Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

*Babe Ruth Thread*

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

  • More Johhny Sylvester.
    Attached Files

    Comment


    • Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
      Babe visits Johnny and Johnny visiting Babe. Those are the signed balls that Johnny received in 1926.

      Soon other great athletes got in to the act. Jack Dempsey boxing gloves, Bill Tilden tennis racquet and a football from Red Grange, all autographed and sent to Johnny.
      Thanks, SJ3!
      Looks like Johnny might have visited Babe at home, hard to be sure.
      I think the photo I've seen identified as young Johnny might be somebody else, the kid in that shot had darker hair and a big lesion on his lip.
      How cool that they met up again, albeit under the cloud of Ruth's illness...they look pretty happy in the second photo but I wonder if the men may have shed a few tears before the visit was over.
      "I throw him four wide ones, then try to pick him off first base." - Preacher Roe on pitching to Musial

      Comment


      • Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
        More Johhny Sylvester.
        Wow!
        What the heck happened to Johnny's eye???
        "I throw him four wide ones, then try to pick him off first base." - Preacher Roe on pitching to Musial

        Comment


        • Not sure but I think one of his problems was a serious sinus infection.
          Not a doc, don't know if that swelling was the result of that infection.
          Also suffering some injuries, the result of falling off a horse or kicked by a horse..
          Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 02-03-2012, 03:28 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Bill Burgess
            Joke? Garbage? I think not. With the following threads, we will ALWAYS be the leading baseball discussion website, as well as the finest baseball photo website ever online.

            Historic, Archival Photographs
            Negro Leagues Historic Photographic Archive,
            19th Century Players
            Meet The Sports Writers; This creation, of which this entry is a part, is unique. It is the only index to sports writers I have ever seen, or heard of.
            Meet The Announcers
            Bill's Rare Baseball Photos
            Bill's Rare Babe Ruth Photos
            The Cobb Consensus
            Ty Cobb / Assorted Historical Topics
            Rare Babe Ruth Photos
            Vintage Panoramic Pictures

            Long live Kingdom Fever! Long live the King!

            This is by far the best site out there. I have been an avid fan for 25 years and I've never run across so many people that look way beneath the surface to support their arguments. Granted, Ruth and Cobb sucked.....LOL j/k. But seriously, the photos, the quotes by coaches and players of the past, the past newspaper articles that get resurfaced by BBF members are nothing short of amazing. And the unlimited number of variables that members use to support their arguments is unbelievable. Kudos to the dedicated BBF members. Baseball was dying to me due to the steroids scandal. But BBF got me back. Nice work, guys. Your hard work does not go unnoticed. Guys like Shoeless, Mr Burgess et al do their homework and it shows.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
              In closing....either Babe Ruth was a hell of a player, pitcher and hitter....or he was the luckiest player to put on the spikes, you make the choice.
              Or BOTH.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by csh19792001 View Post
                Or BOTH.
                Could be, but it's difficult, just about impossible to outline, to measure the luck factor.

                On the other side, I wonder what might have been had he played his whole career in the live ball era and as an everyday player. I'm assuming had he come in during the live ball era he still would have spent some time as a pitcher. How long it would have taken his team to realize his potential as a hitting every day player would determine his career hitting numbers.

                We could be looking at close to 800 home runs. Playing dead ball , pitching and batting only every 4th or 5th day from 1914-1917 while a pitcher only, his career total home runs from 1914-1919, his first six seasons was 49 home runs. His career is already one quarter over and he has only 49 career home runs.

                Career home runs first six seasons for some of the top home run hitters.
                Mays-------187
                Aaron------179
                Bonds------142
                Ruth--------49
                Even at that, I really can't say bad luck for Babe, that he came into the game in the dead ball era, it just happened that way. Not a vary good start in the way of home runs but he managed to get to 714.

                Just another what if, something we will never know, what would his career hitting numbers be like had he come in later.

