I am increasingly thinking that Jackie Robinson is one of the most underrated baseball players of all-time and that, as great as Joe Morgan was, that Jackie should be considered a better player than Morgan.

Joe Morgan had more stolen bases than Robinson, but he played in an era when stolen bases were a much more common occurence. Morgan never led the league in SB's, whereas Robinson did, twice....

A big part of Morgan's appeal is his on-base percentage, and yet Jackie had a better career OBP (.409 to .392) a much better career OPS (.883 to .819) and an equal OPS+ of 132

Jackie's career BA was a full 40 points higher than Joe's. That means when a player is on 2nd or 3rd, there is a much higher % of time that Jackie was knocking in the runner as opposed to taking a walk. Jackie's BA was almost 40 points higher than the league average, whereas Joe's was just 11 points higher. Their OBP was about equal in terms of differential to league average: Jackie's OBP was 62 points higher than league average, whereas Joe's was 66 points higher.

They were both terrific fielders, but Jackie was much more versatile, being able to play fantastic D at 3B, 1B and OF in addition to 2B (and he played SS in the Negro Leagues). Joe was a 2B who played OF, too

Neither was lights out in the postseason, but Jackie was better there, too and much better in All-Star Games

Morgan hit more HR's, but had a much lower slugging %

I think if you adjust for league averages, Robinson was actually much closer in ability to Honus Wagner than people give him credit for.....