1927 Yankees vs. 1961 Yankees: Who’s Better? A Position by Position Breakdown

Many consider the 1927 New York Yankees the greatest MLB team ever assembled.

Most of this credit is given to the heralded “Murderer’s Row” lineup including Hall of Fame inductees Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Tony Lazzeri, and Earle Combs—though having two Hall of Fame pitchers in Herb Pennock and Waite Hoyt certainly didn’t hurt.

Others would argue for the 1961 Yankees—a star-studded roster in its own right with Mickey Mantle, Roger Maris, Yogi Berra, Elston Howard, and Whitey Ford.

Though the latest generation of fans would fight to the death for their 1998 team, and rightfully so, I’m going to focus on the two immortal Yankees teams of the past—breaking them down position by position.

One player will be picked in each position battle, and a tally will then be made at the end to create an “on paper” favorite if the two were to play head-to-head in a World Series.

Without further ado, let’s get started with a look at catcher where you will not see Yogi’s name—he had since moved to the outfield at this point of his career. Here we go:

C – Pat Collins/Johnny Grabowski ’27 vs. Elston Howard ‘61

The 1927 Yankees had a platoon situation at catcher which also included contributions from a third catcher named Benny Bengough.

While Collins was the best offensive threat—compiling a .407 OBP in 251 Abs—he and Grabowski combined for a 29 percent caught stealing rate (33 for 114).

The 1961 Yankees, on the other hand, had one of the best catchers in MLB at the time in Elston Howard. He hit .348 with a .387 OBP and .939 OPS that season, and added an exceptional 50 percent caught stealing rate (20 for 40).

The Decision: Elston Howard – ‘61

This is an easy one for me, as Howard was both a dynamic offensive and defensive player in 1961—beating out the less productive trio of the ’27 roster.

1B – Lou Gehrig ’27 vs. Bill “Moose” Skowron ‘61

Lou Gehrig, arguably the greatest first baseman in the league’s history, had an otherworldly season in 1927—hitting .373 with 47 HR, 175 RBI, 52 2B, .474 OBP, 1.240 OPS, and 149 R.

Yes, these are actual statistics…and you can throw in 18 triples while you’re at it.

“Moose” Skowron, meanwhile, put up decent power numbers with 28 HR and 89 RBI. His .318 OBP and .790 OPS at a power position at first base were far from his best years as a Yankee in 1956 and 1960.

The Decision: Lou Gehrig – ‘27

Remember when I said the decision at catcher was easy? Well this one is the equivalent of being asked whether you’d rather have a massage at the hands of Minka Kelly or a colonoscopy.

Lou Gehrig put up numbers that even gamers could not produce on Xbox 360, and had in my opinion one of the two to three greatest seasons in the history of the game in 1927.

2B – Tony Lazzeri ’27 vs. Bobby Richardson ‘61

Hall of Fame second baseman Tony Lazzeri was at it again in 1927, as he collected 18 HR, 102 RBI, a .383 OBP and .866 OPS for a position and time period that rarely witnessed years like these.

Richardson had his best MLB season the following year in 1962, and his best World Series in 1960—where he would have been the easy choice for MVP if not for Bill Mazeroski’s timeless Game Seven home run.

In 1961, however, Bobby could only muster a .295 OBP—not enough to prevent the defensive gap between the two to be overcome by Lazzeri’s offensive prowess.

The Decision: Tony Lazzeri – ’27

Richardson was the far superior defender, and put up some solid offensive years in his Yankees career, but 1961 was not one of them. Lazzeri takes this one in a landslide.

SS – Mark Koenig ’27 vs. Tony Kubek ‘61

Koenig had 62 RBI, 99 R, and 34 extra-base hits in 1927, which was a very representative offensive arsenal for any shortstop of the time period.

Kubek had an impressive 52 extra-base hits to go along with 84 R in 1961, as well as earning a reputation as one of the best double-play shortstops in the game (turning 107 of them that season).

The Decision: Tony Kubek – ’61

Offensively, the two are very similar in an overall side-by-side analysis. Defensively, however, I cannot ignore Koenig’s 47 errors in 1927.

