*Babe Ruth Thread*

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Ok sorry, didn't see that. Thanks for checkin'. Sorta extreme reaction by Lavan. I looked at several games after and he started each one. Guess he didn't get suspended. Probably had somethin' to do with Ruth's gentle reaction. Could have blown up big time if he took great offense. Seems players got suspended back then for a lot less.

Can't believe he wasn't tossed for throwing his bat. I think your right Randy, even going back to the 1950-1960s umps seemed a lot less sensitive than today. They would even give more leeway to a players gripe, like bad calls.
On Babe's personality, having anything to do with it, Lanvan shaking his hand after the bat throw.
Another even, almost coming to blows with Ty Cobb in one game, fists raised, broken up by teammates.
When they changed sides, passing each other, Cobb pats Babe on the back.

Read an article about the called shot game. Guy Bush who had been calling Babe every name he could think of before the home run struck up a conversation with Babe later in the game. Kidding him about Babe playing one of the Cub players out of position in the outfield. To which Babe said OK to Bush. Bush commented, didn't get it, he was riding Babe so hard from the bench and now Babe's not even angry, it's like nothing took place earlier in the game.
The very next day, Bush pitching and he hit Babe on the arm...................here we go again. On his way to first Babe keeps brushing his arm, as though to chase away a pesky insect..............that didnt hurt. You can see he has some words for Bush the pitcher on his way to first base.
According to Gehrig on deck Babe yelled to Bush............" hey lop ears, was that your fast ball".
After the game, Babe's arm was swollen an black and blue.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Can't believe he wasn't tossed for throwing his bat. I think your right Randy, even going back to the 1950-1960s umps seemed a lot less sensitive than today. They would even give more leeway to a players gripe, like bad calls.
On Babe's personality, having anything to do with it, Lanvan shaking his hand after the bat throw.
Another even, almost coming to blows with Ty Cobb in one game, fists raised, broken up by teammates.
When they changed sides, passing each other, Cobb pats Babe on the back.

Read an article about the called shot game. Guy Bush who had been calling Babe every name he could think of before the home run struck up a conversation with Babe later in the game. Kidding him about Babe playing one of the Cub players out of position in the outfield. To which Babe said OK to Bush. Bush commented, didn't get it, he was riding Babe so hard from the bench and now Babe's not even angry, it's like nothing took place earlier in the game.
The very next day, Bush pitching and he hit Babe on the arm...................here we go again. On his way to first Babe keeps brushing his arm, as though to chase away a pesky insect..............that didnt hurt. You can see he has some words for Bush the pitcher on his way to first base.
According to Gehrig on deck Babe yelled to Bush............" hey lop ears, was that your fast ball".
After the game, Babe's arm was swollen an black and blue.

Took this sequence off the Ken Burns special, Baseball.
There is no description but I'm betting this is from the 1932 World Series, Bush hitting babe on the arm in the game after the Called Shot game.
It sees to fir an artilce I read some years ago.............Bush hitting Babe on the arm....babe with flciking motions, we can see that and finally, he certainly appears to have some words for the pitcher on his way to first. We can't see it here but in the article it goes on to say Babe continues his tirade of words to Guy Bush on the mound.
Two singles, Babe walks bases loaded and Bush retires Gehrig on a long drive to center, Bush leaves the game.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Here is that sequence dscribed in previous post, Bush hits babe.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Here is a rare pic of The Babe, captioned 1906, looks a bit older then he would be in that year.

So sure of himself even at an early age. Some where, I'm searching, I have a pic of a book or pamphlet which is supposed to be Babe's earliest signed article. Have not seen it in years not sure of exact wording but he writes words to this effect............I am the worlds(or baseballs) greatest pitcher, then his signature.

At what age when he wrote this, he was still at St. Mary's at that time.
If I can ever find that pic, I will post it.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Some Wannabe Babe..............babes, only a few.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Just in case he gets nailed speeding, courtesy card 1948. I have one folder with at least a dozen of his speeding violations.

The Boston Braves gave him a card, a pass to any future Braves game.
Shame on the Yankees. When he phoned and asked for a few tickets to the 1936 World Series, he was told he would have to first send a check.......................in his own house..... what have you done for me lately Babe.

