Talk:Five-tool player

message: Barry Bonds doesn't count. He can't run nearly as well as any of the other player mentioned here.
*I think you're focusing too much on recent events: when Barry Bonds broke into the majors, he was one of the fastest players in baseball.  --M@rēino 13:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bonds used to be fast but he has NEVER had a good arm.   —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.62.5.95 (talk) 10:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Why was Vladimir Guerrero removed, but I-Rod kept?  I don't care so much about the former, but when in conjunction with the latter, it's pretty insane.  I-Rod averages what?  6 steals a year?  Vladimir, by the way, does not steal "6 bases a year".  He's stolen 15 a year for the last 3 years, and has 52 more in his considerably shorter career than I-Rod does.  I-Rod is 4 tool, and having a link to one source, like was done with Vladimir, does not constitute proof.  If time is a factor, Vlad has played virtually the same amount of time as A-Rod.  He's not missing any tools (within obvious reason), he has an MVP award, etc.  Nothing wrong with the guy for such a list in the least. Perhaps instead of a sentence with a run-on of names like that, we should instead create a subsection in the article in which to list a group of players who are less-than-debatable.  The current selection kinda...sucks. President David Palmer 04:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of the reasoning here seems rather flawed.  While Bonds never had a Clemente canon, he has maintained his quick release and good footwork.  Further, Jeter has had 2 20/20 seasons and 1 where he fell 1 stolen base short.  While he isn't a fully fledged slugger, he has always been a threat to deposit a grooved fastball into the seats.  If anything, it is his lack of fielding range that makes him a 4 tool player, not his power.  Vladimir Guerrero is an absolute no brainer.  He was 1 home run from a 40/40 year and doesn't steal huge numbers mostly because he is on orders not to.  He still beats out infield hits all the time.  Oh, and as far as Molitor goes, the guy did steal a ton, so I don't see where there is a question there either.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.213.239.55 (talk) 23:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of Players

message: Carlos beltran is the most perfect example of a five tool player.  How is he not listed, seriously?
See above "If I had created the page myself I would have limited the list to HOFers and players exceeding HOF standards by at least 2 of the 4 www.baseball-reference.com scales."  Until he exceeds at least 2 of the 4 HOF Standards above I would oppose his inclusion. TonyTheTiger 17:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  beltran 

message: I support the need for validation of facts, but tagging every player (including Willie Mays !) with CN is ridiculous. Willie Mays is the pentultimate FTP and everyone knows in Baseball knows this. If we are going to manage the article this way, then maybe the whole thing should be deleted. TrulyTory 13:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was tempted to run this article through an AfD, but the main problem is WP:NPOV and possibly WP:OR if this article is not supported by citation. If you'd prefer it go that way, anyone can feel free to start up the AfD. Erechtheus 23:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The problem is that we shouldn't be agreeing on any sort of statistical cutoff. That's original research. That's not what Wikipedia does. It seems to me that the fate of this article should be to list those players who are described as having the five tools by a credible source. Erechtheus 21:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I generally agree with Tony, but we have to keep in mind the different eras of the game. Almost everyone I know considers Mays, Mantle, and Snider premier examples of the FTP, but the 1950's was not really a base-stealing era, so relying on that stat as an indication of speed is misleading. Many experts consider that Snider was as good as Mays and Mantle throughout that era, and he had all these tools. To say the George Brett was not a FTP is grossly unfair as well. He certainly was - look at his 1979 season if you don't recall him. TrulyTory 23:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation Needed?

