Trekgeekscott
Posts: 39668
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: twinsfan quote:
ORIGINAL: djskillz Agree there, Matt. I don't think Ruth can ever be topped because of the pitching aspect, but as for "everyone else" A-Rod's in the mix. Along with Bonds, Ted Williams, Mantle, Mays... I don't agree with you on his impact this season. 1) I don't think he'll end up playing much 3b at all. 2) I just don't think he's got much left in the tank. Let's not overstate Ruth's pitching. He had TWO good pitching seasons in his career. And speaking of the time, look at the competition....there wasn't much. It was a time when there weren't many teams, and it's questionable how many truly great players were in the game at the time. Other than his time at pitcher, he was a plodding outfielder. A-Rod was a top-rate SS and 3B, and played against much tougher competition. Ruth played in a era where all the bad things were detrimental to playing the game. He drank, ate too much, and still dominated. AROID used performance enhancing drugs. You do have a point about eras. Ruth did not play in an integrated league so he would have had more competition for slugging than he had if Josh Gibson would have been allowed to play with/against him. Ruth gets more credit for me though for growing the game. The homerun brought people to the ballpark. He changed the entire paradigm of the game. Do you know who held the lead in HRs for a season before he hit 60? He did, with 23. That's how he changed the game. And his number should be closer to 800 dingers too. Rule changes, when he played if a ball landed in foul territory even if it curled around the fair side of the pole, it was foul, and it's estimated 80 or so of balls he hit "foul" would be called HRs today.
_____________________________
I'd like to thank my arms for always being beside me, My legs for supporting me and my fingers. I can always count on them.
|