Can you name the MLB players with over 500 home runs and 3000 hits?

Javascript is not currently enabled on your browser.
If you do have Javascript enabled:
This site uses javascript to make the magic happen.
Please turn on javascript and reload this page, or use a more current browser (like Firefox)

You might also like these games:
MLB HR Leaders (1980s)	MLB 40-HRs by 4-letter players	MLB HR Leaders by Decade

There are 23 comments for this game.
(Warning: comments may contain spoilers)

MLB 500 HR & 3000 Hit Club Quiz

by skiii

Created Sep 25, 2009 in Sports
Featured Apr 30, 2013
Game Plays 15,306

Embed Game

Report a Mistake

Friend Scores and Standings

Loading friend results....

Top Games Today in Sports

Top Games with Similar Tags

Top User Games in Sports

Archived comments: show them

Comment below threshold: show it

	forneverandafter:	Apr 30th, 2013 at 20:24 GMT		3 points
	Two of these guys played for the Orioles, none for the Yankees...just sayin

	jjf:	Apr 30th, 2013 at 23:03 GMT		13 points
	Some great ballplayers. But think about this: Ted Williams finished with 521 homers and 2,654 hits -- while missing 3 full years to WWII and most of 2 years serving in Korea. The numbers he would have had ...

	terrapin19:	Apr 30th, 2013 at 23:33 GMT		1 point
	Disappointed in myself that I completely missed the one I watched all the time growing up (not going to say which one that is to avoid dating myself).

	jeffg3wksapart:	May 1st, 2013 at 00:11 GMT		1 point
	If Griffey Jr. HAD done roids he likely wdve made this list (630/2781) since he missed so many games when he played for the Reds. And Rafe didn't become a huge home run hitter until he was 30. Anyone wonder why?

	brettinohio:	May 1st, 2013 at 02:38 GMT		5 points
	The most underrated man in baseball history must be Frank Robinson. He is 53 hits short of being on the list. He is also the second most famous Robinson to break a major color barrier in baseball as well as being the second most famous Robinson on those great Orioles teams of the 60s and 70s. He was a first ballot HOFer who was in the same HOF class as Hank Aaron.

	tevster1316:	May 1st, 2013 at 15:12 GMT		1 point
	Palmeiro*

	kps7179:	May 1st, 2013 at 18:53 GMT		4 points
	Quite the exclusive club. But Aaron and Mays tower above over everyone who came after them. Incredible that Aaron hit the 500 mark at 34 and 3,000 mark at 36. Mays at 35 and 39, respectively. Murray was in his 40's and we know Palmeiro needed PED's to get there.

	Slinkyfarm:	May 2nd, 2013 at 03:31 GMT		4 points
	What knocks me out about Aaron is that even if you didn't count the home runs, he'd still have more than 3,000 hits. Nobody who's known as a power-hitter first could make that claim, and of that exclusive class, Stan Musial is a distant second in homers.

	yocoy:	May 2nd, 2013 at 04:10 GMT		1 point
	At least three of these guys were clean.

	ojoe:	May 2nd, 2013 at 06:07 GMT		3 points
	I think Aaron and Mays are great arguments for revising Hall of Fame voting procedures. Willie Mays lost some time to military service, and later lost some power numbers to his home ballpark in San Francisco, and still put up those numbers. Aaron retired as No. 1 all-time in homers and No. 2 in hits. Only Cobb had more. He's still No. 1 in RBI, still No. 1 in total bases...And yet nobody has ever been elected to the Hall unanimously. Which means that somebody DIDN'T vote for Hank Aaron and Willie Mays. Boggles the mind. These are Mount Rushmore figures in the game - how is it possible that somebody saw them on a Hall of Fame ballot and thought, "Nah, he's not quite there"?

	lftyg33:	May 2nd, 2013 at 09:04 GMT		2 points
	@yocoy: hard to call hank aaron and willie mays "clean" when they both openly used "greenies" which are banned today.

	kps7179:	May 2nd, 2013 at 15:27 GMT		1 point
	@Slinkyfarm, good point, though I think Stan, though way behind in HR's, is underappreciated. Have to remember he served our country in the war as well. He's near the top in so many hitting categories even still, which is remarkable.

	kps7179:	May 2nd, 2013 at 15:28 GMT		1 point
	@ojoe: Racist voters perhaps?

	Troy94:	May 2nd, 2013 at 15:47 GMT		3 points
	@kpsjoe: That's possible, but it's more likely that it's the small group of 75-80+ year old voters who either feel that no one, no matter how good they are, should be voted in unanimously, so they don't vote for them to keep that from happening or feel that "Since Babe Ruth didn't get in unanimously, I will make sure no one does."

	ciretose:	May 2nd, 2013 at 20:33 GMT		1 point
	Haters.

	Troy94:	May 2nd, 2013 at 22:40 GMT		1 point
	I inadvertently combined 2 users' names on my earlier comment. It should have been directed @kps7179. I mistakenly made a portmanteau of their username and that of ojoe. My apologies to both of them.

	pgrossma:	May 3rd, 2013 at 20:13 GMT		0 points
	@Troy94, I think that those are curtains to hide racism behind

	Slinkyfarm:	May 5th, 2013 at 01:31 GMT		2 points
	@kps, Musial is absolutely unappreciated as a home run hitter. What gets left out of the numbers is that he led all players born in the 1920s in career homers, but I still think of him first as a doubles-hitter, singles-hitter and high-average guy and I'm not alone in that. And @ojoe, there are writers who simply won't vote for any first-ballot players. That's how there haven't been any unanimous selections. It'll be interesting to see how close Greg Maddux comes. Other than regarding his move to the Braves, which was entirely the fault of Cubs GM Larry Himes, I've never heard an ill word spoken of him as a player, as a person or as a leader. And there will still be a couple of voters who leave him off their ballots.