Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bob Gibson------Pete Lacock

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

  • nerfan
    replied
    First of all, I was alive when Bob Gibson was pitching. I was 1 year old in 1975!

    Also, you're 88 and posting on the internet? Props to you.

    Leave a comment:


  • 9RoyHobbsRF
    replied
    I remember the 60s specifically

    While Gibson and his record stand for himself, the truth is he was considered (rightly or wrongly) a notch below Koufax and half a notch below Marichal

    Even in his glorious 1968 year, there was a Sports Illustrated article (summer 1968) on the dearth of hitting in 1968 baseball and reasons and solutions explored, a ton of pitchers were named in the article including the young NY Mets staff, Gibson was not mentioned in the article.

    Gibson benefitted from the move to the new stadium in 1966, which just about coincided with the biggest downturn in offensive baseball ever.

    A great great pitcher, but during the decade of the 60s, he was never considered the best pitcher let alone the best player, and that is where the prime of his career was

    Originally posted by rkoch View Post
    You people,who never saw him pitch. are taking pot shots of my favorite ball player of all time, Bob Gibson. I loved Willie Mays, but all around I think Bob, in my 88 years, was the best ballplayer and athelete I`ve seen in my lifetime. He could do it all, a great fielder of his own position,even though he came off the mound in an akward position but was a great athelete otherwise. He was a good hitter,when occasion demanded it and a great player defensively, I remember one season, when he broke his leg[I`m sure some of you statisics freaks can fill in the date], I attended a game in San Francisco,with my sons, and we allways attende batting practice, where he was hobbleing around third base instructing Ed Spiezo[Scotts father] helping to field ground balls. I don`t think he was a head hunter. He would throw inside, which was done at the time, but I think he was not a head hunter. He was one of the greatest players of all time,as evidenced by his election to the HOF on the first ballot. Some of you who offer opinions,who were`nt even alive when he pitched, I highly resent.

    Leave a comment:


  • BigRon
    replied
    Originally posted by rkoch View Post
    You people,who never saw him pitch. are taking pot shots of my favorite ball player of all time, Bob Gibson. I loved Willie Mays, but all around I think Bob, in my 88 years, was the best ballplayer and athelete I`ve seen in my lifetime. He could do it all, a great fielder of his own position,even though he came off the mound in an akward position but was a great athelete otherwise. He was a good hitter,when occasion demanded it and a great player defensively, I remember one season, when he broke his leg[I`m sure some of you statisics freaks can fill in the date], I attended a game in San Francisco,with my sons, and we allways attende batting practice, where he was hobbleing around third base instructing Ed Spiezo[Scotts father] helping to field ground balls. I don`t think he was a head hunter. He would throw inside, which was done at the time, but I think he was not a head hunter. He was one of the greatest players of all time,as evidenced by his election to the HOF on the first ballot. Some of you who offer opinions,who were`nt even alive when he pitched, I highly resent.
    rkoch, with all respect to you and your many decades of following baseball, I too saw Bob Gibson over the entire span of his career. I'm not as old as you, but I'm in my mid-60s. Saw Musial, Schoendienst, Flood, Boyer, and many other Cardinals from the 50s and 60s. I agree that Gibson was a great athlete and a great pitcher. And, I stand by my earlier contention that he would basically do anything to win, including throwing at batters. For the record, Duke Snider was MY favorite player. Snider homered off of Gibson, and the next time up Gibson drilled him in the elbow on the first pitch. Broke his elbow, Snider was out nearly 2 months. Gibson kept on pitching. Does that make Bob Gibson the devil? No. He wasn't alone in his approach to the game, but I feel strongly that his behavior and the behavior of those like him pushed the envelope of competition beyond reasonable bounds. That's my opinion. I'm entitled to it, as you are to yours.

    Congratulations on your many years of following baseball- I hope I'm doing the same when I'm your age.
    Last edited by BigRon; 12-14-2010, 08:13 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • StanTheMan
    replied
    Originally posted by STLCards2 View Post
    I am sure you cannot disagree that my hypothetical (throwing at people's heads on purpose) is as bad as rascism.
    I absolutely disagree.... I've never watched a person get out of the way, duck, or hit the dirt to avoid racism. I am still also looking for the very first racism helmet. How many ear flaps would it have do you think? One, perhaps two for people with more than one minority background? The racial equivalent of a switch hitter? The racism helmet gives them a little protection maybe?

    I'm by no means condoning trying to hit a batter in the head, it is THE transgression of all transgressions on a baseball field in my mind, just that trangressions from a baseball diamond don't often apply well as equals to those in real life. Worst vs worst, average vs average, minor vs minor, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • rkoch
    replied
    You people,who never saw him pitch. are taking pot shots of my favorite ball player of all time, Bob Gibson. I loved Willie Mays, but all around I think Bob, in my 88 years, was the best ballplayer and athelete I`ve seen in my lifetime. He could do it all, a great fielder of his own position,even though he came off the mound in an akward position but was a great athelete otherwise. He was a good hitter,when occasion demanded it and a great player defensively, I remember one season, when he broke his leg[I`m sure some of you statisics freaks can fill in the date], I attended a game in San Francisco,with my sons, and we allways attende batting practice, where he was hobbleing around third base instructing Ed Spiezo[Scotts father] helping to field ground balls. I don`t think he was a head hunter. He would throw inside, which was done at the time, but I think he was not a head hunter. He was one of the greatest players of all time,as evidenced by his election to the HOF on the first ballot. Some of you who offer opinions,who were`nt even alive when he pitched, I highly resent.