[pheasant]

What I'm wondering is how much different Ruth would be viewed (and ranked by types on here) if he had never pitched. Pitching is so hard to quantify, and to put a value on, as it relates to other hitters' offensive numbers. Sometimes I think his pitching is just a forgotten about aspect. It's conveniently thrown in by a few as a "cherry on top" as a reason to rate him over others, while the majority would rate him over others regardless...which is impressive considering he didn't start his true offensive career until age 25.

So imagine Ruth still gets signed by the Orioles (not just as a pitcher, remember he was signed for being a slugger, catcher, having a cannon, being a skilled outfielder, and overall athletic freak. But lets say everything remains the same. Dunn signs him, he goes to Boston (as primarily a pitcher), and he has the same 1914 season. In this scenario, instead of going 18-8 in 1915, lets say he fizzles out and his hitting is too much to overlook, so they put him in the outfield. How much different would his legacy be?

If Ruth had that 1915 season to become "seasoned" and starting in 1916, I think he would be a gold glove caliber outfielder for a few seasons leading up to 1920. How much would that change his legacy? Again, his pitching is nice, and often just kinda thrown in for extra measure without truly getting any weight. But those young, athletic, productive seasons in the outfield, putting up huge OPS+ numbers, I think would look better than his pitching. His late career decline in the field would not carry as much weight, because he'd have productive seasons on the front end. His hitting in Fenway would be taken into account and his OPS+ would be higher.

Any thoughts? Anything I'm missing?

It sounds absurd to say it, but imo sometimes Ruth is underrated in terms of an overall player because I think his pitching is taken for granted. It's sorta like well yeah, he was pretty good but check out his hitting, and the pitching is tough to compare.

Ruth won 23+ games twice before the age of 23. How many pitcher have done that?

In his career, he completed 72.7% of the games he started (1914-1933) and in those 107 CG, he threw a shutout 16% of the time. I'm not saying he was the greatest pitcher ever, what I'm saying is that he was a STILL DEVELOPING YOUNGSTER, who had already proven himself to be a Cy Young level pitcher. I think that, along with the fact that HE COULD HAVE BEEN playing a gold glove caliber outfield while putting up moster OPS+ numbers offensively, is overlooked. How different would his legacy be?

Here's a thought. Mantle and Ruth both broke in at age 19. Let's say Mantle had Ruth's pitching career and offensive numbers up until age 25. When we compare players numbers and offensive stats, HR, RC, WAR, this and that are thrown around but it's all offensive. How much would Mantle's offensive and defensive legacy be impacted by being a Cy Young caliber pitcher. Would anyone consider it?

Great point, Sultan. I'm going to run with that one. Like you said, let's say his pitching is garbage in 1914. Let's try and project what he would have looked like in 1915-1918 without pitching. Also, let's look at at his 1918 season to get an idea. We have to remember that in 1918, Ruth was used a ton as a pitcher down the stretch. Let's revisit by looking at how Ruth finished down the stretch as a pitcher:

07/05/18 CG, won 4-3
07/17/18 CG, won 4-0
07/29/18 CG, won 3-2
08/01/18 CG, won 2-1
08/04/18 CG, won 2-1
08/08/18 CG, won 4-1
08/12/18 CG, lost 1-2
08/17/18, CG, won 4-2
08/20/18, 7IP, lost 8-4, Ruth's only bad game down the stretch
08/24/18, CG, won 3-1
08/31/18, CG, won 6-1
Total: 12 starts, 11 CG, 9-2 record,1.76 ERA, opponents BA=.184. Of the 11 Complete games, he gave up 2 runs or fewer in 10 of them, and 3 runs in the 11th. I would say that's giving your team a chance to win in all of those games. Of course, he also pitched 2 complete game victories in the World Series in early September. As a matter of fact, Ruth started game 1. And Ruth hit a little that year too.

