fWAR was the second-most in a season for his career. His hitting took a bit of a dip in 1910, but he was still very good with .324/.382/.418, and in 2021, that equates to .327/.392/.554, great work. But it was his fielding and baserunning that really elevates this season to the status of elite. On the basepaths, he stole 81 bases, a career-high. While we don't have figures for the caught stealing numbers during this year, Collins's career mark of 66% was 10% higher than league average, and that is only for the years 1912, 1914-1916, and 1920-1927. Collins was stealing the most bases of his career when we don't have that data and when he was at his fastest, so we can be relatively confident that his SB% was most likely higher than what we do have records for. He added 11 runs from baserunning that season, and his fielding was even better. Collins's RF/9 was 5.54 compared to the average 5.04, and his fielding percentage was .972 vs. .947 for the average second basemen. These are massive differences, and accounted for Collins adding 24 fielding runs to his RAA, which ended up with his accruing 7.8 WAA, his career-best.

By any sabermetric category one chooses, 1909 and 1910 were the best seasons of Collins's career. Whether it be bWAR, fWAR, WAA, or waaWL%, that two-year span was the peak of his prowess. However, this is not to say that Collins only had a prime of two years; from 1911-1916, he generated 49.8 bWAR, over 8 per season, and his OPS+ was 161 (for reference, the highest OPS+ for Vladimir Guerrero over a full season was 162). During those six seasons, only Tris Speaker and Ty Cobb had more bWAR, and Collins also had a 161 OPS+ during that time. To think that those years were past his best is remarkable, and demonstrates how elite he was on the diamond. Specifically from 1912-1915, his worst season was a 8.9 bWAR campaign, and in 1911 and 1916, he accrued impressive totals of 6.6 and 7.0, respectively; for reference, the most WAR HOFer Vladimir Guerrero ever had was 7.4 in 1998. Collins would also gain jewelry as if he had a collection at Tiffany's, with a total of 6 World Series rings in 8 Fall Classics (although he did not play in 1929 or 1930, when he was once again a member of the Philadelphia Athletics after joining the White Sox from 1915-1926). In those appearances, he would hit .328/.381/.414 for a .795 OPS, a very respectable figure given those were in the Deadball era. His cWPA (Championship Win Probability Added) was a great 25.2% for his career, and in both the 1910 and 1913 World Series, he had nearly an 1.100 OPS. All in all, Collins had a phenomenal career, well befitting of a medal spot on the all-time second base leaderboard.

2. Joe Morgan: If a player is considered as an inner-circle HOFer, say Ruth, Williams, Mays, Mantle, Gehrig, Cobb, Aaron, or others, it is plainly evident by their career totals or traditional rate metrics. Ruth had a .690 SLG, Williams a .482 OBP, Mays had 660 HRs, Aaron 755, Cobb hit .366, Gehrig accrued over 1,900 RBI in a tragically shortened career, and Mantle had eight seasons walking over 100 times while hitting over 50 HRs twice. Joe Morgan does not have traditional stats anywhere close to those guys. He did have 1,865 walks in his career, so he has that, but traditional stats are by and large meh on him, nothing that would cause one to think that he can be credibly thought of as top two at a premium position. However, he is just that, as I will explain below.

Up until Jackie Robinson, with the exception of Rogers Hornsby, the best second basemen in MLB history had been exclusively in the American League. Frankie Frisch had a couple great years, but compared to Gehringer, Lajoie, and Collins, the Junior Circuit ruled the 4 spot. Robinson comes along and changes that, and 7 years after his retirement, "Little Joe" Morgan arrives on the scene and sets a new standard of excellence at the position for post-integration infielders. He signed as a free agent with Houston in 1962 and was in the Bigs less than a year later, September 21, two days after his 20th birthday. His first couple years were very similar to the guy at No. 3 on the list, Eddie Collins. Like his spiritual predecessor (who also came up in his age 19 season), Morgan played very little his first two seasons, only getting 73 plate appearances in that time. He didn't exactly light the league on fire during that small sample size, going 13-62 with a grand total of 1 extra base hit, a triple. His slash line was .210/.329/.242 over 18 games, good for -0.1 bWAR. So yeah, he wasn't exactly Ted Williams or Dick Allen as a rookie. 

