Titans @ Patriiots gamethread

[Chamillitary Click]

who lead the league in home runs more than the Babe?


Babe Ruth hit a record 29 homeruns in the DEAD BALL ERA - if you hit 15 back then you were a "slugger"

lol, the competiton today is so much better than it was in the 1920's, it's barely comparable.

how many players back then even hit more than 35 homeruns in a season?

he had nobody pitching to him & the "somebodies" who were pitching to him were throwing 18 straight innings in back to back double headers lol.

So all the batters were so bad in the 20s that of all the 18 straight inning pitchers only the Babe could hit the ball long? Give me a break. You're the one who likes facts. Here's a fact for you. Bonds hit an HR ver 13 at bats. Babe hit 1 every 12 at bats. No ifs, no buts, no speculation. Babe Ruth is a better homerun hitter because he hit a homerun more often than Bonds did. We could speculate on pitchers all day and believe me I have theoretical arguments up the wazoo, but you like stats and facts and the fact is that Ruth is a better HR hitter than Bonds, because when Bonds made it to Ruth at bat number he had 150 less homeruns than Ruth. So if you bet on Bonds in a game to hit a homerun and I bet on Ruth, at the end of each career I'd have more money because Ruth hit more homeruns and more often.

alright, we'll just ignore the fact Ruth didn't have to face a left hander whose purpose of getting a contract is to get left handed batters out in the 7th & 8th.

Ruth's competiton has to be a factor here & like i was saying Hack has been posting stats of the games best at their peaks & a lot have averaged as many or more than him; actually surprising.

[Lunatic]

^But Brady's "competition" of an uncovering Titans secondary doesn't play a factor? Shallow served u homie on that "average home runs per bat" and with u still arguing against that, your 100% contradicting yourself.

U the homie, but I call it as I see it.

[Chamillitary Click]

^But Brady's "competition" of an uncovering Titans secondary doesn't play a factor? Shallow served u homie on that "average home runs per bat" and with u still arguing against that, your 100% contradicting yourself.

U the homie, but I call it as I see it.

i meant more along the lines of that Baseball was still not at it's peak in terms of players back then, but i understand.

i've never said Brady was better, where is this statement coming from? i never said it lol.

what i HAVE said is that "I'm not saying Brady is better than any of the great HOFer's, I am not saying Brady is better than Peyton, but Brady is one of the the greats."

Tom Brady throws for a high number of touchdowns, year in and year out, has the most in a single season & has 3 rings on teams he has lead. because Peyton has a stronger & more accurate arm that puts him 138 levels above Brady? i don't know, not in my opinion; scoring is scoring.

then Babe Ruth was shown by Hack to have hit less HRs per season than McGuire; i will give him the option to pick either who hits more per season or more all time; which i could personally care less about because that's not even the discussion at hand here but more of getting off into a tangent to argue for a view which i hope one day he realizes isn't convincing me of changing my opinion on Brady lol.

& even though this is the Pats/Titans gamethread, it's gotten far off that topic & it's barely about this weeks game anymore, more like Brady's career & i mean, you can tell, Babe Ruth somehow go involved lol.

& this guy lives for the argument, on a serious note, have you ever seen him in a thread agreeing or co-signing something somebody says?

[Shallow]

who lead the league in home runs more than the Babe?


Babe Ruth hit a record 29 homeruns in the DEAD BALL ERA - if you hit 15 back then you were a "slugger"

lol, the competiton today is so much better than it was in the 1920's, it's barely comparable.

how many players back then even hit more than 35 homeruns in a season?

he had nobody pitching to him & the "somebodies" who were pitching to him were throwing 18 straight innings in back to back double headers lol.

So all the batters were so bad in the 20s that of all the 18 straight inning pitchers only the Babe could hit the ball long? Give me a break. You're the one who likes facts. Here's a fact for you. Bonds hit an HR ver 13 at bats. Babe hit 1 every 12 at bats. No ifs, no buts, no speculation. Babe Ruth is a better homerun hitter because he hit a homerun more often than Bonds did. We could speculate on pitchers all day and believe me I have theoretical arguments up the wazoo, but you like stats and facts and the fact is that Ruth is a better HR hitter than Bonds, because when Bonds made it to Ruth at bat number he had 150 less homeruns than Ruth. So if you bet on Bonds in a game to hit a homerun and I bet on Ruth, at the end of each career I'd have more money because Ruth hit more homeruns and more often.

alright, we'll just ignore the fact Ruth didn't have to face a left hander whose purpose of getting a contract is to get left handed batters out in the 7th & 8th.

Ruth's competiton has to be a factor here & like i was saying Hack has been posting stats of the games best at their peaks & a lot have averaged as many or more than him; actually surprising.

We'll also ignore the fact that half of the Babe's games were played in a stadium that was 490 up the middle, 460 left center, and 425 right center. That he played with inferior balls, inferior bats, and inferior training schedules. He is the best homerun hitter. Period. Just like the guy with the most hits isn't the best hitter, the guy with the most homeruns isn't the best homerun hitter. Unless of course you want to turn this into a Ty Cobb vs Pete Rose debate.


Forgive but I can't think of the left hander you speak of. I can think of my man Lefty Grove though. He was great.