    Leave a comment:


  • nerfan
    replied
    Originally posted by Victory Faust View Post
    I thought when I posted that "No Drugs" jpeg, it might be misunderstood.

    I wasn't talking about Clemens' drug use, although that certainly would bar him from any "best-ever" conversation, the same way it does Barry Bonds.

    But I wasn't talking about that. I was trying to say that, steroids or not, if you're claiming Roger Clemens is the greatest pitcher ever, you must be on drugs.
    Well, you can start with the fact that he pitched in the most competitive era ever, add in his near-130 WAR and 7 Cy Youngs and 143 ERA+. Sure, Johnson was better just looking at the stats, but my era adjustment is obviously higher than yours.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by StanTheMan View Post
    75 men hit more batters all time that Gibson. 17 men hit more batters than Drysdale. Even when you add in the (possible, alleged, etc.) "misses" when guys were able to get out of the way of a knockdown/try to hit him pitch.... is it equal to racism? Or at least "not better than?" Really?

    Wow.
    You misunderstand. I already aknowleged that Gibson/Drysdale may not have tried to hit people in the head on purpose. My statement was - if somebody intentionaly tried to hit somebody on purpose in the head with a baseball, that is just as wrong as rascism. I never claimed that or Drysdale or anybody else did so. I even said "If they threw inside and happened to hit batters occasioanly, that is a very different story."

    I am sure you cannot disagree that my hypothetical (throwing at people's heads on purpose) is as bad as rascism. I never said that Gibson/Drysdale were as bad as rascists, since we do not know they were part of the hypothetical.

    Please reread my original post and you may see what I was getting at. I agreed with you, but added "unless" it was intentional and at heads.
    Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 12-09-2010, 12:04 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Wendt
    replied
    Stick to "fistfights with fans".

    And let's get back to the topic, Bob Gibson--Pete LaCock.
    Who said anything about that other guy while he was playing?

    Leave a comment:


  • StanTheMan
    replied
    Originally posted by STLCards2 View Post
    Agreed, unless the "chin music" is intentional and with the intent to hurt. That seems to be the debate - did Gibson and Drysdale throw at heads on purpose. If so, I don't see how that is any better than rascism. If they threw inside and happened to hit batters occasioanly, that is a very different story.
    75 men hit more batters all time that Gibson. 17 men hit more batters than Drysdale. Even when you add in the (possible, alleged, etc.) "misses" when guys were able to get out of the way of a knockdown/try to hit him pitch.... is it equal to racism? Or at least "not better than?" Really?

    Wow.

    Leave a comment:


  • BigRon
    replied
    Originally posted by StanTheMan View Post
    Gibson could not reach 99 mph by the way.
    A bit off the topic, but we don't know that. Radar guns were not in use in baseball in the 60s except for some experimenting, usually in Spring training. Also, even to this day 5 different radar guns may give 5 different readings. Gibson did have an outstanding fastball, though he wasn't the fastest of his era. And, if the ball is coming at your head, 94-95 is not a lot diffrent than 99.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by StanTheMan View Post
    Well, overt racism (although unfortunately par for the course at the time) and fistfights with fans are indeed far worse than some chin music. Gibson could not reach 99 mph by the way.
    Agreed, unless the "chin music" is intentional and with the intent to hurt. That seems to be the debate - did Gibson and Drysdale throw at heads on purpose. If so, I don't see how that is any better than rascism. If they threw inside and happened to hit batters occasioanly, that is a very different story.

    Leave a comment:


  • StanTheMan
    replied
    Well, overt racism (although unfortunately par for the course at the time) and fistfights with fans are indeed far worse than some chin music. Gibson could not reach 99 mph by the way.

    Leave a comment:


  • Victory Faust
    replied
    My problem with Gibson, Drysdale, etc. isn't solely because they threw at batters' heads. My major issue is how this is chuckled over, as if it's "just how it was," whereas things guys like Ty Cobb did -- which also were "just how it was" -- get painted as the worst offenses since Lincoln's assassination.

    I just don't think there's anything cute about Bob Gibson throwing a 99-mph baseball at a batter's head, and it ticks me off to see the likes of Tim McCarver reminiscing about it with a smile -- and the interviewer never calling him out on it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Victory Faust
    replied
    Originally posted by nerfan View Post
    I don't really take drugs into account when rating players. I assume everyone's guilty until they're innocent from the 90s.

    I thought when I posted that "No Drugs" jpeg, it might be misunderstood.

    I wasn't talking about Clemens' drug use, although that certainly would bar him from any "best-ever" conversation, the same way it does Barry Bonds.

    But I wasn't talking about that. I was trying to say that, steroids or not, if you're claiming Roger Clemens is the greatest pitcher ever, you must be on drugs.

    Leave a comment:


  • sandy1
    replied
    Originally posted by STLCards2 View Post
    A few caveats - Maddux had 1,500 more innnings than Gibson and Johnson probably had close to 1,000 more innings than Drysdale. Johnson also had terrible control early on. But yes, Maddux hit people intentionaly all the time - just never at their heads.

    But yes, the Gibson HBP machine stuff is a little overblown - i had heard that he never led the league before too.
    Yes, on a rate basis Drysdale had more HBP, and led the league more times than WJ did (2) . Still you never hear the older players like Walter Johnson or Eddie Plank (!) being accused of hitting or throwing at batters. Drysdale, who also had control problems early on, is called a headhunter -where is the evidence "headhunter"?

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X