                Comment


                • Even if Ruth had simply been a full-time outfielder by 1915, I believe he could have hit 30 HRs a year from 1915-1919, assuming if he played in NY instead of Boston. As it was, he hit 29 HRs in 1919 in Boston while still going 9-5 on the mound. That's 150 HRs instead of 49 HRs during that time frame, which puts him at 815 for a career. Had he been born 5 yrs later and started in 1920, then I believe he would have hit 865 for a career and that's not unreasonable at at. As it was, he smashed 424 HRs from ages 30-39. He would have done better from 20-29.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by pheasant View Post
                    Even if Ruth had simply been a full-time outfielder by 1915, I believe he could have hit 30 HRs a year from 1915-1919, assuming if he played in NY instead of Boston. As it was, he hit 29 HRs in 1919 in Boston while still going 9-5 on the mound. That's 150 HRs instead of 49 HRs during that time frame, which puts him at 815 for a career. Had he been born 5 yrs later and started in 1920, then I believe he would have hit 865 for a career and that's not unreasonable at at. As it was, he smashed 424 HRs from ages 30-39. He would have done better from 20-29.
                    If we're going to do this, we gotta play the "what if" with the others, too:

                    -Mays missed about 266 games prior to his MVP 1954 season. That's almost two full seasons. Hit then 41 and 51 homers his first two years back. Should have at least 75 more homers.

                    -Aaron played in the worst home run park (since 1900) from 1954-1966. Source: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7932.html

                    Someone like Aaron or Mays playing in the Barry Bonds era would have hit many more home runs...irrespective of steroids. Anyone can hit 30 now. Hank and Mays were hitting 40-50 a year during the height of the second dead-ball era, with the high mound, no brush-back warnings, and not nearly as much triple-A relief pitching as there was in Barry's era.

                    And...paramount to all of this.... Ruth, Cobb, Wagner never played against an African American, and hardly any Latin or Asian players. Look at how quickly the NL got stronger when compared to the AL, in the 15 years after Jackie broke in. Look at the results of the All Star game.

                    From 1949-62...look at the guys who started winning the MVP perennially after the NL integrated; 11 out of 14 years a Black man won the MVP. Over in the AL ZERO MVP's from African Americans until 1963.

                    Comment


                    • On the issue of integration:

                      2005 - 9% African-American, 29% Hispanic, 30% foreign-born, 25% born in Latin America
                      2004 - 9% African-American, 26% Hispanic, 29% foreign-born
                      2002 - 10% African-American, 28% Hispanic, 26% foreign-born
                      2001 - 13% African-American, 26% Hispanic, 25% foreign-born
                      2000 - 13% African-American, 26% Hispanic, 24% foreign-born
                      1999 - 13% African-American, 26% Hispanic
                      1998 - 15% African-American, 25% Hispanic
                      1997 - 17% African-American, 24% Hispanic
                      1996 - 17% African-American, 20% Hispanic
                      1995 - 19% African-American, 19% Hispanic
                      1994 - 18% African-American, 18% Hispanic
                      1993 - 16% African-American, 16% Hispanic
                      1992 - 17% African-American, 14% Hispanic
                      1991 - 18% African-American, 14% Hispanic
                      1990 - 17% African-American, 13% Hispanic, 10% foreign-born
                      1980 - 22% African-American, 12% Hispanic, 9% foreign-born
                      1977 - 25% African-American
                      1975 - 27% African-American, 7% foreign-born
                      1970 - 25% African-American, 10% foreign-born
                      1965 - 8% foreign-born
                      1960 - 4% foreign-born
                      1959 - 17% African-American (first year every team was integrated)
                      1955 - 5% foreign-born
                      1954 - 7% African-American
                      1950 - 2% African-American, 4% foreign-born

                      Below are the # of teams that were integrated on opening day each year from 1947 to 1960:

                      1947 - 1 (1 NL)
                      1948 - 3 (1 NL, 2 AL)
                      1949 - 3 (1 NL, 2 AL)
                      1950 - 5 (3 NL, 2 AL)
                      1951 - 5 (3 NL, 2 AL)
                      1952- 6 (3 NL, 3 AL)
                      1953 - 6 (3 NL, 3 AL)
                      1954 - 11 (7 NL, 4 AL)
                      1955 - 13 (7 NL, 6 AL)
                      1956 - 13 (7 NL, 6 AL)
                      1957 - 14 (8 NL, 6 AL) (1st year NL was completely integrated)
                      1958 - 14 (8 NL, 6 AL)
                      1959 - 15 (8 NL, 7 AL)
                      1960 - 1st year all of MLB integrated on opening day