However, that would change in his age 21 season, 1965. That year would be his breakout, when he burst out with a 137 wRC+ and 5.4 WAR. That was good 19th in the majors in WAR and 27th in wRC+. While it would not come close to the heights he would reach in his prime with Cincinnati, 1965 was a glimpse into the type of hitter that Morgan would prove to be. He led both the AL and NL in walks with 97 at a rate 78% greater than league average, 4th in the MLB. However, his unintentional walk rate was 102% better than average, and that led the majors. This would prove to be perhaps the best of Morgan's skills, of which there were many. The following five full seasons (at least 400 PAs), 1966, '67, and 1969-1971, would see Morgan expand on his prowess of taking the free pass, with a high watermark of his 135% above league average BB% rate in 1966. However, because he only got 528 PAs, his total walks were not that impressive, 89 overall. He would have walk totals of 81, 110, 102, and 88 his next four full years, but then after the 1971 season, a 28 YO Morgan would be traded to the Cincinnati Reds with several other players in a package for Lee May and co. Up to that point in his career, Morgan was averaging a very respectable 4.9 bWAR per 162 games and had a 121 OPS+., with 27.0 bWAR in total and a very impressive 585 BBs to only 385 Ks. However, what Joe would do over the next five years is have, at worst, the best post-integration peak of any infielder. At best, it is the most brilliant display of all-around baseball in the history of the sport.

Joe Morgan came into 1972 with a career-high in WAR of 5.4, a wRC+ of 137, and his peak waaWL% was .519. He superseded all those marks in 1972, and not by an insignificant amount. He accrued 8.4 WAR, a 153 wRC+, and .540 waaWL%, placing 4th, 12th, and 4th in the majors in those respective categories. He set a new career high in walks with 115, and his rate was 100% better than average. His OBP was .417 to lead the NL, and he set personal bests in BA and SLG, too. He placed 4th in MVP voting that season, with his teammate Johnny Bench taking home the hardware as the winner. It was by far the best season of his career so far, and the crazy part is that this was arguably the worst season he had during this prime. 1973 rolls in and Morgan ascends. What does it look like when the best infielder in baseball improves? It looks like 9.1 WAR, the same stellar 153 wRC+, and 12 fielding runs to win his second straight Gold Glove. FanGraphs loves him even more than my calcs, crediting him with 9.5 fWAR and a 156 wRC+. BRef gave him 9.3 bWAR this year (same as 1972), and he also stole 67 bases while being caught a mere 15 times, succeeding 82% of the time. He walked 111 times, 50 more than he struck out, and with a SLG of .493, it was 31% better than average, good for 13th in baseball. Finally, he had a winning percentage of .543, the best of his career at that point, 2nd in baseball, behind only Darrell Evans's .545 mark. He once again finished behind a teammate in MVP voting, this time Pete Rose and his 7.4 WAR and .532 waaWL%. Ending this first part of his five-year peak was 1974. This was arguably Morgan's best season from a pro-rata POV (at least up to that time in his career), setting career highs in BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wRC+, waaWL%, but also total walks and BB%. Adding on 58 SBs and only being caught 12 times was just the cherry on top. With a .427 OBP and .494 SLG, Morgan reached not only the top 10 in wRC+ across the majors, but was fourth overall with a mark of 160. While Schmidt led all players in WAR with 9.5 that year (contrasted with Morgan's 8.4), his waaWL% was .546, .003 greater than Morgan's, so within spitting distance. Morgan would have had greater counting stats if he had been afforded the same PAs as Schmidt, and the fact he had 120 BBs in only 149 games is a testament to his superb batting eye. Steve Garvey won MVP that season, a dumb decision even back then (as there were multiple players with more HRs and RBI), and indefensible with a modern lens (his 3.8 WAR was 21st in his own league). Joe would snatch up the honor the next two seasons though, arguably the two greatest from a middle infielder post-1947. Let's talk about his 1975 and 1976 campaigns.

