HARD TO TOP : Current Crop of First Basemen Is the Best in Baseball History

Although the following story, as you will soon discover, breaks new ground in bold, brave baseball analysis, it is not intended to keep the seasoned fan from addressing weightier issues, such as how the Dodgers were dumb enough to let Steve Sax go but greedy enough to raise the price of parking by another buck.

Let it also be stated, in the interest of avoiding unnecessary postage, that it would be a waste of time to attack the credentials of the author, inasmuch as he will state at the outset of this historical perspective that he’s not old enough to remember Burma Shave or nickel scorecards, Philco radios or Flatbush trolleys. Actually, he’s not old enough to remember anything before JFK, but that’s beside the point.

He does, however, have a decent library of baseball books, which gives him a generous dollop of diamond history, and a company telephone credit card, which allows him to solicit the opinions of Hall of Fame librarian Tom Heitz in Cooperstown, N.Y.; Cub broadcaster Harry Caray in Palm Springs; Padre General Manager Jack McKeon in San Diego, and Dodger scout Ben Wade in the 213 area code.

And none of the above hung up on him when he suggested to them what he is about to suggest to you now: Never before have we seen as many terrific first basemen as there are in big league baseball today. Heitz, in fact, was kind enough to say just that in his own words, taking the author off the historical hook.

“This is as outstanding a group of first basemen, or better, than we’ve ever had in baseball,” Heitz said. “You have to add the proviso, however, that there are more of them because there are more teams.”

Now, this is not intended to impugn the memory of the following:

A. The Iron Horse or Double X, Hammerin’ Hank or Memphis Bill.

B. Stan the Man or the Big Cat.

C. Klu or Moose, Mr. Cub or the Garv.

D. Stretch or Cha-Cha, Boog or Pops.

E. Dr. Strangeglove.

Quick translation:

A. Lou Gehrig or Jimmie Foxx, Hank Greenberg or Bill Terry. They’re all in the Hall of Fame.

B. Stan Musial or Johnny Mize. They’re in there, too.

C. Ted Kluszewski or Bill Skowron, Ernie Banks or Steve Garvey. Banks is in the Hall, Garv is sure to get support.

D. Willie McCovey or Orlando Cepeda, Boog Powell or Willie Stargell. McCovey’s in, Stargell just joined him.

E. Dick Stuart.

Actually, E doesn’t belong in this group, but the nickname for the iron-handed first baseman of the ‘60s made him irresistible.

Other names do belong, however, since each generation has produced its share of fine first-sackers: Rudy York, Mickey Vernon, Gil Hodges, Vic Power, Joe Adcock, Bill White, Norm Cash, Pete Runnels, Ron Fairly, Donn Clendenon, Lee May, Tony Perez, Chris Chambliss, Dick Allen, Rod Carew and Cecil Cooper.

The finest player of the 19th Century probably was Cap Anson, a first baseman, and one of the best players at the turn of the century was Hal Chase, although his brilliance was overshadowed by his part in gambling scandals.

“Usually, your first basemen are your better ballplayers,” Dodger scout Wade said. “We had Garvey here, and before him Wes Parker, who was an outstanding fielder, and with more power would have been considered an even greater player, and you can go all the way back to Hodges.”

No generation, however, has the depth and richness of the ‘80s bunch. Or, as broadcaster Caray said with apt alliteration: “There’s no denying the field is fertile with first basemen.”

Let’s start with the Dodgers and their $2-million first baseman, Eddie Murray. The Dodgers see Cooperstown written all over Murray, and why not? Only five Hall of Famers drove in more runs in their first 10 seasons than Murray did in his, and their names are monumental: Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig and Henry Aaron.

But, consider the following: Last season, Murray hit .284 with 28 home runs and 84 RBIs. Nice numbers, right? Yet, 5 first basemen hit more home runs than Murray, 7 first basemen drove in more runs, 10 first basemen hit for a higher average, 10 hit more doubles, and 8 had a higher slugging percentage.

Or, how about the San Diego Padres, who made the ballyhooed trade for Jack Clark, who hit 27 home runs and drove in 93 runs for the Yankees last season. Clark not only isn’t the best first baseman in the division, he’s not even the best first baseman named Clark. That would have to be Will, of the San Francisco Giants, who had more home runs (29), more RBIs (109) and batted 40 points higher (.282 to .242) than Jack did.

There’s no telling how many home runs Glenn Davis would hit if he played somewhere other than in Houston, but, although he is confined under the Astrodome roof, no National League first baseman hit more home runs than his 30 last season.

“It’s going to be very difficult to pick an All-Star first baseman next year,” McKeon said.

And we haven’t even gotten out of the West, where Atlanta’s Gerald Perry also deserves mention for his .300 batting average on a last-place team.

