Statistically, Babe Ruth is easily the greatest player ever. Nobody really comes close (except arguably Bonds, if you take his numbers at face value). Ruth apparently hit home runs further than anybody ever (including many steroid abusers), and hit home runs at a faster pace than anyone ever (besides steroid user Mark Mcgwire). I've always found it interesting how Ruth was able to do things nobody else ever was able to do, with the exception of one or arguably two steroid users. The man has a .690 career slugging% for pete sakes, how many all-time greats were able to even post a .690 slugging% in a single season (not including roiders)? Hell, if Bonds never juiced, Ruth would still hold the single season record for walks, slugging%, OPS, OPS+, HR/AB ratio, pretty much every single season record out there.
So my question is, did Ruth just happen to be vastly more talented than anyone else who ever play baseball, or was he a great player who dominated arguably inferior competition? Perhaps both? Albert Pujols is widely considered the best hitter of his generation (not including Bonds and Frank Thomas who are more from the 1990's generation), and yet his single season best OPS+ falls well short to Ruth's career OPS+. Was Ruth just that much more talented than the man who is considered the best hitter from his generation? Perhaps he was, but I'm not sold on that.
So my question is, did Ruth just happen to be vastly more talented than anyone else who ever play baseball, or was he a great player who dominated arguably inferior competition? Perhaps both? Albert Pujols is widely considered the best hitter of his generation (not including Bonds and Frank Thomas who are more from the 1990's generation), and yet his single season best OPS+ falls well short to Ruth's career OPS+. Was Ruth just that much more talented than the man who is considered the best hitter from his generation? Perhaps he was, but I'm not sold on that.
Comment