Morgan had reeled off three-straight seasons in which he had finished second in both WAA and WAR in the majors, and top-4 in waaWL%. However, for all his consistent brilliance, he had not captured any major accolades. Bench, Rose, and Garvey had won the MVPs when he started his hot stretch, and while his era-adjusted hitting put him in great territory, he wasn't a major HR force, causing him to be overshadowed by other players who he was far superior to. However, in 1975, there was no denying him the mantle of best in baseball. Morgan set career highs in basically every single offensive rate stat, traditional and sabermetric. His BA and OBP of .327 and .466 would prove to be the best of his career, and this was the first time he had above a .500 for his SLG. He had a .974 OPS to lead both the AL and the NL, and his OPS+ and wRC+ were 169 and 172, respectively. He walked 132 times in 639 PAs, a rate of 20.7%, which was 130% above league average. He would finish with an incredible 10.7 WAR and .559 waaWL%, which led both leagues by a large margin; no player came with even 2.5 wins of him, and Mike Schmidt was second with a .538 waaWL%, wayyyyyy behind Morgan. Joe would also save 14 runs in the field (due to league-leading .986 fielding percentage at second and making 0.29 more outs per 9 innings than average), unique because he was not a good fielder for his career (he won 5 GGs, and was also good in the field in 1973, but his awards for that in 1976 and 1977 were entirely undeserving). All in all, Joe's 1975 saw him accomplish two huge firsts: MVP, and a World Series championship (although in the Fall Classic, he only had a .660 OPS). By waaWL%, it is the 26th greatest year from a player since 1901, and it was a remarkably balanced on at that: 8.4 oWAR and 2.3 dWAR (I adjusted the calcs so that the sum of oWAR and dWAR would equal my WAR calc). Combined with stealing 67 bases in 77 attempts while playing an up-the-middle position, this has a strong case as the greatest all-around season from any player ever. For my money, it's the best season an infielder has ever had since Rogers Hornsby's 1924.

Now we come to 1976. Compared to 1975, it was not as well-rounded, as Morgan went from saving 14 runs to losing his team 1 with his glove. That's where the negatives start, and that's where the negatives end. When it comes to his hitting, Morgan was a beast in '76. Since Arky Vaughan in 1935, the list of middle infielders with a 170 wRC+ or greater includes three names: Lou Boudreau in 1948, Bobby Witt Jr. in 2024, and Joe Morgan in both his MVP seasons. The former two had 170 on the dot. Morgan in 1976 was 186. It is by far the highest of any 2B or SS since integration, and his raw stats are equally impressive. He slashed .320/.444/.576 for a 1.020 OPS and hit a career-best 27 home runs. He walked over 100 times for the fifth straight year with 114 while only striking out in 41 at-bats. We also have to keep in mind that the 1970s were a time of low offense, relatively speaking, so if you convert Morgan's rate stats to the 2024 NL, you get a slash line of .301/.426/.622 for a 1.048 OPS and 50 home runs. He would have led the NL in OPS and finished second to Judge overall. Morgan once again dominated the basepaths, swiping 60 bags and being caught only 9 times for an 87% success rate, a repeat of 1975. Going over to the sabermetrics, Morgan accrued 9.5 WAR and had a .554 waaWL%, which placed him, once again, in the gold medal spot among all of baseball. Graig Nettles came in second in both those categories, with 8.2 WAR and .537 waaWL%, so like 1975, the silver medalist was way behind Joe. To cap off his incendiary batting accomplishments, Morgan again won the NL MVP and captured his second World Series, this time being a dominant force at the dish with an 1.145 OPS in their four game sweep of the Yankees. Going back to MVP voting, in 1975, Joe got 21 of 23 first-place votes, and in 1976, he earned 19 of 24 FP votes. His accomplishments on the field were finally being given proper credit by the media, as he had very strong argument for winning MVP the prior three years. Morgan's 1976 is, in my view, the second-greatest season a middle infielder has had since integration, behind only his own 1975. For infielders overall, I think I would have to put Brett's 1980, Schmidt's 1981, Bagwell's 1994, and Rolen's 2004 ahead of Morgan in '76, but it's close, and if someone wants to go with Joe's 1976, I won't fight them too strongly. It really was that good.