In the East, you have your pick of Le Grand Chat (the Big Cat), Andres Galarraga, who survived a long dry spell to post some of the best numbers in baseball last season: .302 average, .540 slugging percentage, 99 runs scored, 92 RBIs, 42 doubles, 8 triples, 29 home runs.

Keith Hernandez of the Mets had an off-year but is still the best fielding first baseman in the business; Pedro Guerrero of the Cardinals was hurt but is capable of 30 homers and 100 RBIs, and the Phillies like Ricky Jordan so much that Mike Schmidt is back at third base.

“And that’s not including the kid on the Cubs’ roster, who could turn out better than any of ‘em,” Caray said.

Caray has been accused of hometown honking more than once in his career, of course, but he is not alone in his admiration for Mark Grace, the rookie from San Diego State who hit .296 last season for the Cubs.

“The only negative they bring up about him is his power,” Caray said, citing Grace’s 7 home runs in 486 at-bats. “But I remember Musial, as great as he was, was strictly a line-drive hitter his first few seasons.”

What can be said about the American League’s first basemen that hasn’t been said about the National League’s? How about this: They are even better.

Don Mattingly of the Yankees had an off-year last season. He hit .311. Mark McGwire of Oakland couldn’t match his rookie total of 49 home runs. He hit 32. Kent Hrbek of the Twins had the best average of any first baseman: He hit .312 and also popped 25 home runs. Wally Joyner of the Angels dropped off from his first two seasons: He had to make do with a .295 average, 31 doubles, 85 RBIs.

George Brett of the Royals, a converted third baseman, hit better than .300 and knocked in more than 100 runs. And Fred McGriff of the Blue Jays, a part-time designated hitter as a rookie, exploded for 34 home runs--high among first basemen--and a position-leading slugging percentage of .552.

Two of the mediocre first basemen around came through the Dodger system--Greg Brock of the Brewers, who hit .212 in an injury-marred season, and Sid Bream, who hit .265 with 10 home runs, respectable numbers except in this company.

“These things go in cycles,” McKeon said. “Remember, in the ‘30s and ‘40s, there were a lot of great catchers, too--Bill Dickey, Mickey Cochrane, Garagiola . . . “

Joe Garagiola?

“He’s a friend of mine,” McKeon said. “I try to mention him in that company as often as I can.”

Let McKeon digress. Here, the issue remains how to evaluate this group, beyond the numbers, which are impressive in themselves:

--Six first basemen hit more than .300 in 1988.

--Ten hit 20 home runs or more.

--Eight had 85 RBIs or more.

--Eight had 30 doubles or more.

--Nine had slugging percentages higher than .470.

--Eight scored 80 runs or more.

--Ten played in 150 or more games.

Heitz, as librarians are wont to do, took the long view. He mentioned sustained performance as a major barometer.

Only 4 of the National League’s first basemen will be over 30 when next season begins: Murray, 33; Jack Clark, 33; Hernandez, 35, and Guerrero, 32. There are 4 American League first basemen in the 30-something category, too: Brett, 35; Brock, 31; Pete O’Brien of Cleveland, 31, and Dave Bergman of Detroit, 35.

Will Clark is 25, Galarraga 27, Glenn Davis and Perry 28. McGwire and McGriff are 25, Joyner 26, Mattingly 27, Alvin Davis of Seattle 28.

“When you look at this particular group of first basemen and speculate as to who might be selected for the Hall of Fame, some names drop out,” Heitz said. “Or, they’re too young in their career to make a fair assessment.

“We have to wait to evaluate a guy like McGwire, who’s had a couple of good years. There are plenty of players who didn’t last for a variety of reasons. McGwire has a lot of years ahead of him. He might turn out to be the best of them all.”

For now, however, Heitz rates Hernandez as the best of the veteran crowd, although he is quick to point out that Hernandez--despite his .300 lifetime average in 13 seasons--probably wouldn’t be selected to the Hall on his offensive production alone.

“Here’s a guy that is generally regarded, over the long haul, as one of the better first basemen,” Heitz said. “He definitely contributed to the defensive development of the position--the things he does on bunt plays and playing behind the runners. He has shown innovation and creativity at his position, but his offense wouldn’t put him in the Hall. With his defense, he could be a candidate for the Hall. That, and his clutch hitting.

“Mattingly had an off-year, but by all odds, he is one of the great players of our day. The best in my mind, of the older first basemen, is Hernandez, because of his defense and clutch hitting.

“(Jack) Clark to me is not so much a first baseman as he is a hitter. I don’t know if you could look at him as a complete first baseman. Brett was a third baseman, Schmidt was a third baseman. Those guys who moved to first late in their careers, I don’t know if it’s fair to compare them to a Hernandez.

“From a defensive standpoint, I’d choose Hernandez, from an offensive standpoint, McGwire or Murray, from both standpoints, Mattingly.”

And from the standpoint of time, all are agreed, the ‘80s are as good a time as any.