message: This is a very tough inclusion for me to swallow.  On his career he did not steal 100 and he never stole 20.  However, he twice finished in the top 3 in SB's in the pre-Maury Wills era.  What criteria are correct after the HOF cutoff. TonyTheTiger 15:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Footspeed is not just about Stolen Bases. Did HE run the bases well and quickly? Did he get to balls that others could not when on Defence? By all accounts Snider did this, and some say as well as Mays and Mantle - two players who were FTPs. TrulyTory 00:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Duke Snider

message: While I personally believe that nearly all the players included are actually five-tool players, there needs to be verifiable sources. Right now, the selection of most of the players is based on original research, since there isn't a primary source. This quote from the original research policy sums up the problem: "Wikipedia articles include material on the basis of verifiability, not truth."
The baseball-reference.com idea isn't a bad one, but it still doesn't verify that a player is five-tool. It only provides data that is being used by Wikipedia editors to make a decision. I'm not going to remove any of the players, but I do think it's very important to find actual cites that a player is five-tool, instead of using an arbitrary method. Aren't I Obscure? 16:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the removal as well. That is precisely what I was getting at above -- I was just waiting for additional comment before acting to remove items from the article. The Sporting News reference should support the inclusion of Bonds, Griffey, and Rodriguez. I have therefore added them back with that article as a citation. Erechtheus 03:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that it's a good idea to limit how may examples are provided. I know J.D. Drew was considered a five-tool player when he entered the majors, but I don't think he'd merit inclusion here. However, HOF standards should only be used to narrow down who should be included, not as a substitute for a source citing a player actually is five-tool. Aren't I Obscure? 14:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would suggest that this article needs to list non-HOF players who have been categorized as five tool players in addition to players who have been billed as five tool players but have failed to live up to that label. What it needs not be is simply a list of players -- somebody should probably start categories for five tool hall of famers and five tool major league players for those purposes. This article should eventually discuss what it is to be a five tool player and all the controversy that the label creates, using verifiable, credible sources. Does that make sense? Erechtheus 22:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research 

message: I have added this heading and have added just a little bit of the sort of discussion about five tool players I believe this article is lacking. Any thoughts? Erechtheus 08:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I have rewritten the players listing to do a few things including removing the original research standard that was come up with by editors here to attempt to create a standard for significance. This rewrite also makes clear that both HOFers like Mays/Snider and non-HOFers like Dawson can be called five tool players. Erechtheus 18:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing OR "significant" note 

message: Someone inserted Carlos Beltran into the middle of the players listed by the Sporting News article that is the fourth citation. He is not mentioned in that article. 
I'm all for listing Beltran here if there is a decent citation that can support it, but I have removed Beltran until such a citation can be produced. Erechtheus 18:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carlos Beltran 

message: I have been away.  I am going to delete a lot of the stuff as WP:OR.  See my comments above. We need to keep the list short and true.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM)  01:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Standards

message: In order to keep people from adding all their favorite players and having a uselessly long list this page should be reserved for players who are in the Hall of Fame and those already considered likely to be in the hall.
Currently at http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/kempma01.shtml the Hall of Fame Monitor says:
:Black Ink	Batting - 15 (152), Average HOFer ≈ 27
:Gray Ink	Batting - 52 (487), Average HOFer ≈ 144
:Hall of Fame Monitor	Batting - 32 (578), Likely HOFer ≈ 100
:Hall of Fame Standards	Batting - 21 (683), Average HOFer ≈ 50
None of his numbers are close to the avereage HOFer numbers
Currently at http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/beltrca01.shtml the Hall of Fame Monitor says:
:Black Ink	Batting - 5 (382), Average HOFer ≈ 27
:Gray Ink	Batting - 84 (281), Average HOFer ≈ 144
:Hall of Fame Monitor	Batting - 96 (169), Likely HOFer ≈ 100
:Hall of Fame Standards	Batting - 39 (166), Average HOFer ≈ 50
Possibly by the end of the season he will be likely by 2 of the 4 measures. Then, we can add him.
If you want to add a player, find a link that says Vladimir Guerrero, who passes 3 of the 4 tests according to http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/guerrvl01.shtml, was a 5-tool player in his prime.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  19:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Guerrero had a hell of an arm, but he wasn't much of a fielder. His career fielding percentage is .963, well below the .983 average for his position over that time. He led the league in errors as a right fielder nine times! --Jprg1966 (talk) 16:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 Carlos Beltran and Matt Kemp