Larkin?

Which All-Star Shortstop Was Better: Derek Jeter or Barry Larkin? - Riverfront Ball - Cincinnati Sports - Bengals - Reds - Bearcats

Breaks it down and gives a slight edge to Jeter

Larkin.

Astroturf killed Lark's and Davis's potential. Just think how great they both would have been if they played on grass and were able to stay healthy in the 90s?

In their prime I take Larkin every day of the week.

In their prime I take Larkin every day of the week.

 

He could do everything but play 154+ games/year consistently.

Concepcion was better than both!

Concepcion was better than both!

If you're talking defense only I can buy that argument, but if you're talking all around it's not even close.

Larkin the better defender, by quite a bit. If you consider off and def an even split in the comparison, meaning the are both equally as valuable in the equation (and I don't necessarily think that way), then I don't see how Larkin isn't at least in a dead heat with Jeter.

Give me Larkin.

Jeter truely is the best player in history to never be great in one category. He was above average in everything and had few holes (not a fan of his defense). Larkin was great in the early and mid 90's in his prime in almost everything. Larkin will get the nod from me as who I like better in their prime. But Jeter's career was probably better IMO. I put Jeter and Rose on the same level of greatness with Rose a little ahead because he did win an MVP.

The more I think about it, I think Jeter and Rose are carbon copies of eachother. Except Jeter got older quicker

If you're picking one player over another you have to go on body of work. If I'm picking a player for my team I'd take Jeter's 20 seasons over Larkin's 19 seasons. Jeter average 137 games a season. Larkin averaged 114. Durability has to be taken into account. Larkin was a better defender. Otherwise he only bested Jeter's numbers in triples (by 10), stolen bases (by 19), and Slugging (by .004). Jeter kills him in hits, runs, RBIs and homers. If you want to say that Larkin had better overall tools then you might have an argument--but if you asked a GM to pick a career and plug that player into their lineup everyone would take Jeter.

If you're picking one player over another you have to go on body of work. If I'm picking a player for my team I'd take Jeter's 20 seasons over Larkin's 19 seasons. Jeter average 137 games a season. Larkin averaged 114. Durability has to be taken into account. Larkin was a better defender. Otherwise he only bested Jeter's numbers in triples (by 10), stolen bases (by 19), and Slugging (by .004). Jeter kills him in hits, runs, RBIs and homers. If you want to say that Larkin had better overall tools then you might have an argument--but if you asked a GM to pick a career and plug that player into their lineup everyone would take Jeter.

 

This

If you're picking one player over another you have to go on body of work. If I'm picking a player for my team I'd take Jeter's 20 seasons over Larkin's 19 seasons. Jeter average 137 games a season. Larkin averaged 114. Durability has to be taken into account. Larkin was a better defender. Otherwise he only bested Jeter's numbers in triples (by 10), stolen bases (by 19), and Slugging (by .004). Jeter kills him in hits, runs, RBIs and homers. If you want to say that Larkin had better overall tools then you might have an argument--but if you asked a GM to pick a career and plug that player into their lineup everyone would take Jeter.

 

That's because Jeter has never done anything wrong. He played the game the right way. He never took steroids or got caught for taking steroids. He is the greatest player of our generation. He has 5 championships and he did it all by himself at shortstop. He's the Captain. Mr. November. The most clutch player to ever play the game. Of course the GMs would pick him over Larkin.