                      This shows actually how slow MLB was to integrate, even after Robinson joined the Dodgers. Six years after 1947, most MLB teams still didn't have an African-American. 1954 was actually when integration started to really make headway, and it wasn't until six years AFTER that when all teams were integrated.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by pheasant View Post
                        Even if Ruth had simply been a full-time outfielder by 1915, I believe he could have hit 30 HRs a year from 1915-1919, assuming if he played in NY instead of Boston. As it was, he hit 29 HRs in 1919 in Boston while still going 9-5 on the mound. That's 150 HRs instead of 49 HRs during that time frame, which puts him at 815 for a career. Had he been born 5 yrs later and started in 1920, then I believe he would have hit 865 for a career and that's not unreasonable at at. As it was, he smashed 424 HRs from ages 30-39. He would have done better from 20-29.
                        Babe hit very good at Fenway, even with that distant right field bleachers, once he became a regular player.


                        Don't have the numbers, going from memory on the following.
                        Most home runs by a visiting player.
                        Mantle and Ruth tied with 37 or 38. If I recall then it was Killebrew, Kaline and Joe Dimaggio.
                        Ruth is the only left handed hitter on the list, have no split on Mick, how many RH and LH, should be easy to find.
                        Also, I would assume Ruth had the least number of bats of those players, Dimaggio might be close with the least.
                        Ruth was a visitor for 15 seasons 1920-1934. Also right field, right center field and dead center was deeper when he played, Fenway dimensions brought in a couple of times in the 1930s, I believe 1934 and again in 1939.

                        Here are his 1927 numbers, only one season small sample. Onlt two to RF, a couple to deep RCF, three to LCF.
                        Attached Files
                        Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 02-04-2012, 03:20 PM.

                        Comment


                        • And on the issue on the internationalization of baseball, as it applies to the league strength discussion: (posted by "Ubiquitous" several years ago on this site)

                          Here is a year by year break down on foreign born players in the Majors. One thing to note is that this is simply a raw body count. This doesn't factor in playing time.

