91 replies to this topic

[timwakefield]

JoeyJoJo, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 12:31 PM, said:

But, come on, it might be cliche, but it doesn't change the undisputable fact that Babe Ruth is the greatest of all-time and it is stupid to suggest otherwise.

Babe Ruth is the #1 best ever, and I'm a man who loves him some Ted Williams.http://www.baseball-.../ruthba01.shtmlAll those bold numbers are when he led the league. http://www.baseball-...g-leaders.shtmlhttp://www.baseball-...g-leaders.shtmlhttp://www.baseball-...g-leaders.shtmlThe man hit over twice as many home runs as anybody else in either league, for 3 consecutive years. Nothing like that has happened since. I wonder if anybody has ever hit more than twice as many home runs as anybody else in the either league even one time, let alone for 3 years running. I very strongly doubt it, unless it was pre-Ruth and it was like 11 vs 5, rather than 50 vs 20.EDIT: Oh wait, it was done again, in 1926, by fucking Babe Ruth.

[JoeyJoJo]

timwakefield, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

EDIT: Oh wait, it was done again, in 1926, by fucking Babe Ruth.

And, oh by the way, he fucking led the league in ERA, complete games, and shutouts while winning 23 games one year. And has a career 94-46 record with a 2.28 ERA. I guess he had the advantage of not facing himself though.

[CaneBrain]

BUT HOW WOULD BABE RUTH HAVE DONE IF THEY LET BLACK GUYS PLAY, ANSWER ME THAT SMARMY PANTSes.Marlins fans are definitely deserving of the 5 spot. Bad enough that they belong on the list but you can hardly fault them for general apathy......so #5 sounds good.Not sure how Red Sox fans make the worst list. Annoying, sure, but knowledgable and passionate.....that's enough to be in the middle of the pack at least.

[timwakefield]

And as long as we're talking about how Ruth is so obviously greater than Bonds, even without the steroid issue, figure Ruth's .342 lifetime average vs Bonds' .298. Well, I figure it and I get that one is enormously higher than the other, given the context of lifetime batting average for a veteran, retired player.Sure Bonds has a nice obp, but really nothing spectacular even. Ruth's is 30 points higher and he's not even #1 (cough, tedwilliams, ahem). Ruth hit a home run once every 11.76 official at-bats. Bonds, once every 12.92 official at-bats. And those don't count walks. I could go on.

[CaneBrain]

timwakefield, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 1:39 PM, said:

And as long as we're talking about how Ruth is so obviously greater than Bonds, even without the steroid issue, figure Ruth's .342 lifetime average vs Bonds' .298. Well, I figure it and I get that one is enormously higher than the other, given the context of lifetime batting average for a veteran, retired player. Sure Bonds has a nice obp, but really nothing spectacular even. Ruth's is 30 points higher and he's not even #1 (cough, tedwilliams, ahem). Ruth hit a home run once every 11.76 official at-bats. Bonds, once every 12.92 official at-bats. And those don't count walks. I could go on.

To play devil's advocate:The player pool was far, far weaker. No black guys or Hispanics. Not to mention Ruth never had to fly cross-country, play at night, or deal with the era of video review and specialization. I think Bonds on steroids was the best player we have ever seen all things considered. I favor Ruth's career over Bonds....but those two seasons where Bonds had OBPs well over .500......I seriously doubt we ever see a guy dominate like that again. Pretty hard to make your teammates better in baseball but Bonds accomplished it for a couple seasons.The fact that Ruth pitched for a time so dominatingly makes this argument pretty moot.....but if we are solely judging them as hitters-----you can make a case that Steroid Bonds was as good as we have seen.

[Mercury69]

Babe Ruth: It could be argued he was the best "natural" ballplayer ever. I mean, who the hell goes from being a stellar pitcher to changing the entire game around by smashing HR's at an unheard of rate in the deadball era? Best ever of all-time? Sure, I'll bite...Johnny Damon: **** Johnny Damon. He was good with the Red Sox, but he had a horrible mullet. Then he signs with the Yankees? Hillbilly, puh-leeze...Barry Bonds: OK, I loved this guy when he was with the Pirates. Then his ego got bigger than Jupiter and then he started crushing HR's and apologists said it was the maturation process, off season wirkouts and his terrific hand/eye. Then his neck completely disappeared, like Sammy Sosa's. And he was mouthy and irritable with the press, turning into one of the biggest a-holes ever in MLB. ****l you, Barry. Your dad has more class in his scrotum...

[JoeyJoJo]

This is how I judge players (and, by extension, how everyone should do it): how does he compare against his peers? Babe Ruth was so far and away better than anyone he played against, it's silly. He hit more home runs than entire teams. Not just some teams. Every single team.

CaneBrain, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 10:42 AM, said:

Not to mention Ruth never had to fly cross-country, play at night, or deal with the era of video review and specialization.

Such miniscule points that it's not even worth mentioning. In my opinion. But I'd rather fly cross country in a private jet than take the train to the next state.By the way, I've always been a huge Barry Bonds supporter.

[CaneBrain]

JoeyJoJo, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 1:49 PM, said:

Such miniscule points that it's not even worth mentioning. In my opinion.