Errors are not the end-all in determining defensive abilities in ballplayers, but 47? That makes Kubek’s 30 look like Ozzie Smith at his best.

3B – Joe Dugan ’27 vs. Clete Boyer ‘61

Dugan could not be considered much of an offensive threat in 1927—managing to gather 44 R, 2 HR, 43 RBI, and 29 extra-base hits.

Boyer, who like Richardson had his best year as a Yankee in 1962, did not fare much better than Dugan in 1961. He topped Dugan with 61 R, 11 HR, 55 RBI, and 35 extra-base hits, but he hit an anemic .224.

The Decision: Clete Boyer – ‘61

This explanation could be virtually copied verbatim from the shortstop debate, as offensively neither man separated himself with conviction.

Boyer was possibly the greatest defensive third baseman in Yankees history—some would argue Graig Nettles—which is what pushed him over the top in a close battle.

LF – Babe Ruth ’27 vs. Yogi Berra ‘61

First of all, let me acknowledge that Babe Ruth is viewed primarily as a RF.

Ruth played 56 games in left field in 1927, and it did not seem fair to completely wipe out Roger Maris’ record-breaking season by matching him up with the Sultan of Swat.

How could 61 home runs be crushed so easily? Well, Ruth had 60 of his own—adding 164 RBI, 158 R, a .356 AVG, .486 OBP and 1.258 OPS. What’s even more horrifying is that no one would consider this Ruth’s greatest year in pinstripes.

Berra was a 36-year-old in decline in 1961, but was still able to produce 22 HR to help chip in. It’s impossible not to respect Yogi, but this fight was over before the bell was rung.

The Decision: Babe Ruth – ’27

I will keep this short and sweet. Babe Ruth is the best hitter in MLB history, and 1927 was no different.

CF – Earle Combs ’27 vs. Mickey Mantle ‘61

Combs, an excellent player and offensive force in the Bronx, hit .356 with a stellar .414 OBP and .925 OPS in 1927. He also produced 65 extra-base hits—including 23 triples—and scored 137 runs as part of “Murderer’s Row”.

Mantle was at the epicenter of one of the most captivating seasons in Major League Baseball history, and would go on to have his best Yankees season since his back-to-back MVPs in ’56 and ’57.

“The Mick” would put together 54 HR, 128 RBI, 131 R, .317 AVG, .448 OBP, and 1.135 OPS—while leading MLB in walks and slugging percentage.

The Decision: Mickey Mantle – ‘61

Combs put up excellent numbers, and easily could have beaten out many others in a head-to-head battle.

The Yankees outfield is a crowded one in this debate, however, and Mantle had one of his immortal seasons.

RF – Bob Meusel ’27 vs. Roger Maris ‘61

Meusel had a rock solid 1927 season offensively, and did everything that could have been expected of him.

He drove in 103 runs, had a .393 OBP and .902 OPS, and stole 24 bases—all while only suiting up for 135 games.

Maris’ 1961 season needs absolutely no introduction. In many baseball fans’ eyes, it still represents the true pinnacle in single-season home run history—and I tend to agree with them.

Amidst unimaginable stress and torment, Maris slugged 61 HR while amassing 141 RBI, 132 R, and a nearly 1.000 OPS.

The Decision: Roger Maris – ‘61

This is yet another opportunity to keep it short and sweet, as there is truly no explanation needed. Maris had baseball’s greatest exhibition of power since Ruth’s 1927 season.

1927’s Pitching Staff

1. Waite Hoyt: 22-7, 2.63 ERA, 256.1 IP, 1.16 WHIP, 23 CG

2. Herb Pennock: 19-8, 3.00 ERA, 209.2 IP, 1.30 WHIP, 18 CG

3. George Pipgras: 10-3, 4.11 ERA, 166.1 IP, 1.35 WHIP, 9 CG

CL - Wilcy Moore: 19-7, 2.28 ERA, 213 IP, 1.15 WHIP, 6 CG, 13 SV

1961’s Pitching Staff

1. Whitey Ford: 25-4, 3.21 ERA, 283 IP, 1.18 WHIP, 11 CG, 209 K

2. Bill Stafford: 14-9, 2.68 ERA, 195 IP, 1.16 WHIP, 8 CG

3. Ralph Terry: 16-3, 3.15 ERA, 188.1 IP, 1.08 WHIP, 9 CG

CL – Luis Arroyo: 15-5, 2.19 ERA, 119 IP, 1.11 WHIP, 29 SV

This call is about as tough as any that I’ve come across in this discussion, and is one that came down to the tiniest of details to separate the two from each other.