Morgan would have another quality hitting season in 1977, but his wRC+ would slip from the mountainous heights the previous two years to a merely great 142 mark. Consequently, his WAR would decline to 5.9 on the back of poor defense, and his waaWL% dropped to .526. However, he was still an all-star, and deservedly so. In what was inarguably a steep fall from his prior five seasons, he still finished 12th in the majors in WAR, so it shows what a special player he was. After that year, his decline would continue, only exceeding 5 WAR once more, in 1982, with 5.2 wins. Still, he was always an above-average player, providing decent hitting at an important defensive position. Joe would end his time in the majors with 100.6 bWAR, the fourth-most among second basemen. However, the reason I place at the two-spot in my top 10 is similar to why Robinson was ranked ahead of Lajoie: prime and competition. Morgan's 5-year peak from 1972 through 1976 is all-time great. In those five seasons, he had a waaWL% of .548, which is 10th all-time for five-year stretches, and only behind Hornsby for second basemen. He also garnered 46.0 WAR, nearly 1/2 of his career total (if you prefer bWAR, it was 47.8 wins and a .551 waaWL%). As someone who prefers using primes/peaks to rank players as opposed to sheer volume, this appeals greatly to me, and it demonstrates a player who, when at their best, was of preeminent importance to the team's success. Winning two World Series is a testament to that. Bill James has Morgan ranked as the best second basemen of all-time, and while I disagree, I can completely understand why. It's no secret who is number one on my list, but if I were to build a team from scratch, give me Morgan at second over anybody else due to the all-around brilliance of his game. He was not only a deserving first-ballot HOFer, but in my book, a top 20 player of all-time.

1. Rogers Hornsby: Hornsby is admittedly a difficult player to rank. On the one hand, his rate stats, both unadjusted and adjusted, would have you believe that he is a top 4 player ever. He slashed .358/.434/.577 for his career, his OPS+ and wRC+ were both 175. His waaWL% for his career was .546, fourth all-time behind only Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, and Ted Williams. In the 1920s, Hornsby had 10+ WAR five times, exceeded a 180 wRC+ eight times, led the majors in waaWL% five times, had a .550 or greater waaWL% six times, and led both leagues in WAA and WAR four times. Keep in mind he did this during the time Babe Ruth was laying waste to pitchers in the American League, so to lead both leagues in waaWL% and WAR was no small feat. If you prefer the more traditional stats, Hornsby averaged .382/.460/.637 across the decade for an OPS of 1.096. That is ten years of consistent dominance, and if MVP voting existed in its current form, Rogers more than likely takes home around 6-8 awards during that period. It's difficult to put into words just how much better Hornsby was over his competition. If you want to restrict the period for the five years between 1921-1925, Hornsby hit over .400 in three of those seasons as well as overall, going .402/.474/.690 for a 1.164 OPS and 204 OPS+. In 1922, he accrued an incredible 450 total bases, second in baseball history to Babe Ruth's 457 the year prior. That year was his magnum opus in terms of volume, with him getting 250 hits, 102 of them for extra bases, with 46 doubles, 14 triples, and 42 homers. He had a .722 SLG and posted 10.1 bWAR. This was also probably his sixth-best season.