Imo, that's crazy talk especially the video review and relief pitcher part. The night games and travel are much more miniscule. Getting to see the same pitcher all 9 innings most of the time is not.

[timwakefield]

Video review and personal trainers and hitting coaches and all that helps the hitters too!

[timwakefield]

CaneBrain, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 1:54 PM, said:

Getting to see the same pitcher all 9 innings most of the time is not.

The idea that pitchers used to finish every game they started is sort of a myth. Maybe around 1900 it was true, but by Ruth's time it was far from uncommon for a relief pitcher to come in. Certainly there wasn't a whole bullpen full of them, specialized in different ways and preparing all year for high-pressure, tense situations. More likely it was your least-tired guy coming in to try to stop the bleeding in a still-winnable game, but relievers were definitely used. Look up some stats during the Ruth years of pitchers and how many complete games pitchers were throwing vs how many games they were starting. You'll see a large number of incomplete games.Edit: Randomly, the 1928 Yankees 5 main starters, complete games vs games started: 22 of 38, 19 of 31, 18 of 24, 10 of 22, and 3 of 12. Red Sox the same year: 25 of 34, 20 of 29, 10 of 26, 9 of 28, and 4 of 15. So it looks like about 50/50, from that admittedly small but random sample.Nerdy math edit: from that sample, 54% of games were complete games.

[JoeyJoJo]

Plus, the vast majority of today's relievers are worse than the starters. Otherwise they'd be starters. So I think it balances itself out anyway. I haven't seen any studies comparing eras on late inning performance.

[CaneBrain]

JoeyJoJo, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 2:27 PM, said:

Plus, the vast majority of today's relievers are worse than the starters. Otherwise they'd be starters. So I think it balances itself out anyway. I haven't seen any studies comparing eras on late inning performance.

Something for Bill James to look at. I am just pointing out some things. I think Ruth is far and away the #1 (since he was also a pitcher....that's kind of an argument ender, imo) but I feel like because of steroids it gets downplayed exactly how scary-good Bonds was for about 2.5 years. When it is a surprise when a guy makes an out, that is pretty amazing.

[Mercury69]

Kind of got off-topic, in a worthwhile way, but here's what I was going to say:Montreal Expos fans: I know the franchise moved to DC back in 2005, but Expos fans were often the most apathetic bunch of bandwagoneering assholes ever. I remeber the Expos going on a West coast raod trip and winning 12 of 15 or something like that, which put them back into a pennant race. Fans came out 30K strong for maybe two or three games and then it dwindled back to the usual 12-14K. Pathetic...Their front office was a bunch of fukkos, too, which didn't help.On a related note, The Expos hold the record for the earliest no-hitter by a franchise. Bill Stoneman tossed one against the Phillies 10 days into the Expos first season.

[king_tanner]

JoeyJoJo, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 10:49 AM, said:

By the way, I've always been a huge Barry Bonds supporter.

Really? Why? Unless if you are a Giants fan.Aside from all the steroid stuff, the guy is like the biggest dick ever.

[JoeyJoJo]

king_tanner, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 9:57 PM, said:

Really? Why? Unless if you are a Giants fan.Aside from all the steroid stuff, the guy is like the biggest dick ever.

I'm actually a Dodgers fan, but I just really don't care what people are like off the field. What I meant by supporter is that I was able to recognize that he was a top 3 player of all-time and was completely awed by his performance.

[GeneralGeeWhiz]

king_tanner, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 9:57 PM, said:

Really? Why? Unless if you are a Giants fan.Aside from all the steroid stuff, the guy is like the biggest dick ever.

so if bonds was a sweetheart you would like him? who cares how he was off the field. he is one of if not the greatest player to ever play. its like hating on tiger because of his off the course stuff. you should appreciate a great player for his abilitiets, not his attitude off the field. thats a narrow minded view.

[El Guapo]

JoeyJoJo, on Tuesday, September 7th, 2010, 10:49 AM, said:

Such miniscule points that it's not even worth mentioning. In my opinion. But I'd rather fly cross country in a private jet than take the train to the next state.

Hmmm, would I rather fly 5 hours across country on this:or spend 6-8 hours on this to go a couple hundred miles:

[timwakefield]

To be fair, only minor leaguers and negro leaguers took buses. I mean, obviously it sucks that there even was a negro league (rather than an integrated major leagues) but if we're just comparing major leaguers, I think they mostly took trains. The team probably had at least a car to themselves, good food probably, all that. Just sayin, Babe wasn't exactly stuck on a rotten bus all day.

[BigDMcGee]

timwakefield, on Wednesday, September 8th, 2010, 7:48 PM, said:

To be fair, only minor leaguers and negro leaguers took buses. I mean, obviously it sucks that there even was a negro league (rather than an integrated major leagues) but if we're just comparing major leaguers, I think they mostly took trains. The team probably had at least a car to themselves, good food probably, all that. Just sayin, Babe wasn't exactly stuck on a rotten bus all day.

I dunno, many of hte owners from that era were extremely cheap. Maybe not the yankee's owner tho.

[timwakefield]

That's true, Charles Comiskey's cheapness was apparently one of the motivating factors in the White Sox throwing the world series.