Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Joe DiMaggio

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bluesky5
    replied
    Why hasn't this thread and the "Joe DiMaggio" thread been merged?

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    Originally posted by layson27 View Post
    1. It's very, very rare for someone in a team sport to be widely considered the greatest while they're still playing. In recent memory only Wayne Gretzky, and perhaps Michael Jordan were considered the greatest while still playing. Maybe Bonds, maybe Jerry Rice, and that's about it. So Mays not being voted #1 in 1969 kinda makes sense.

    2. When Ted Williams said at the time of the poll that “Joe was simply the greatest player I ever saw” he almost assuredly was referring to DiMaggio as being the best player at his prime/peak that Williams ever saw. Williams obviously was not using career value and counting stats as his gauge of greatness. That seems to be the gauge the voters were using as well.
    The fact that Yankee Stadium penalized DiMaggio's slugging ability may have played a small factor too.
    The caveat here is that Williams saw DiMaggio play in person probably in about 170-180 full games while Williams was active. This kind of extensive first hand observation tends to stand out in a person's mind for a long time. How many times did Williams see Stan Musial, Willie Mays ,and Hank Aaron play in person? I suspect probably not that many times. So it's likely Williams didn't get the kind of first hand exposure to these great players that he did of DiMaggio.

    Leave a comment:


  • layson27
    replied
    Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
    I don't think any serious person doubts DiMaggio was an inner-circle HOFer. He was certainly a great player, one of the greatest of the great.

    That being said, DiMaggio was overrated for much of his life. In 1969, Joe DiMaggio was voted The Greatest Living Ballplayer for MLB's centennial. It is hard to see this while Mantle and Mays were still living (not to mention Musial and Williams). DiMaggio was graceful, a great center fielder, etc., but Mays and Mantle had longer careers, and were, arguably, greater players who were penalized for playing through the 1963-68 pitcher's era. Williams and Musial both had far longer careers than DiMaggio, who limped into retirement in 1951. (Musial and Williams both had exceptional seasons in their 40s.) I don't feel sorry for DiMaggio and I don't view him as slighted because he received greater accolades while living than any other ballplayer I can think of.
    1. It's very, very rare for someone in a team sport to be widely considered the greatest while they're still playing. In recent memory only Wayne Gretzky, and perhaps Michael Jordan were considered the greatest while still playing. Maybe Bonds, maybe Jerry Rice, and that's about it. So Mays not being voted #1 in 1969 kinda makes sense.

    2. When Ted Williams said at the time of the poll that “Joe was simply the greatest player I ever saw” he almost assuredly was referring to DiMaggio as being the best player at his prime/peak that Williams ever saw. Williams obviously was not using career value and counting stats as his gauge of greatness. That seems to be the gauge the voters were using as well.
    The fact that Yankee Stadium penalized DiMaggio's slugging ability may also have played a small factor.
    Last edited by layson27; 10-08-2013, 08:59 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fuzzy Bear
    replied
    I don't think any serious person doubts DiMaggio was an inner-circle HOFer. He was certainly a great player, one of the greatest of the great.

    That being said, DiMaggio was overrated for much of his life. In 1969, Joe DiMaggio was voted The Greatest Living Ballplayer for MLB's centennial. It is hard to see this while Mantle and Mays were still living (not to mention Musial and Williams). DiMaggio was graceful, a great center fielder, etc., but Mays and Mantle had longer careers, and were, arguably, greater players who were penalized for playing through the 1963-68 pitcher's era. Williams and Musial both had far longer careers than DiMaggio, who limped into retirement in 1951. (Musial and Williams both had exceptional seasons in their 40s.) I don't feel sorry for DiMaggio and I don't view him as slighted because he received greater accolades while living than any other ballplayer I can think of.

    Leave a comment:


  • JR Hart
    replied
    Along with his amazing talent, DiMaggio played hard every play of his career. He was extremely prideful and intense. His teammates were sucked in to his determination. By contrast Williams was indifferent about his fielding and his teammates. He set no such example of determination. All the walking and OBP in the world can't change that.

    It's not a coincidence that DiMaggio has 9 rings and Williams 0.

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    Deleted post.
    Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 10-07-2013, 03:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Been said that when Joe returned from the service in 1946, he was not the same Joe as we knew him before the service.

    I think it was more a case of eroding health and his physical being, not his skill level.

    1946, right from the start problems with both knees swelling in spring training and into the start of the season. One knee heavily taped.
    July 7 torn knee ligaments, returns August 17. Plays 132 games.

    1947 Bone spur removed left heel January 6. Heel does not heal properly, surgery left heel March 12, skin graft. Hobbled in spring training and early season. First game April 21. In pain much of season, does play 141 games.

    1948 some pain, same old story, the heel. Mild pain, one of his heathier and better years gets in a good number of games, 153.

    1949 Bone spur spring training right heel, removed in April. sits out 65 games comes back June 28, big series with Bosox. Yanks sweep 3 games, Joe.... 11 at bats -4 home runs- 9 RBI.
    September 18, hospitalized for a few days then remains out for a few games. Described as viral infection.

    Did a good deal of research on Joe, right from the start and I can tell you, this guy had bad legs, even when young, played with lots of pain. I guess he was big and strong but that does not guarantee durability.

    1939 age 24 he played 120 games, injures knee chasing down fly ball, out April 29 return June 7.

    1940 AGE 25 plays 132 games.
    Injures knee in pre-season game against Dodgers.
    Pain in Knee out April 27- May 9.
    There would be more gaps of a couple or a few games he would sit out as the result of that spring training injury
    Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 12-18-2009, 08:34 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • yanks0714
    replied
    Originally posted by thaa View Post


    Perhaps it really is one of the better arguments you've read, if only by virtue of its succinctness. Moreover, it doesn't commit the non sequitur that the earlier post, to which it responded, was guilty of. Namesly, that Joe D. was a more complete ballplayer than Williams but that this did not make him "better."

