It wasn't Baer that was the second best, it was Schmeling and by a clear margin. Even if he lost in an off performance he was rated for pretty much every year of the decade (the most often rated HW of the 30s), beat more contenders and beat Louis himself. Baer arguably is in the top 5 though and at his best I can't see anyone having an easy time with him barring Ali and Holmes. You just cannot dismiss wins over guys who were good to stellar boxers with good size on them.
I'm just saying that Baer was huge potential that lacked skills and discipline. Do I need to explain that to you again?