It looks like he was literally a full time pitcher from 7/29 until the end of the season. Let's see how his hitting until that point of the season: Up through 7/29/18 that year, he was at .301/.398/.629 with 20 doubles, 11 3b, 11 HR in only 229 AB. That is insane. We have to remember that he had only scatteredd 400 career PA up until that season. That's not allowing one to get into a groove. I believe Ruth would have slugged 22 HRs with 40 doubles and 12 triples a year and drove in 98 RBI from 1915-1918, which factors in the war-shortened season. From 1919-1935, he had 694 RBI and 2097 RBI. Thus, add 88 HRs and 396 RBI to the mix. That gives him 782 HRs and 2493 RBI, along with 618 doubles. That is insane for a guy that would have played 4 full seasons in the Dead Ball era. And he still should have lost 40 games to the war. I am personally still more impressed with his pitching mix. But I think the casual fan would be more impressed with Ruth had he never pitched.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

What I'm wondering is how much different Ruth would be viewed (and ranked by types on here) if he had never pitched. Pitching is so hard to quantify, and to put a value on, as it relates to other hitters' offensive numbers. Sometimes I think his pitching is just a forgotten about aspect. It's conveniently thrown in by a few as a "cherry on top" as a reason to rate him over others, while the majority would rate him over others regardless...which is impressive considering he didn't start his true offensive career until age 25.

so they put him in the outfield. How much different would his legacy be?


Any thoughts? Anything I'm missing?

It sounds absurd to say it, but imo sometimes Ruth is underrated in terms of an overall player because I think his pitching is taken for granted. It's sorta like well yeah, he was pretty good but check out his hitting, and the pitching is tough to compare.

. I'm not saying he was the greatest pitcher ever, what I'm saying is that he was a STILL DEVELOPING YOUNGSTER, who had already proven himself to be a Cy Young level pitcher. How different would his legacy be?

I think even though some of his career numbers would be higher had he gone to the outfield earlier like 1916, he might be viewed the same or not as high as he is at this time, with his pitching and hitting as it actually is.
I would still have him on top even without his pitching.

I just think the fact that he was so good at pitching when a pitcher only, 3 full seasons 1915-16-17 it makes him more impressive then he would be with higher offensive numbers had he not pitched as long as he did.

Because without even getting into a bunch of stats on his pitching. Consider this, in his three seasons as a pitcher 1915-1916-1917, there were only two pitchers better then him in that time period, Walter Johnson and Grover Alexander, two of the greatest ever. Thats saying enough no need to even list his pitching numbers, regular season.
World Series, 3 wins no losses and the second lowest ERA 0.87 for 'starting" pitchers minimum 30 innings pitched, Harry Brecheen with 0.83

It's just so impressive being one of the best pitcher for 3 seasons then going to the outfield and the rest is history, what he did with the bat.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I agree Shoeless. And the most impressive thing is that he was still developing, which is scary.

My thought was just that his pitching totals don't come close (for obvious reasons) to other great pitchers. So he doesn't get ranked there, while at the same time, people seem reluctant to project him out to all-time great had he remained a pitcher. This, despite numerous facts that should make one feel comfortable with that projection. So his pitching just kinda hangs there, as a ho-hum, so-what kinda thing.

On a side note, was looking up lefty HR numbers at Fenway. Any chance you can look into these dates and check of any were inside the park HR (and to see if the SWITCH hitters were indeed batting lefty)?
1919 - RUTH 9 in home park

Lefthanded 1919 homers in Fenway

6/25/19 - Sam Rice

1920 - RUTH 8 as visitor

Lefthanded 1919 homers in Fenway

5/25/20 - Harry Hooper
5/31/20 - Wally Schang (SWITCH - off righty pitcher)
7/21/20 - Shoeless Joe
7/24/20 - Harry Hooper



1921 - RUTH - 4 as visitor

Lefthanded 1919 homers in Fenway

6/3/21 - Elmer Smith
6/7/21 - Ken williams
6/17/21 - Lu Blue (SWITCH - off a righty pitcher)
6/17/21 - Mike Menosky
6/21/21 - Herb Pennock (SWITCH - off a righty pitcher)
6/21/21 - Chicken Hawks
6/25/21 - Roy Moore (SWITCH - off a righty pitcher)


By the way, Lu Blue and Chicken Hawks have to right up there as best baseball names of all time. Hadn't heard of them before lol

Will take a look Randy.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Could not find info on switch hitter home runs, left or right.

One bounce type and three IPHR.
I guess the IPHR Rice hit, he earned it. The game recap write up described it as a drive near the flag pole, thats deep. Also a cartoon from the Boston Globe, Rice home run.