Both staffs are headed by big-time Hall of Fame arms in Hoyt and Ford—though Ford’s innings, strikeouts, and ability to dominate give him the edge.

Having a second Hall of Fame hurler in the second slot gives 1925 the edge back in their favor, though Stafford performed plenty well enough in 1961 to make it close here.

Pipgras was not 1927’s third starter entering the World Series, but he was given the start and performed admirably. Terry had an out-of-body season, however, which gave 1961 back the lead by a nose.

This brings us to the final call, and there was only one closer who could come out on top as difference-maker: Wilcy Moore.

Not only did Moore pitch 213 innings while only starting 12 games in 1927, but he threw a Game Four complete game to close out the World Series after saving a one-run contest in Game One.

Arroyo had about as good a year as you can have as a relief pitcher in the time period, but the determining factor was Moore’s versatility to both start and close with extreme efficiency.

The Decision: The 1927 Pitching Staff by the Slimmest of Margins

Who Wins the Head-to-Head Series?

The Closing Breakdown:

The 1961 Yankees took the position by position hitting breakdown over “Murderer’s Row” by a head-to-head margin of 5-3.

While it should technically be a 4-4 tie if Ruth was switched over to RF, the ’61 team wins the coin flip with its ability to bring an infinitely more dangerous bat off the bench—or slotted in at hypothetical DH—in Johnny Blanchard (21 HR, .305 AVG, .382 OBP, .995 OPS in 243 AB).

Unfortunately for the 1961 team, they did not perform as dominantly on the field as they should have on paper—losing the runs scored battle by a considerable margin.

The 1927 Yankees won a microscopically close battle in the pitching staff race, which sealed 1961’s fate in the overall head-to-head breakdown.

Miller Huggins was the superior manager to Ralph Houk by virtually any standard, and 1961’s complete lack of any speed on the bases took away their chance at taking advantage of 1927’s poor catching arms.

The Final Call: The 1927 Yankees Win the Series in 7 Tight Games

The Top Five Reasons the MLB Most Valuable Player Award is a Farce

Many fans, writers, players, and analysts argue what being the “Most Valuable Player” truly means. Some argue it requires being the “best player on the best team,” while others suggest it belongs to “the season’s best player.”

I personally fall somewhere in between—choosing to fully recognize the “valuable” component, while not disqualifying a player who fell just short in a pennant race.

In many seasons, such as the 1998 Yankees, the best team is just that—a “team.” They are a unit comprised of multiple high quality players that represent something far greater than the simple sum of its parts.

A “Most Valuable Player” many times cannot be chosen from the game’s best team, as no player distinguishes himself as more important than the men standing next to him.

In other cases, a player has a season immortalized in baseball lore, and his accomplishments can/should sometimes outweigh a great season by a pennant winner—so long as they occur as part of a competitive ball club.

As a result of my slightly modified criteria, I have created a list of five controversial MVP decisions that particularly irritated me. Each personifies my frustration and disappointment with the MVP voting process, and shows why things need to change.

5. Andre Dawson (1987)

The 1987 vote represents most people’s underlying issue and concern with the MVP process—being “most valuable” on one of the league’s worst teams. Everyone loves “The Hawk,” but 1987 in no way represented an MVP-caliber season.

Not only did his Cubs finish dead last in the National League East (a staggering 18.5 games back of first place St. Louis), but Dawson’s stats were one-dimensional.

Dawson sported just a .287 BA and .328 OBP—just the 6th best batting average and 8th best on-base percentage of his career. As a result of his anemic OBP, Dawson scored just 90 runs that season even though he nearly hit 50 home runs.

