At first I thought it would be Manny Ramirez by a long shot because he's so much younger than Thome, but in fact Manny is just 1 year younger. However, Thome averages 40 homeruns per year in his career, versus 42 per year by Ramirez. As well, somehow I see Thome as having "old player skills," he's slow and just hits for power, meaning that he'll age faster. It's not like Ramirez is faster, but I see him as less bulky as Thome, and not aging as rapidly. There career averages are 314 for Ramirez and 281 for Thome.

I went with Thome. I see Ramirez as suddenly disappearing at some point, a la Juan Gonzalez -- not coincidentally, his Most Similar player at BBRef.

Although, to be fair, Thome and Ramriez are both in each other's Top 5 Most Similar list. I could see Thome DHing with success until he's 42 or 43, but Manny will be gone by 37 or 38.

Incidentally, I wouldn't know how to check this on Retrosheet or anything, but I wonder if before yesterday was the first time in the history of the game that three players all had the same number of 450+ homers at 453 each for these guys?

 

Personally, I see Ramirez as the better pure hitter and I think that his time in the outfield will stand him in good stead when he becomes a DH for good in 2009 or so.

There have been only 32 hitters with 450+ homers, and using bbref it's fairly straightforward to figure out what year each passed the 450 mark.  That's when it gets tricky, as one would want to focus in on the years where it might be possible.  Eyeballing it, the two periods where there might be three players with the same total would be in the late 60s/early 70s, as the stars who came up in the 50s (Aaron, Mays, Banks, Matthews, F. Robby, Mantle, Killebrew) were winding down their careers, and the last 7 years or so. 

Interesting thing about these three is their wide disparity in career RBI -- it's Sheff at 1495, Ramirez at 1459 and Thome way back at 1253.

Thome's always played on teams that scored a lot of runs; this surprised me.

Ramirez is younger and seems likely to have the longer career.  Will either Ramirez or Thome catch Griffey, currently at 548?

I almost added a voting option, "Miguel Cabrera (88)" just to see who would go that route and why, but the symmetry of the three totals was too cool to futz with.

I'm with the majority of voters.  I think Manny is some kind of hitting maestro.  A genius.  An eccentric who, instead of composing symphonies or playing wicked electric guitar, hits the stuffing out of baseballs.  It's not just his numbers.  He gets a look in his eye when he is going to do something good.  Maybe a late career stint at the Rogers Centre as DH will pad his numbers a little more, as we all know of the damage he does there.

Wow ... I figured Manny would win this one, but 92 of the first 100 votes? I think maybe we can file this one under "bad question," hey?

I thought it was a good question...I picked Manny, but it didn't seem completely obvious. Thome might be a better HR hitter, I just figured Thome's extra year and injury from last year tipped it slightly in Ramirez's favour. But Manny is an oddball who could retire early (some say that, I have no idea if it's true), and he has missed time every year in his career. I wouldn't be shocked if either one falls off a cliff, or keeps going towards 600+ homers. I'm hoping Thome keeps going and breaks the career strikeout record; he's already 9th, and could break the top 5 by year-end.

Sheffield, of course,  looks too old and injured, plus he's not a HR hitter, really.

Does it seem like Thome has been around forever? Tough call on these three. With the amount of money players are making today, few seem to actually want to play 20+ years anymore. If Ramirez stays on with BoSox and becomes a full-time DH for them, I'd have to give him the edge. But, seems like every off season he's demanding to be traded.

I don't mean to be a contrarian, but I've always thought the "players make a lot, so they'll retire" thing didn't make sense. They currently have the choice between make millions to play game or retire. Some who retire early now do mention they "don't need the money", but that's not the point. If they liked playing baseball still, and they were good enough,  they would. Look at Clemens, who has basically said at this point he values playing baseball over time with his kids (he said he would quit to spend more time with his family, so when he came back...I'm just saying the reverse reasoning applies.).  And a few more hundred thousand/million dollars seems like a good reason to stick around, unless you are just sick of playing.

Right now, you have guys like Franco, Steve Finley, Craig Biggio, Bonds, Clemens, Moyer, Randy Johnson, David Wells, all still playing. They've all made at least 50 million in their careers (except poor Franco, at just 23 mill), and keep playing anyway. I think if there are fewer 20+ year careers, it's likely due to the younger end not getting as many chances, ie teenagers don't get to play as often in MLB as they once did.

The crop of players from the 80s who are still around are either a testimony to their enduring skills, or the lack of talent in today's MLB level. We both left out a few worthy names still around: SAlomar, Jr., RSierra, CSchilling, GMaddux, TGlavine and a few others who are out due to injuries. I think with the great infusion of Latin players, the game has made a dynamic shift. Time will tell if the players with ten years (as of 2006) or less will be around.