As for Brady being one of the greats. I have no doubt he'll be remembered as such. I just don't think he would have been if he ended up on the Bills in 2000. Where I see Peyton being remembered at the very least as good as his father. The difference between the two is that I think Peyton would be one of those QBs that despite his team never winning, everyone and their mother in that organization would know that it wasn't because of QB play and no matter what, they'd keep him. Where if Brady was on a team that kept losing, he'd have been dropped. That's my assessment. It's all speculation and I can't prove any of it, but just based on the way he plays, my understanding of the Erhardt - Perkins offensive system, and my prediction of the success of Kyle Orton, and Matt Cassel under that system, that I've come to that personal conclusion. You'll still have a great life if you don't ever adopt that theory, but just understand that I'm forever sticking to it. And nothing short of Brady joining the Titans tomorrow and making them win 10 straight game and a wild card spot will change that. I will also take a cheap shot at Brady every time I see the opportunity too. You shouldn't take it personally. I just like ragging on him.

[Chamillitary Click]

^so you're upset & dislike the fact that Brady gets so much praise, but you don't think that he will be remembered as a great?

Lefty Grove the starter? who faced Babe Ruth 90% of games at least once?

& i will ignore that because he was playing with inferior pitching too.

lol, i admit the guy is the best baseball player of all time, just not the greatest HR hitter & it's just not enough lmao.

[Shallow]

^so you're upset & dislike the fact that Brady gets so much praise, but you don't think that he will be remembered as a great?

Lefty Grove the starter? who faced Babe Ruth 90% of games at least once?

& i will ignore that because he was playing with inferior pitching too.

lol, i admit the guy is the best baseball player of all time, just not the greatest HR hitter & it's just not enough lmao.

"I have no doubt he'll be remembered as such". I do think he'll be remembered asa great. I just don't think he would have been if he played on a shit team. I'd say the same about Bradshaw, Namath, Starr, etc.


Prove to me that the pitching was inferior. You're the one that likes facts and stats, and proof. Where is the proof. It's all speculation that a guy from today would walk into the 20s and pop 'em out like no tomorrow.

And who is this left hander that Bonds faced in 90% of his games?

[Chamillitary Click]

^my bad, i didn't see you say "no doubt he will", i thought it read, "i doubt he will".

& my proof is simply logic.

people back then had other jobs in the off season, they weren't concerned about staying at the top of their game.

they would put a bat or ball down in late September & not pick another one up until March.

today a guy like A-Rod or Pujols or Johan or Lincecum barely have an off season.

i'm sure they take a few months off when the season ends, but by Decemeber they are getting into a zone.

the game was still developing back then.

& every team in major league baseball has at least one left handed specialist to get left handed batters out.

I.E. Phil Coke & Damaso Marte for the Yankees; they might not even have jobs if statistics didn't show they can get left handed batters out more efficiently than right handed pitchers.

[OchoCinco]

Frankly the level of talent in sports today is so far above what it used to be back in the days of Babe Ruth its impossible to try and compare. You can say that Babe Ruth was amazing and all this but truly he would probably look average with todays pitchers and level of talent all around.


And the WOW at the titans i got to watch this game this weekend before work n i was fuckin laughing. Brady lit them the fuck up.

[Shallow]

^my bad, i didn't see you say "no doubt he will", i thought it read, "i doubt he will".

& my proof is simply logic.

people back then had other jobs in the off season, they weren't concerned about staying at the top of their game.

they would put a bat or ball down in late September & not pick another one up until March.

today a guy like A-Rod or Pujols or Johan or Lincecum barely have an off season.

i'm sure they take a few months off when the season ends, but by Decemeber they are getting into a zone.

the game was still developing back then.

& every team in major league baseball has at least one left handed specialist to get left handed batters out.

I.E. Phil Coke & Damaso Marte for the Yankees; they might not even have jobs if statistics didn't show they can get left handed batters out more efficiently than right handed pitchers.

1) If your logic is true then the great players today would have been much worse than they are if they had to only play a few months a year and work the rest of the time. If Barry Bonds had no training schedule, no steroids, no off time to rest and practice, not making staying on top of his game his first priority in life, he would have had far less homeruns. If that logic is true what Babe did was harder because he did what no one around him could do.

2) It's all a big if, isn't it? You scoff at my logic that if Peyton Manning had 100 more pass attempts in 04 he'd have had another 10 or 11 TDs, but you use the same type of shit to argue against the Babe.

3) My logic goes the other way on this big if. Maybe they didn't have the full development of the game and trained the same way, but neither did Ruth so it would even out. He still hit more HRs per at bat. The league had half the teams, so half the spots were available, and there were no other prominant pro sports so the best athletes in the country only played baseball. If the MLB decided to cut the league to 8 teams each tomorrow, every team would have 5 aces starting and two all star closers as relievers, then an amazing closer. They also have two clean up hitters batting 4th and 8th. If today's USA decided that only baseball would be a sport then every superstar athlete playing football or basketball would focus on baseball making the competition that much harder and making the level of play higher. The MLB today would be insane under those circumstances. Well those were the circumstances back then, and I'm not saying it was harder then,but I could argue that those circumstances then equate it to the current diluted league.

4) But in the end it's all ifs. What isn't an if is 1 HR every 11.7 at bats. Leading the league in HRs 12 times; more than Bonds, Aaron and McGwire combined. And what isn't an if is that he did it all in a stadium that was 490 up the middle.