To put an icing on the “undeserving cake,” Dawson’s strikeout-to-walk ratio was worse than at any point of his career from 1980 to his final year as a starter in 1993.

4. Alex Rodriguez (2003)

Another prime example of an MVP rising from the ashes of a last place team, Alex Rodriguez undeservedly won the award in 2003 with the Texas Rangers.

A-Rod’s Rangers finished 71-91, and were so far in Oakland’s rearview mirror that they stopped keeping track by the All-Star break. The eventual deficit stood at 25 games on the season’s final day.

Exactly how “valuable” can a player be for a last place team? Texas was nearly closer to capturing the worst record in MLB history than they were to catching the AL West Champion Athletics.

Though A-Rod’s numbers were very impressive, they left much to be desired for an eventual MVP winner. He produced 47 HR, 118 RBI, 124 R, and a .298 BA, but the bottom-line stats don’t tell the whole story.

Aside from being buried in last place, A-Rod hit just .276 with runners in scoring position, .260 in late-and-close situations (though I dislike the stat), and drove in just 47 of his 118 runs (39.8 percent) on the road.

A-Rod was no more than a product of a little league park in Arlington on a last place team. The Rangers finished last with him, and they would have finished last without him. There is nothing inherently “valuable” about a season like A-Rod’s in 2003.

3. Dennis Eckersley (1992)

Though this vote may be the one that raises my blood pressure to the most alarming of heights, it cannot possibly rise higher than No. 3 on the list.

This voting process does credit a solid season on a division-winning team, but it opens up a whole new can of worms. There have been players ignored in MVP discussions who had far better seasons than those Eckersley beat out, but this vote makes as little sense as any other.

The 1992 season didn’t represent Eckersley’s best season as a pitcher. It didn’t even represent his best season as a relief pitcher.

Yet this is the year a reliever wins the league’s Most Valuable Player Award?!

Eckersley was 7-1 with a 1.91 ERA while pitching 80 innings, recording 51 saves, and sporting a WHIP of 0.913. A very solid season, but nothing out of the ordinary for any season’s best closer.

To put things into perspective, “Eck” was 4-2 with a 0.61 ERA and 0.614 WHIP in 73.1 IP in 1990. His strikeout-to-walk ratio was an absurd 73:4, and he added an equally impressive 48 saves.

Not only did Eck not win the Cy Young in 1990 (finishing 5th), but he finished just 6th in the AL MVP voting process. His numbers were drastically better in 1990 than 1992, and help to illustrate how unimpressive his 1992 MVP season truly was in comparison.

2. Lou Gehrig (1934)

Lou Gehrig was a player underrated and underappreciated from the day he replaced Wally Pipp as the New York Yankees first baseman. He was overshadowed for much of his career by Babe Ruth—though he may have been just as responsible for Ruth’s breath-taking offensive performances.

Gehrig’s greatness was never ignored more starkly than during the 1934 major league season.

“The Iron Horse” captured the Triple Crown during that campaign—hitting .363 with 49 HR and 165 RBI. He also added 128 R and a .465 OBP—all without the benefit of a dangerous and productive Ruth.

Not only did Gehrig lose the MVP voting in 1934, but he finished fifth. Fifth? How can a Triple Crown winner be determined to have the fifth best season in the American League?

To make matters worse, the 1934 MVP vote went to the Detroit Tigers’ Mickey Cochrane. Gehrig lost out to a man who hit .320 with just 2 HR, 76 RBI, and 74 runs scored.

Cochrane only played in 129 games that season (Gehrig played all 154), and collected just 140 hits in comparison to Gehrig’s 210. Gehrig even stole more bases than Cochrane in 1934 (nine vs. eight).

A player who hit .43 points lower, scored 54 fewer runs, drove in 89 fewer runs, hit 47 fewer home runs, and collected 70 fewer hits was more valuable than Gehrig?

For those of you assuming the Yankees had a poor season, New York was 94-60 in 1934—winning 61 percent of their games.

* Mickey Cochrane was a player-manager and played a more important defensive position at catcher, but this alone cannot overshadow Gehrig’s godlike offensive season.