    To be a "more complete" ballplayer is, by definition, to be a better player. This was self-evident, requiring nothing further from me than "Sure it does."
    Self evident to who besides yourself?

    There is no doubt that JoeD was a more complete ball player than Ted because his D was better and he ran better. Probably threw better too.

    But Ted's hitting overrides his lack of 'completeness' for want of a better word. JoeD's fielding, running, and throwing advantage are not enough to overtake Ted's hitting, Therfore Ted is the 'better' of the two.

    In BBF polls over the yers Ted is always ahead of JoeD in the opinion of the BBF posters.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sultan_1895-1948
    replied
    The DiMaggio portion of Jenkinson's new book will be especially interesting.

    Leave a comment:


  • ol' aches and pains
    replied
    Originally posted by thaa View Post


    Perhaps it really is one of the better arguments you've read, if only by virtue of its succinctness. Moreover, it doesn't commit the non sequitur that the earlier post, to which it responded, was guilty of. Namesly, that Joe D. was a more complete ballplayer than Williams but that this did not make him "better."

    To be a "more complete" ballplayer is, by definition, to be a better player. This was self-evident, requiring nothing further from me than "Sure it does."
    If I had to choose, I'd go with the man who had a career OBP of .482, the highest in history. 12 seasons over .490 OBP. Sure Dimaggio was a more complete ballplayer, but a hitter like Williams comes along once in a lifetime. He beats Dimaggio in OPS+ 191-155! When you hit like Ted Williams, you can get away with average defense.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Wendt View Post
    That's one of the better arguments I've read in my two years here!
    :applaud:


    Maybe the Yankees ballclub considered itself to be above those shenanigans, or Yankee Stadium to be above that.
    I don't think they ever considered it would be viewed as a shenanigan.
    Possible they never even thought to do it, I have no idea.

    Leave a comment:


  • thaa
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Wendt View Post
    That's one of the better arguments I've read in my two years here!
    :applaud:

    Perhaps it really is one of the better arguments you've read, if only by virtue of its succinctness. Moreover, it doesn't commit the non sequitur that the earlier post, to which it responded, was guilty of. Namesly, that Joe D. was a more complete ballplayer than Williams but that this did not make him "better."

    To be a "more complete" ballplayer is, by definition, to be a better player. This was self-evident, requiring nothing further from me than "Sure it does."

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Wendt
    replied
    Originally posted by thaa View Post
    Sure it does.
    That's one of the better arguments I've read in my two years here!
    :applaud:

    Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Never understood why the Yanks did nothing about those monster distances on the left side when Joe came to the Yanks.
    ...
    When you look at some of these distances, Yankee Stadium was more difficult to reach than all the others and there were no changes.
    Maybe the Yankees ballclub considered itself to be above those shenanigans, or Yankee Stadium to be above that.
    Last edited by Paul Wendt; 11-27-2009, 11:32 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • EdTarbusz
    replied
    Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Could this be the answer, part of the answer. What happened in the season of 1942, not a Joe Dimaggio like season.

    1941, His wife Dorothy leaves thier home.
    1941 Pearl Harbor attack.
    Soon after the attack, Joe's parents are deemed "enemy aliens" and required to carry ID at all times. They are limited with travel, no further than 5 miles from home. They are not even allowed to visit Joe's restaraunt, it exceeds the 5 mile limit. Later in 1942 the government lifts the restriction, only to Joe's restaraunt to allow him to maintain restaraunt while Joe plays ball.

    1942, Dorothy threatens Joe with divorce. Government agents search Joe's parent's home, sieze radios and flashlights. Yes, even flashlights. The gov fears his dad may be signaling enemy agents off the coast when on his vessals. One of his dad's vessals is seized.

    Early-mid 1942, Joe is diagnosed with ulcers.

    A restriction is placed on how far off the coast Joe's dad can fish. One time agents board one of his vessals, looking for radios, flares or flashlights.

    Not much of a mystery, Joe had more than baseball on his mind in the season of 1942.
    Decline after returning, most bio's and comments by teammates, lots of injuries, he was never the same as before going into the service.
    One more thing to add to add about DiMaggio and 1942: DiMaggio and his wife had a new baby in their apartment. This probably also added to his stress level.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Never understood why the Yanks did nothing about those monster distances on the left side when Joe came to the Yanks.
    1934 Al Simmons joines the White Sox, in some news articles Al makes no bones about Comiskey Park distances. The White Sox move home plate out 14 feet. Now the distance to CF from 450 to 436- down the lines from 362 to 342.

    Ted Williams joins the Bosox 1939.
    1940 Fenway distance down RF line shortened from 332 to 304.
    Power alley RCF, bullpen installed, disatnce drops, 405 to 382.

    Hank Greenberg joins the Pirates in 1947.
    Forbes Field distance down LF line, 365 to 335, LCF from 406 to 355.
    Known as " Greenberg Gardens."
    Hank is with Pirates for only one season 1947 but here comes another RH young slugger, Ralph Kiner. Distances remain the same, now the left side known as "Kiner's Korner."
    Ralph leaves the Pirates in 1953 and in 1954 the distance to left and LCF are moved back out.
    When you look at some of these distances, Yankee Stadium was more difficult to reach than all the others and there were no changes.
    I don't think we can ever overstate what Joe was up against on that left side at Yankee Stadium. I wonder how many 420-430+ drives died on that left side. Probably some for EBH's but some had to be just long outs

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X