                          Code:
                          yearID	total	%
                          2005	345	27.9%
                          2004	342	27.4%
                          2003	323	26.3%
                          2002	317	26.0%
                          2001	308	25.2%
                          2000	294	23.9%
                          1999	278	23.0%
                          1998	257	21.7%
                          1997	247	22.0%
                          1996	216	18.9%
                          1995	199	17.6%
                          1994	163	16.4%
                          1993	178	16.1%
                          1992	151	15.0%
                          1991	156	15.1%
                          1990	141	13.7%
                          1989	128	13.0%
                          1988	138	14.2%
                          1987	123	12.6%
                          1986	110	11.5%
                          1985	111	11.8%
                          1984	108	11.6%
                          1983	111	11.6%
                          1982	108	11.6%
                          1981	100	11.0%
                          1980	107	11.7%
                          1979	97	10.8%
                          1978	102	11.3%
                          1977	106	11.8%
                          1976	100	12.2%
                          1975	89	10.5%
                          1974	98	11.4%
                          1973	95	11.6%
                          1972	94	11.4%
                          1971	90	10.9%
                          1970	105	12.4%
                          1969	99	11.7%
                          1968	78	11.5%
                          1967	84	11.7%
                          1966	78	10.9%
                          1965	71	10.1%
                          1964	70	10.0%
                          1963	63	9.1%
                          1962	65	9.3%
                          1961	52	8.4%
                          1960	56	9.7%
                          1959	42	7.4%
                          1958	38	6.6%
                          1957	35	6.2%
                          1956	32	5.8%
                          1955	37	6.2%
                          1954	25	4.7%
                          1953	19	3.6%
                          1952	22	4.0%
                          1951	24	4.4%
                          1950	22	4.2%
                          1949	20	3.8%
                          1948	11	2.0%
                          1947	15	2.8%
                          1946	20	3.2%
                          1945	27	4.9%
                          1944	23	4.2%
                          1943	18	3.5%
                          1942	18	3.5%
                          1941	14	2.6%
                          1940	10	1.9%
                          1939	8	1.5%
                          1938	9	1.8%
                          1937	8	1.6%
                          1936	6	1.2%
                          1935	6	1.2%
                          1934	5	1.0%
                          1933	4	0.9%
                          1932	9	1.8%
                          1931	7	1.4%
                          1930	4	0.8%
                          1929	7	1.4%
                          1928	5	1.0%
                          1927	5	1.0%
                          1926	7	1.4%
                          1925	7	1.3%
                          1924	6	1.1%
                          1923	6	1.2%
                          1922	10	2.0%
                          1921	14	2.8%
                          1920	14	2.8%
                          1919	13	2.7%
                          1918	19	3.9%
                          1917	16	3.3%
                          1916	21	4.0%
                          1915	25	3.4%
                          1914	30	4.1%
                          1913	20	3.4%
                          1912	21	3.5%
                          1911	17	3.2%
                          1910	16	3.2%
                          1909	16	3.2%
                          1908	16	3.6%
                          1907	15	3.6%
                          1906	16	3.9%
                          1905	17	4.4%
                          1904	14	3.8%
                          1903	16	4.3%
                          1902	23	5.9%
                          1901	16	4.3%
                          1900	5	2.7%
                          1899	11	3.5%
                          1898	11	3.7%
                          1897	13	4.9%
                          1896	9	3.3%
                          1895	10	3.5%
                          1894	12	4.6%
                          1893	7	2.7%
                          1892	11	4.1%
                          1891	22	6.1%
                          1890	34	6.7%
                          1889	17	5.3%
                          1888	19	5.7%
                          1887	22	7.0%
                          1886	19	5.8%
                          1885	29	9.0%
                          1884	52	8.2%
                          1883	21	8.1%
                          1882	19	8.3%
                          1881	9	7.5%
                          1880	10	7.9%
                          1879	6	5.0%
                          1878	6	7.8%
                          1877	5	5.4%
                          1876	9	7.4%
                          1875	12	6.3%
                          1874	8	6.7%
                          1873	12	9.8%
                          1872	14	9.8%
                          1871	12	10.4%

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by csh19792001 View Post
                            If we're going to do this, we gotta play the "what if" with the others, too:

                            -Mays missed about 266 games prior to his MVP 1954 season. That's almost two full seasons. Hit then 41 and 51 homers his first two years back. Should have at least 75 more homers.

                            -Aaron played in the worst home run park (since 1900) from 1954-1966. Source: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7932.html

                            Someone like Aaron or Mays playing in the Barry Bonds era would have hit many more home runs...irrespective of steroids. Anyone can hit 30 now. Hank and Mays were hitting 40-50 a year during the height of the second dead-ball era, with the high mound, no brush-back warnings, and not nearly as much triple-A relief pitching as there was in Barry's era.

                            And...paramount to all of this.... Ruth, Cobb, Wagner never played against an African American, and hardly any Latin or Asian players. Look at how quickly the NL got stronger when compared to the AL, in the 15 years after Jackie broke in. Look at the results of the All Star game.

                            From 1949-62...look at the guys who started winning the MVP perennially after the NL integrated; 11 out of 14 years a Black man won the MVP. Over in the AL ZERO MVP's from African Americans until 1963.
                            Thats true about Aaron and he did not play every game at home, look at the AL Parks in the 1910's-1920's. In some of those AL parks you could hit 450+ foot drives to center and not reach the bleachers. Some of those tape measure ESPN highlight bombs to dead center would be long outs in some case, maybe EBH's

                            I suppose we will now hear about the short porch at Yankee Satdium. Ruth might have poked some down there, not many that I could find at Proquest but I'm sure he lost some in that deep RCF 429 feet and that 487 to centerfield. There may be one or two parks at the most to dead center today that are close to Yankee Stadiums RCF 429, dead center forget it 487.
                            Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 02-04-2012, 03:37 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by csh19792001 View Post
                              If we're going to do this, we gotta play the "what if" with the others, too:

                              -Mays missed about 266 games prior to his MVP 1954 season. That's almost two full seasons. Hit then 41 and 51 homers his first two years back. Should have at least 75 more homers.