1. Ted Williams (1941, 1947)

The only thing that could possibly upstage Gehrig’s disappointment is a Hall of Fame player who was robbed of the MVP twice by division rival Joe DiMaggio.

Remember when I explained that some seasons are immortalized in baseball lore, and that these efforts should sometimes overcome a solid season by a pennant winner?

Ted Williams was ignored for epic achievements in both 1941 and 1947.

In 1941, Williams generated one of the most magical numbers in major league history when he hit .406. Never duplicated and rarely even approached since 1941, Williams’ “.406” is still recognized as one of the few statistical anomalies that may never be broken.

Unfortunately for Williams, he was put up against an equally immortalized baseball feat by a man on a pennant-winning club—DiMaggio’s 56-game hitting streak.

Even if voters chose to deem the two epic accomplishments as “equal,” Williams lead the league in walks, runs scored, home runs, slugging, on-base percentage (.553), and OPS.

Although a strong DiMaggio proponent, it is impossible for me to justify his MVP selection over a season like Williams’.

To further prolong the “head-scratching” phenomenon, Williams joined Gehrig in “Triple Crown but no MVP” purgatory in 1947.

Again losing the vote to “Joltin’ Joe,” Williams hit .343 with 32 HR, and 114 RBI—also leading the league in runs, walks, OBP, OPS, slugging, and total bases.

DiMaggio received the award even though he did not lead the league is any offensive category. He also played in 15 fewer games than Williams, hitting just .315 with 20 HR 97 RBI, and 97 R.

It can be argued that 1947 represented the worst full season of DiMaggio’s career, and it is rather difficult to argue against that notion. To hand him the MVP award is rather laughable, and an indictment on the voting process in general.

Jeter Finds Yet Another Way to Scatter Name Amongst the Game’s Greats

Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter has been doing nothing but climbing historic lists since donning the pinstripes for the first time in 1995.

Another milestone was unable to hide from Jeter’s ever-expanding legacy, as he became just the fourth Yankee to surpass 1500 runs scored on Tuesday night against Texas.

The Yankees are a franchise boasting 26 World Series titles, as well as employing 34 Hall of Fame players at one time during their careers.

Any time a player is the “fourth” to do anything in a Yankees uniform, it is always an extraordinary feat worthy of celebration.

This occasion is no different, as Jeter joins only Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, and Mickey Mantle in rarified Bronx air.

In true Jeter fashion, he would not score his 1500th run in a moment that did not require it.

He would instead score the go-ahead run in the most emotional of moments, supplying New York with a lead that it would never relinquish.

Aided by a clean, hard slide by an angered Mark Teixeira at second base, Jeter was able to cross home plate and into the history books for what seems like the 100th time.

To save time and effort, baseball historians have been provided with a “Derek Jeter” rubber stamp—making it easier to add his name to any recently achieved milestone list.

Though clearly benefiting from some of the most potent lineups in team history, Jeter was able to accomplish the feat in just 2035 games played.

Excluding the 2003 season, in which Jeter dislocated his shoulder and was forced to miss 43 games, he scored 110+ runs in nine straight seasons.

This streak included four seasons of 120 or more runs scored, something the great Rickey Henderson could only do two times in 25 Hall of Fame seasons.

Henderson is often considered the greatest baserunner of all time, which helps to underscore Jeter’s impressive run-scoring abilities as a Yankee.

Other milestones such as 3000 career hits are simply inevitable for Jeter, and he will become just the first Yankee to ever reach the magic number.

Jeter will soon be No. 1 on the Yankees all-time hits list, passing Lou Gehrig who sits at 2721.

He will be a surefire first-ballot Hall of Fame inductee, and will deserve every vote that he receives. He is a class act and a role model for children during a dark era in Major League Baseball.

Congratulations Jeter, and we will all look forward to being there for your next milestone’s celebration.

Remembering Lou Gehrig: The Quiet, Forgotten Leader of “Murderer’s Row”

The 1927 Yankees are often considered the best baseball team ever assembled.

Their lineup’s potency was unparalleled, earning them the intimidating nickname of “Murderer’s Row.”

