Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mike Piazza vs Josh Gibson

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

  • Originally posted by willshad View Post
    You keep attempting to write off Piazza as 'the fifteenth best hitter of his era'..but how about we look at him this way: by FAR the best hitter at his position in the history of the game. His 143 lifetime OPS+ is a good 14-15 points ahead of Bench and Cochrane, and his ten season peak produced a road OPS of well above 1.000. How many catchers have come along in MLB over the years, and Piazza trumps them all easily. To hit as well as Piazza did for as long as he did is a monumental achievement. It takes more than stories or a small sample of stats produced in short seasons to make me believe anyone could match it. Again, not saying that it's impossible..just highly, highly unlikely.

    It's one thing to be a great hitter, hit long home runs, and put up good numbers in a weak league in 30 game seasons, and have tales spun about you. It's a whole different animal to play catcher in 154 or 162 game seasons at the major league level and produce great numbers year after year for a long period of time.
    Interesting except:

    1) Piazza was far best because people ignore Gibson. Needless to say, if everyone ignored Henderson, Cobb, Mays, Brock, Collins, Raines, Wilson, and Morgon, then at some point, Aparicio might be regarded as the greatest!!

    2) Gibson wasn't considered the best hitting catcher in the NeL. He was considered the best hitting player, and not with the benefit of PEDs. My guess is that had Cochrane or Bench or Berra been doing PEDs, the rankings would change. Huge differences though when you ignore those facts.

    3) Probably no one has shared with you that NeL players didn't play 30 games a year. I know, it's a hidden fact----despite the fact that that about a dozen posts have already indicated they played a LOT more games than that---but I understand that people sometimes miss a LOT of posts. Gibson reportedly played 170 games in many seasons not 30. Please update your 30 to 170 so the myth of Gibson playing 30 games a year doesn't keep getting posted.

    4) The "weak" league had 50% of the best players in baseball. I don't know how you define weak but in the army when half the division is missing, it's called weak. I agree that BOTH leagues were weaker compared to the intergrated leagues of the 1970's.
    Last edited by drstrangelove; 02-11-2015, 06:34 PM.
    "It's better to look good, than be good."

    Comment


    • I'll tell you what I see: Ruth's all time ranking at#1 is always being second guessed because it was in an all white league, and if you happen to bring up Gibson or Suttles, this just makes it uncomfortable for the Ruthians here. The Majors were watered down by being all white and excluding many of the best players of the day. There's no way you can wish or retconn this fact away. If what Paige or Gibson did comes into question because it was in an all black league, then what does that [email protected] the Majors of the time? Well we know what it says, and its pretty ugly. Thank you Kennesaw.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post
        Interesting except:

        1) Piazza was far best because people ignore Gibson. Needless to say, if everyone ignored Henderson, Cobb, Mays, Brock, Collins, Raines, Wilson, and Morgon, then at some point, Aparicio might be regarded as the greatest!!

        2) Gibson wasn't considered the best hitting catcher in the NeL. He was considered the best hitting player, and not with the benefit of PEDs. My guess is that had Cochrane or Bench or Berra been doing PEDs, the rankings would change. Huge differences though when you ignore those facts.

        3) Probably no one has shared with you that NeL players didn't play 30 games a year. I know, it's a hidden fact----despite the fact that that about a dozen posts have already indicated they played a LOT more games than that---but I understand that people sometimes miss a LOT of posts. Gibson reportedly played 170 games in many seasons not 30. Please update your 30 to 170 so the myth of Gibson playing 30 games a year doesn't keep getting posted.

        4) The "weak" league had 50% of the best players in baseball. I don't know how you define weak but in the army when half the division is missing, it's called weak. I agree that BOTH leagues were weaker compared to the intergrated leagues of the 1970's.
        I am not willing to accept that Gibson was superhuman, as you are saying. Would you mind explaining just how he was able to play 170 games each season at Ruthian levels, when the best major league catchers could only manage 110-120 games per season at much lower levels, and inconsistent from year to year?

        Maybe he was an alien?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by willshad View Post
          I am not willing to accept that Gibson was superhuman, as you are saying. Would you mind explaining just how he was able to play 170 games each season at Ruthian levels, when the best major league catchers could only manage 110-120 games per season at much lower levels, and inconsistent from year to year?

          Maybe he was an alien?

          Ok.


          strawman.jpeg


          I'm not sure who you consider the "best major league catchers." How did you determine that they "only manage 110-120 games per season."


          Excluding Gibson, Berra, Bench, Cochrane and Campanella are widely regarded as the 3-4 best catchers of all time.

          Assuming 15 games in pre-season, adding in post season, I have Berra---at catcher---averaging 162 games per year (1950-1956), Bench 155 per year (1968-1977), Cochrane averaged 145 per year (1925-1932), and even Campanella averaged 132 per year (1949-1956.)

          And the last 3 were in shortened seasons (154 games.) They all well may have played more than 15 exhibition games.

          So, your list of the best catchers apparently excludes:

          1) Bench
          2) Cochrane
          3) Berra
          4) Gibson
          5) Campanella
          Last edited by drstrangelove; 02-11-2015, 08:02 PM.
          "It's better to look good, than be good."