So, with all the above, why do I say that Hornsby is difficult to rank? Taken at face value, he has a strong argument as being maybe the best player after Ruth, especially considering that he accomplished all he did (127.0 bWAR) in fewer than 9,500 plate appearances. What's there not to love? Well, it comes down to the most important factor of a sport: the quality of competition. The National League during Hornsby's time was, let's say, lacking in that department, materially so. When you compare the NL to the AL from the mid-1910s to the early 1930s, the difference in quality is insane. Hornsby's first full season in the majors was 1916, so from that year to 1931, his last full year, of the top 15 players in WAR, 12 of them were in the American League, with only 3 residing in the NL. During that span, of players with at least 3,000 PAs, six of the top seven in OPS+ were in the AL; Hornsby was the lone representative of the Senior Circuit. I think 1918 demonstrates the degree of separation in terms of quality better than anything. That season, Hornsby led the National League in WAR, something he would do 12 times! He had 5.0. In 1919, he once again led the NL in WAR, this time with 6.1. That same year, Babe Ruth had 10.3 for the Red Sox in the AL. A gap of four wins between the best from one league to another is almost impossible, and while bWAR has them much closer, 6.7 wins for Rogers and 9.1 for the Babe, it's still a sizable gulf. This was not limited to a two-year span either. For that same 16 season period of 1916-1931, there were only 10 seasons in the National League in which a player had 8 or more bWAR: Hornsby had 9 of them, with Frankie Frisch taking the other with 9.4 in 1927. In the AL, during that same time, there were 24! And it wasn't just Babe and Lou: Tris Speaker, Ty Cobb, and George Sisler all had multiple years with 8+ bWAR, and Joe Cronin had 8.5 in 1930, which would have led the NL, but was only good for third in the AL in a year that saw earn Ruth had 10.3 and Gehrig had 9.6. This is a mere puddle in the oceans-worth of data that shows the superiority of the American League over the National League during Hornsby's time in the league.

Okay, so with the above two paragraphs out of the way, I guess I should explain why I have Rogers ahead of Joe, before I get into the former's incredible career. I said in the last paragraph for Morgan that I understand having him above Hornsby, and it's because Morgan's all-around game was better than Hornsby. On defense, while the sabermetrics like Hornsby more than Morgan, we should take them with no more than a couple grains of salt. While not perfect by any means, Range Factor (RF/9) is probably the best statistic to use when determining the quality of defense a player provided up until 2002, when UZR was created. We now have Outs Above Average and Fielding Run Value, which rely on video to attempt to accurately assess defensive performance. Those are infinitely better than anything we have for Hornsby's time, but even with RF/9, Hornsby is really lacking there. As for fielding percentage, he was average, so at least from what I can see, the justification for Hornsby having such high fielding values is unconvincing. While Morgan was no defensive wizard, he was better both in Range Factor and Fielding Percentage when compared to league average. When it comes to baserunning, there is no contest, and it is inarguable. Hornsby stole 76 bases and was caught 79 times from 1920-1937, as we do not have data for caught stealing before 1920. That is a success rate of 49.0%, well below the 55.6% average for the majors. Morgan stole 689 bases at an 81.0% clip, 16.6% above league average. Using linear weights, it is estimated that Morgan added 80 runs to his team on the basepaths alone, contrasted with Hornsby costing his team 9, a difference of 89. But still, I have Hornsby over Morgan, and it's because of the fact that Rogers is probably a top 5 hitter ever, or at the very worst, he is top 10. Of all factors in baseball, hitting is by far the most accurate when it comes to assessing the value a player provides, and Hornsby dwarfs everyone at his position when it comes to what he did with the bat. His career wRC+ is 175.0; Eddie Collins is at 143.8, and he is second. Joe Morgan's best season was 186, and Hornsby had seven seasons above that. He finished 11 seasons with a wRC+ of at least 160. As a hitter, in my view, he made up for both the lack of competition and the suboptimal parts of his game of fielding and baserunning. I respect others who disagree, but for me, that's what tips the scales. Now, let's look at his years, because there is a lot to salivate over.