Throughout the glory years of this immortal roster, New York possessed a one-two punch of Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig.

Yankees Manager Miller Huggins could write Gehrig’s name into the scorecard months in advance. He knew nothing would ever prevent Gehrig from lacing up his cleats.

During Gehrig’s remarkable 2130 consecutive games played streak, he is said to have broken every finger on both hands, while also suffering countless other debilitating injuries. His toughness and dedication quickly earned him “The Iron Horse” as a moniker.

Ruth often joins Ted Williams, Willie Mays, and Joe DiMaggio as the first players to roll off the tongues of those debating the “best player of all-time.” Gehrig, meanwhile, has forever been underrated and underappreciated with regard to his greatness; somehow disappearing behind the shadows of baseball’s immortals.

Ruth is rightfully credited with being the greatest hitter in Yankees history, as well as potentially the best in the entire existence of America’s Pastime. He deserves every accolade, as 714 home runs and a career .342 AVG are untouchable when reflecting on the era in which he played.

Gehrig, however, was even more responsible for the team’s eternal admiration. By hitting cleanup in Murderer’s Row, he provided unequaled protection in order to maximize Ruth’s performance.

As a result, Ruth received many more fastballs than pitchers would have dared to throw had there been any other hitter standing in the on-deck circle. He hit 60 home runs in 1927, the highest total on his Hall of Fame career.

What makes Gehrig’s achievements more noteworthy is the fact that he was protected by Bob Meusel, a man who hit just 8 home runs in 1927. He never hit more than 12 homers in Gehrig’s Yankee tenure.

Gehrig stepped into the batter’s box with the bases empty an additional 60 times due to Ruth’s blasts, and had a gap hitter as protection in back of him. Even so, he still produced 47 HR, a .373 AVG, .474 OBP, and a team high 175 RBI.

As powerful and feared a hitter as Ruth was, it was actually Gehrig who performed slightly better in the World Series.

Ruth hit .326 with 33 RBI in 41 games, while Gehrig generated .361 with 35 RBI in just 34 games. During their time as teammates, Ruth hit .409 with 22 RBI, whereas Gehrig batted .422 with 25 RBI.

Both epitomized the word “clutch,” but Gehrig’s superior numbers should be celebrated and magnified by hitting behind Ruth.

After Ruth’s final .300 AVG and 100 RBI season in 1933, he became a mere shell of the hero he once represented. He struggled mightily in 1934, before eventually leaving the franchise shortly thereafter.

Gehrig’s production remained unchanged, even while shouldering the burden of the Yankees lineup for the first time without Ruth. From 1934-1937, he averaged 41+ home runs and 149 RBI, while also hitting .350 over that span.

The Yankees added a promising rookie to the lineup in 1936 named Joe DiMaggio, who was again placed in front of Gehrig in the batting order.

Additionally, “The Iron Horse” had a 20 home run hitter batting behind him for the first time in his entire career; Yankees catcher Bill Dickey.

The culmination of Dickey and DiMaggio helped to balance New York’s lineup and protect Gehrig. It led to three consecutive World Series Championships from 1936 to 1938.

The Iron Horse would have continued to collect jewelry had it not been for his sudden and disheartening retirement in 1939. He was ultimately forced to leave the game he loved after developing a rare disease which would later bear his name.

Gehrig was the product of a blue collar New York City upbringing, earning the right to make his mark on the sport’s most impressive franchise. He left baseball the way he entered it after replacing the injured Wally Pipp; feeling grateful and blessed for the years he spent living every kid’s dream.

The emotional and heartfelt speech Gehrig delivered is still regarded as one of the best in sports history. He was summoned to speak with no preparation or prior knowledge, and delivered a teary-eyed message straight from his heart to the microphone.


Gehrig is one of the most talented players to ever don a baseball uniform. More importantly, he is the classiest and bravest man to step foot onto the hallowed ground of Yankee Stadium.

Not only was Gehrig someone to look up to and admire, but he is also a true source of inspiration to anyone who knows his story or battles his disease to this day.

I tip my hat to you, Lou Gehrig, and sincerely hope that you are still hitting cleanup in God’s lineup.