                              -Aaron played in the worst home run park (since 1900) from 1954-1966. Source: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7932.html

                              Someone like Aaron or Mays playing in the Barry Bonds era would have hit many more home runs...irrespective of steroids. Anyone can hit 30 now. Hank and Mays were hitting 40-50 a year during the height of the second dead-ball era, with the high mound, no brush-back warnings, and not nearly as much triple-A relief pitching as there was in Barry's era.

                              And...paramount to all of this.... Ruth, Cobb, Wagner never played against an African American, and hardly any Latin or Asian players. Look at how quickly the NL got stronger when compared to the AL, in the 15 years after Jackie broke in. Look at the results of the All Star game.

                              From 1949-62...look at the guys who started winning the MVP perennially after the NL integrated; 11 out of 14 years a Black man won the MVP. Over in the AL ZERO MVP's from African Americans until 1963.
                              I have covered that many times in that past. That Babe would not dominate as he did if playing in integrated baseball. But that in no way means he would be an also ran or just a "regular hitter". It means he would have more competition.
                              Lets remember he was more than a home run hitter, he has the 5th highest career batting average among modern time hitters and he was a long ball hitter. Ted Williams is his only rival if speaking about a hitter for average and power.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
                                Thats true about Aaron and he did not play every game at home, look at the AL Parks in the 1910's-1920's. In some of those AL parks you could hit 450+ foot drives to center and not reach the bleachers. Some of those tape measure ESPN highlight bombs to dead center would be long outs in some case, maybe EBH's

                                I suppose we will now hear about the short porch at Yankee Satdium. Ruth might have poked some down there, not many that I could find at Proquest but I'm sure he lost some in that deep RCF 429 feet and that 487 to centerfield. There may be one or two parks at the most to dead center today that are close to Yankee Stadiums RCF 429, dead center forget it 487.
                                At least in numerical terms, these questions are pretty much answered in the Schell book. He adjusts it for the offensive context of the times, and does it by timeframes. The book was written in 2004.

                                Maybe we can synthesize these and figure out which was the worst overall. I'll try to include the ones that recur, and omit those that were only the best/worst for only a short span of time. I'll look at post 1900 parks only.

                                Worst Parks for Runs
                                #1. County Stadium (1953-58)
                                #2. Dodger Stadium (1962-68)
                                #3. Qualcomm (1998-2003)

                                Honorable Mention- #4. Dodger Stadium (1994-2003)

                                Worst Park for Home Runs
                                #1. South Side Park III (White Sox, 1901-09)
                                #2. Crosley Field (1920-33)
                                #3. Griffith Stadium (1914-55) (that's 40 years)

                                When looked at overall, Griffith was the easily the worst park for homerun hitting in modern baseball history.


                                Worst for Batting Average
                                #1. South Side Park III (1901-1909)
                                #2. Dodger Stadium (1994-present)
                                #3. Crosley Field (1938-45)

                                (Also high on the list- Qualcomm- 1998-2003)

                                Worst parks for Doubles/Triples
                                #1. Polo Grounds V (1926-57)
                                #2. Dodger Stadium (1969-2003)
                                #3. South Side Park (1901-09)

                                Best parks for strikeouts (for pitchers)
                                #1. Polo Grounds IV (1891-1910)
                                #2. Yankee Stadium (1923-36) (This has to be distorted a ton by Ruth)
                                #3. Ebbets Field (1922-35)

                                (#4 in the modern era- Qualcomm 1998-2003)

                                Worst Parks for OPS
                                #1. South Side Park III (White Sox, 1901-09)
                                #2. Griffith Stadium (1914-35)
                                #3. Crosley Field (1920-33)

                                Honorable Mention- Dodger Stadium (1962-present)- shows up twice in the top 10.

                                Just eyeballing it, it looks like overall, the worst seem to be Dodger Stadium, Crosley, Qualcomm, the old White Sox Park are up there. Griffith was a death sentence for homerun hitters, and brutal for power hitters overall.

                                I might go with South Side or Dodger Stadium as the best pitcher park in modern history.
                                Last edited by csh19792001; 02-04-2012, 03:55 PM.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X