Rogers had a cup of coffee with the Cardinals in 1915, and then in 1916, his first full season, he has a 140 wRC+ and 4.4 WAR, pretty great for a 20 year-old. He follows that up with a superb 1917 where he leads the NL in WAR, WAA, waaWL%, and has a 162 wRC+. His 9.2 WAR and 7.5 WAA in only 589 PAs pro-rates to 10.2 and 8.3 in 650 PAs, respectively, and his waaWL% was .552. In all those categories, he led the NL, and was second to Cobb in each. He beat out his fellow Texan, Tris Speaker, who up until that point, was the consensus best player from the Lone Star State. It was sort of a passing of the torch moment, and to this day, those two are on the Mount Rushmore of players born there, with Joe Morgan and Frank Robinson placing third and fourth, respectively (honorable mentions to Greg Maddux and Eddie Mathews). This would be followed by his two aforementioned years in 1918 and 1919, which while leading the NL in WAA, WAR, and waaWL%, were not particularly impressive given the state of the league, as was previously described. He would rebound in 1920 with 9.6 WAR, 7.8 WAA, a .550 waaWL%, and a new career-high of 186 wRC+. Had Babe Ruth not existed, Hornsby would have run away with the title of best player in baseball. Alas, he would have to settled for the moniker of best in the NL, a crown he would wear for the next nine seasons, save 1926. The consistency that Rogers displayed is really what separated him from his contemporaries. From 1917-1929, his worst finish for his league's WAR leaderboard was 4th, in 1926. It was absolutely a down year for him, but he still had a .520 waaWL% and got 4.7 WAR. Ruth had 3.5 in his down season in 1925, though he did have a .521 waaWL%. Both of them were by far the best hitters in their league throughout the 1920s, it's just that Ruth lasted a little longer, maintaining great years into 1932, while Hornsby's last elite season was 1929, at only the age of 33 (from 1930-1937, he only had 844 plate appearances, with 419 of those coming in 1931). That tangent aside, we are about to enter into the peak of Hornsby: 1921-1925.

We already went over his domination in the first paragraph during those five seasons, but they are so incredible that they deserve a deep dive. In each of those seasons, Hornsby was no worse than second in all of the majors in waaWL%, wRC+, WAA, and WAR (except 1923, but only because of his only playing 107 games, and he still 4th and 6th in WAA and WAR, respectively, while getting second in waaWL% and wRC+). His waaWL% were .555, .546, .549, .566, and .558 consecutively, and his WAR totals were 10.6, 9.5, 6.9, 11.8, and 10.0. His amazing 1922 season was the worst of those five when it comes to winning percentage, a year when he beat Ruth in the four above metrics. If that doesn't demonstrate the Raj's dominance at the plate, I really don't know what could. From 1920-1925, Hornsby led the NL in BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, and wRC+. Not over that span, mind you, but every single year, he was #1 in those categories. Again, with the qualifier that the NL was not as competitive as the AL, that is still incredibly impressive. In 1923, he had a down season, which would consist of 6.9 WAR over 487 PAs with a 192 wRC+. Over 650 plate appearances, that pro-rates to 9.2 WAR. Even a down year was elite from a pro-rata POV, and then in 1924 and 1925, Hornsby set a standard for RH hitters that would not be surpassed until Aaron Judge in 2022, nearly 100 years later. For the former, Hornsby reached career-highs in 1924 in the following categories: waaWL% (.566), WAR (11.8), WAA (9.9), wRC+ (212), OPS+ (222), BA (.424), and OBP (.507). Ruth had a 214 wRC+ and a .513 OBP, but Hornsby led all players in everything else. In the pantheon of infielder seasons, this has as good a case as any to be considered the best ever, alongside Wagner's 1908, Morgan's 1975, Brett's 1980, and Schmidt's 1981. He also led baseball with 227 hits and had 82 XBs and walked an NL-best 89 times. He slashed .424/.507/.696 for a 1.203 OPS, which was 225 points higher than what second place Zack Wheat had as a member of the Dodgers. Hornsby's 11.8 WAR was 4.6 wins ahead of Frankie Frisch's 7.2, so while the note of a weak league may apply here, Rogers also bested the Babe's total WAR of 11.7. Overall, 1924 was the peak of Rogers's time in baseball, but while he would never reach those transcendent heights again, he was far from cooked. He still had four more elite years left in him.

