There are literally dozens of better hitters. Rose's prime (1965-1979) saw him hit .316/.388/.442, a 130 OPS+, in 10942 plate appearances, topping out with a 152 and 158 in 1968-69 (he won batting titles both years). 401 runs above average, 27 RAA per season. He was mostly a poor to average hitter outside of these years.
That's pretty close to Rod Carew's prime (1969-1983, 397 RAA in 8601 PA, 26 per season). Of course Carew was more valuable per plate appearance, but it's pretty close overall. Rod Carew was a fantastic player, but no one argues he was the greatest hitter of all time, or close to it - in all honestly, he's often forgotten today.
Rose (and Carew) weren't even close to Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, Ted Williams, Ty Cobb, Lou Gehrig, Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Stan Musial, Hank Aaron, Rogers Hornsby, Jimmie Foxx, and so on and so on. You can eliminate all of the pre-integration players and he still won't be in the top 40 (Frank Robinson, Frank Thomas, Albert Pujols, Mike Trout, Ken Griffey, Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez, Mike Schmidt, Chipper Jones, Eddie McCovey, Rickey Henderson, Reggie Jackson, George Brett, Gary Sheffield, Carl Yastrzemski, Harmon Killebrew, Eddie Murray, etc, etc). You can add players like Oscar Charleston and Josh Gibson and Turkey Stearnes, who won't pick up the same batting runs because their teams played very short seasons, but who were honestly as good as their contemporaries.
Rose got lots and lots of hits. He got hits more often per plate appearances than a lot of guys. Someone like Harmon Killebrew, a near-contemporary, was generating more value at the plate, because his hits, while fewer in number, were simply much more valuable (it takes several singles to equal a home run, and Killebrew hit a lot of home runs), and he was avoiding outs at essentially the same rate (1959-1972, Killebrew had a .385 OBP).