It's June 16, 2024, 07:19:10 AM
Total Members Voted: 16
mdogg why are you all up on the black man's schlong all of the sudden?
MDogg take your L like a man
hahahai love when people challenge ol' Hackenshmidt to a baseball arguement
Quote from: Hack Wilson on July 10, 2008, 05:54:17 PMhahahai love when people challenge ol' Hackenshmidt to a baseball arguement see here is the thing, your arguing that Ruth had no control over who he played, that he was popular with Negro players, and that's well known, but the bottomline is that the Negro League was full of great talent in the 20's, the height of the league, and Ruth never was allowed to play them. For that, and that allone the era was full of what ifs. Josh Gibson they said hit 800 home runs in the Negro League, but because of faulty stat taking it's not regonize. You think your a get baseball source, but unless you are 90 years old facts are your wikipedia is your major source. You like me have no real footage of these players, we are left with stat books and stories. And as a history major, I can say that all stories, even the Bible, have to be looked at critially. So when I hear about Ruth, I don't question if he was a great player, but what I do know, even before the bigger head, Barry Bonds was the greatest player I've ever seen, and Bonds before 1998 gave me no questions that he was every just as bit as good as the great players from Willie Mays' era. To me that was when baseball was at it's greatest, it's puriest. Before Jackie Robinson baseball, by no fault of it's players, was like the US pre-1865, stained, and those records are put into question. Ruth got baseball out of the deadball era, put butts in seats and for it he is treated like the greatest player ever. This country loves to think of guy who looks like one of them, has a great smile and a strong bat as the GOAT. But to me, I can't see him that way. Not when there was a league full of great players who never had a chance to prove how good they can be. In the flip side, once Jose Canseco came on the field, baseball became stained again. We will never know if most of these players are juicing until they come out or get caught. Neither has happened to Barry, but his the poster child of steriods, mainly because of his bad relationship with the press. I never thought he should have broken Hank Aaron's record, but he did, and his swing was so quick and so sweet that he honestly could have been a great home run hitter in his career IF he would have focused on strength earlier instead of waiting to "experiment". These players have ??s all over them. I think Bonds was a better athlete than Ruth, I think that his swing was better, and aside from Ruth being one of the best pitchers in the game, I think Bonds was a better all around player than Ruth, from stolen bases to contact hits to fielding. He's a 2nd generation player, he knew the game coming in and he played like it, until 1998.
Quote from: M Dogg for Obama on July 11, 2008, 04:28:33 AMQuote from: Hack Wilson on July 10, 2008, 05:54:17 PMhahahai love when people challenge ol' Hackenshmidt to a baseball arguement see here is the thing, your arguing that Ruth had no control over who he played, that he was popular with Negro players, and that's well known, but the bottomline is that the Negro League was full of great talent in the 20's, the height of the league, and Ruth never was allowed to play them. For that, and that allone the era was full of what ifs. Josh Gibson they said hit 800 home runs in the Negro League, but because of faulty stat taking it's not regonize. You think your a get baseball source, but unless you are 90 years old facts are your wikipedia is your major source. You like me have no real footage of these players, we are left with stat books and stories. And as a history major, I can say that all stories, even the Bible, have to be looked at critially. So when I hear about Ruth, I don't question if he was a great player, but what I do know, even before the bigger head, Barry Bonds was the greatest player I've ever seen, and Bonds before 1998 gave me no questions that he was every just as bit as good as the great players from Willie Mays' era. To me that was when baseball was at it's greatest, it's puriest. Before Jackie Robinson baseball, by no fault of it's players, was like the US pre-1865, stained, and those records are put into question. Ruth got baseball out of the deadball era, put butts in seats and for it he is treated like the greatest player ever. This country loves to think of guy who looks like one of them, has a great smile and a strong bat as the GOAT. But to me, I can't see him that way. Not when there was a league full of great players who never had a chance to prove how good they can be. In the flip side, once Jose Canseco came on the field, baseball became stained again. We will never know if most of these players are juicing until they come out or get caught. Neither has happened to Barry, but his the poster child of steriods, mainly because of his bad relationship with the press. I never thought he should have broken Hank Aaron's record, but he did, and his swing was so quick and so sweet that he honestly could have been a great home run hitter in his career IF he would have focused on strength earlier instead of waiting to "experiment". These players have ??s all over them. I think Bonds was a better athlete than Ruth, I think that his swing was better, and aside from Ruth being one of the best pitchers in the game, I think Bonds was a better all around player than Ruth, from stolen bases to contact hits to fielding. He's a 2nd generation player, he knew the game coming in and he played like it, until 1998. blah blah blah. what good is a stolen base when you hit 50 home runs, 15 triples and 30 doubles a year??Buck Oneal himself said that your average Negro league team consisted of 2-3 position players of MLB quality and 1-2 pitchersnow if a roster is 15-20 players deep, thats not much. 1/4 of the rosters.now, really, why am i bothering to argue with you? you actually think Bonds is a better contact hitter than Babe Ruth? wow. what makes you think that? the fact his batting aveage is .035 points above the league average, which is smaller than Ruth's .057?the fact Ruth's slugging % was miles ahead? were you really THAT impressed by bonds' two steroid enhanced batting titles that you've swayed your decision??please tell me.Babe Ruth in 1923 had the best fielding season by a right fielder of all time. you forget Ruth had a ROCKET of an arm, and was very speedy until the late 1920's.come on now, you just sound bitter.btw the way: josh gibosn's 800 home runs = a mythical total for negro league, minor league and exhibiton games....this includes against amateur talent.he's only confirmed for hitting about 150 against negro league competition and cuban leagues (legit leauges)gibson would not hit 800 in the majors, especially being a catcher.
SMH