On those names, always liked Lu Blue but Chicken Hawks new to me.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Never thought of it before.
With all the long drives Babe hit in his career, so many, he never had a bounce home run.
I guess outfielders played him so deep many long drives were caught.
One article in the NY Times telling of a few game where Cleveland played him with 4 outfielders abreast.

Went on to say in the article, the only way some outfielders could play him any deeper would be to pay admission and sit in the bleachers.

I like pitcher Ted Lyons take on Babe's home runs, "a mile high and miles deep. But when he lined one out, wasn't like a baseball it was more like a golfer teeing off, snake like, gone in a second. Hit lower and in the infield some one migh get hurt or killed. Great wrist action"

[pheasant]

Hey Sultan. We are missing too much info to get accurate numbers. We don't know how many errors were commited, GIDP, and guys that were picked of base or caught stealing. Thus, we cannot get an accurate guage on at-bats.

[pheasant]

Babe Ruth vs the best of the AL(teams with .500+ winning pct)

From 1916-1935, Ruth went .330/.463/.673 against teams with a .500+ winning pct.

Here's how Ruth did in the Live Ball era vs .500+ teams during his best years: I left out the obvious years(1922,1925, and his heavily declining years from 38+ years of age)


1920 .383/.562/.925 in 40 games
1921 .405/.560/.902 in 65 games
1923 .375/.550/.688 in 44 games
1924 .327/.462/.692 in 44 games
1926 .360/.517/.689 in 110 games
1927 .346/.464/.738 in 63 games
1928 .280/.423/.559 in 44 games
1930 .367/.483/.766 in 59 games
1931 .365/.467/.717 in 61 games
1932 .366/.501/.764 in 79 games

Ruth murdered the ball against the .500+ teams except for in 1928 when he was simply very good. This guy wasn't stoppable. Ruth literally embarassed his peers during his prime. I just wish he would have applied more of his work ethic from 1926+ during his early years. He might have slugged .900 a couple of years. Had he not been so busy staying up all night drinking, he might have won another ERA crown as a pitcher. This guy literally had talent to burn.

Even as a pitcher, he went 31-25(.556 pct) with a 2.25 ERA vs .500+ teams.

I cannot find a weekness with this guy. I certainly cannot accuse him of running up his stats against the teams in the basement.

[pheasant]

Ruth's pitching stats for his 23 complete games, 1916(opponents' avg/ob%/slug%).

739 at-bats, 138 H, 17 2b, 2 3b, 0 HR, 55 BB, 5 HBP, 13 Sacs, .187/.244/.215, 1.25 ERA, 19-4 record, 9 shutouts.

Note: In Ruth's other appearances, he went 4-9 with a 2.66 ERA. That era isn't all that bad, considering it's the games that he got knocked out of(includes rare relief appearances).

Ruth gave up far more bases to BB/HBP than he did to extra base hits, which explains the high OB%(.244 isn't too shabby).

Ruth was only 21. I think that his control hadn't come close to peaking yet, which makes sense. What pitchers see their control peak at age 21? Ruth had 6 games in which he walked at least 5 batters, including a 9 BB game, a 7 BB game, and 2 6 BB games. But people could not hit the Babe. I wonder how good he would have gotten once he learned a little better control?

[Badge714]

While on the subject of Babe Ruth's power, check out these mind benumbing stats:

Babe Ruth's lifetime Slugging Average was .690. As you all know this is an index of a player's power - the sum of the number of bases reached on each hit, divided by the total number of times at bat.
In their best years the following players never surpassed Ruth's lifetime Slugging Average:
Hank Aaron
Willie Mays
Hank Greenberg
Joe DiMaggio
Duke Snider (hit more HRs in '50s than anyone)
Ted Kluszewski
Joe Adcock
The "Mick" did manage it only once, in his Triple Crown Year of 1956 when he slugged .705.
Ruth slugged over .800 twice and over .700 nine times. From 1926 to 1931 he averaged over fifty HRs a year.

As to the cheaters of the steroid era, Bonds did manage a distant lifetime SA of .607. Bonds never managed to slug over .700 until his 16th year in the majors when he barely eclipsed the Babe's single season SA of .847.

Long live the memory of the Behemoth of Bash!