By unadjusted stats, Hornsby was never better than he was as a 29 YO in 1925. He hit .403 with a .489 OBP and slugged a career-high .756 with 381 total bases. In every category, he led baseball among qualifying hitters, and he also hit 39 home runs, 10 triples, and 41 doubles. 90 extra base hits is elite anyway you slice it, and to do so in 504 at-bats is remarkable. For the fifth time in six seasons, Hornsby got past the 200 hit mark, and he won his first of two MVPs (somehow he didn't win the previous season). Now for the adjusted metrics. Hornsby had 10.0 WAR, a .558 waaWL%, and 8.2 WAA to go along with a 197 wRC+. He was first in all those categories across baseball, and beat out his chief competitor in the AL, Ruth, for the second year in a row. Rogers did all this in 606 times at the plate, so pro-rate it to 650 and you get 10.7 WAR and 8.8 WAA, which would have been second behind 1924 in both those categories for his illustrious career. This two-year peak of Rogers saw him earn 21.8 WAR, 18.1 WAA, average a .562 waaWL%, and a 205 wRC+. In terms of hitting, it's up there with the Babe, Bonds, Williams, and Foxx for dominance over one's competitors. After this, Rogers would continue to excel, with his getting WAR totals of 10.6, 8.9, and 10.3 consecutively from 1927-1929. He had a 205 wRC+ in 1928 to beat Babe's 197 in the American League as well as leading both leagues in waaWL% that season with a .549 mark. Amazingly, 1928 was the worst overall year for Hornsby in that three-year window, since he had a .553 and .551 in 1927 and 1929, respectively, the latter ranking him first in both leagues. He would cease being the titanic force at the dish after that year, but his legacy as the greatest RH hitter of all-time is arguably still intact, 87 years after his 1937 retirement.

Thus ends this list that took me over 15 months and 12,000 words. Here are five honorable mentions (not in any particular order) and a couple sentences highlighting each. Thank you for reading and I hope you enjoyed it.

Hon. Mention 1. Joe Gordon: While he is best known for winning the 1942 AL MVP over a much more deserving Ted Williams, Gordon was a fantastic second basemen in his prime, combining elite defense and good hitting to have a .533 waaWL% over his best five seasons and averaging 6.8 WAR over 650 PAs. He accumulated 44.8 WAR 1939-43 and in 1947-48. He and Bobby Doerr dueled for the best second basemen in the AL during their time, and in my view, Gordon won that battle.

Hon. Mention 2. Lou Whitaker: Whitaker was the pinnacle of consistency for a decade and a half. He was basically guaranteed to give the Tigers 4-6 WAR and play good defense with a patient approach. Whitaker's best hitting seasons actually occurred from 1991-1995, with him having a 134 OPS+ over that stretch in his age 34-38 seasons. Whitaker's 75.1 bWAR is second-most from any position player who is eligible for the HOF that is not either banned (Pete Rose) or tied to steroids (Bonds and A-Rod). Only Bill Dahlen has more at 75.3, but Whitaker has 3.3 more WAA at 42.7.

Hon. Mention 3. Ryne Sandberg: Sandberg accrued 68.7 WAR from 1982-1993 and 1996-1997. He won the 1984 MVP on the strength of 8.4 WAR and a 142 wRC+. He had six seasons of at least 6.5 WAR and in each of those years, was top 10 in baseball in WAR and WAA. Over his best five years, he had a .531 waaWL% with a 141 wRC+ to go along with over 36 WAR. He did not have the consistency of Whitaker, but his best years superseded Lou's.

Hon. Mention 4: Roberto Alomar: Off-the-field issues aside, Alomar was a really good second basemen. While his defensive reputation (10 Gold Gloves) is mostly without basis, he was a very good hitter at his best, having a 138 wRC+ over his five best seasons. He twice exceeded more than 7 WAR, in 1999 and 2001, and in '01, he had a career-high 152 wRC+. While most of his GGs were not deserved, he did save 11 runs in 1998. He had 67.3 bWAR from 1988-2001.

Hon. Mention 5: Jose Altuve: FanGraphs and Baseball-Reference diverge pretty significantly on Altuve's defense (FG has him at only -21 runs saved, while BRef thinks he is completely terrible with -82), but one thing everyone agrees on is how much of a beast Altuve in the batter's box. In his five best seasons, his wRC+ is 152.4, sixth-highest all-time among 2B for that peak span. He currently has 58.0 fWAR and I think that if he can get to 65, he will be in the Hall. In that case, the only question would be how much would voters hold the 2017 sign-stealing scandal against him, although all evidence points to Altuve not being a willing participant. For my money, with numbers similar to Alomar and Sandberg, he should get in.