          Comment


          • Who was Gibson's competition at NeL catcher?
            "The first draft of anything is crap." - Ernest Hemingway

            There's no such thing as an ultimate stat.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 1905 Giants View Post
              Who was Gibson's competition at NeL catcher?
              Quincy Trouppe, Biz Mackey and a young Roy Campanella. Santop and Petway were the best deadball catchers. Frank Duncan and Double Duty Radcliffe were pretty good too.
              "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
                Quincy Trouppe, Biz Mackey and a young Roy Campanella. Santop and Petway were the best deadball catchers. Frank Duncan and Double Duty Radcliffe were pretty good too.
                Thanks bluesky always good to get more info.
                "The first draft of anything is crap." - Ernest Hemingway

                There's no such thing as an ultimate stat.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 1905 Giants View Post
                  Thanks bluesky always good to get more info.
                  Mackey mentored Campanella too. Trouppe was an excellent player/manager. He had a cup of coffee with the Indians when he was past his prime.

                  You can go on seamheads and see their stats:

                  Gibson has a 190 OPS+ in 1000 PA from '30-36
                  Mackey is 153 in 2800 from '20-36
                  Santop is 163 in 1800 from '10-26
                  Duncan has a paltry 59 OPS+ in 2000 PA from '20-36 but the second most defensive win shares among catchers.
                  Radcliffe is at 88 in just 400 PA from '28-35
                  "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bucketfoot View Post
                    I'll tell you what I see: Ruth's all time ranking at#1 is always being second guessed because it was in an all white league, and if you happen to bring up Gibson or Suttles, this just makes it uncomfortable for the Ruthians here. The Majors were watered down by being all white and excluding many of the best players of the day. There's no way you can wish or retconn this fact away. If what Paige or Gibson did comes into question because it was in an all black league, then what does that [email protected] the Majors of the time? Well we know what it says, and its pretty ugly. Thank you Kennesaw.
                    Do yourself a favor and read the Comparative Difficulty chapter in THIS BOOK

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
                      Mackey mentored Campanella too. Trouppe was an excellent player/manager. He had a cup of coffee with the Indians when he was past his prime.

                      You can go on seamheads and see their stats:

                      Gibson has a 190 OPS+ in 1000 PA from '30-36
                      Mackey is 153 in 2800 from '20-36
                      Santop is 163 in 1800 from '10-26
                      Duncan has a paltry 59 OPS+ in 2000 PA from '20-36 but the second most defensive win shares among catchers.
                      Radcliffe is at 88 in just 400 PA from '28-35

                      Quote from http://www.baseballhistorian.com/fan....cfm?hero=1832

                      "Roy Campanella, the Hall of Fame catcher for the Brooklyn Dodgers, once said this about Josh Gibson, 'When I broke in with the Baltimore Elite Giants in 1937, there were a hundred legends about him. Once you saw him play, you knew they were all true. I couldn't carry his bat or glove. The stories of his 500-foot home runs are all true, because I saw them. And he was one of those sluggers that seldom struck out. You couldn't fool him; he was too quick with the bat.' "

                      Another piece of evidence from a 3-time MVP MLB player who saw Gibson play and actually was behind the plate when Gibson was a hitter. Campy is of course widely considered as a top 3-4 all-time catcher by most people.
                      Last edited by drstrangelove; 02-11-2015, 08:06 PM.
                      "It's better to look good, than be good."

                      Comment


                      • Has even one person said they believe Gibson was a bum who wouldn't have succeeded in MLB?

                        If we assume a relatively healthy career behind the dish, I have no problem believing he might have reached into top 10 territory among all players, ever. Is that under-selling him?
                        Last edited by Sultan_1895-1948; 02-11-2015, 07:35 PM.

                        Comment


                        • About time Campanella has been brought up. Here’s a catcher who played in the Negro Leagues, then entered MLB later, so we have some records from both to compare:

                          Negro League (from BBRef):

                          Code:
                           Player PA	HR	AB/HR	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS
                          RC	500	14	33.86	.314	.346	.481	.827
                          JG	1987	107	17.05	.350	.401	.624	1.026
                          These numbers aren’t strictly comparable, because Campy started playing in the Negro Leagues at a very young age, and last played there at age 23, which for most players would be before his peak. Then again, Gibson should have been past his prime by the early 40s. Here are some other comparisons to Gibson:

                          Overall, [Campanella] hit .291/~.374/.494 in the Mexican League [age 20, 21 seasons]. For comparison's sake, Gibson had batted .393/~.496/.802 in Mexico in the two prior seasons.
                          The 22-year-old [Campanella] made the East team for the 1944 East-West Game, but was on the bench as Gibson started.
                          In the 1945 season [age 23], Roy hit .290 for Baltimore and also won a game as a pitcher. His 7 doubles were third in the Negro National League and his 4 homers tied for third, though he was 7 behind the leader, Gibson.
                          And here’s a comparison of Campy with Piazza, to their age 33 seasons (Campy’s period is shorter, because he didn’t enter MLB till age 26):

                          1949-55 (27-33): .288/.370/.531 wRC+ 134, 200 HR (6th, 16 AB/HR)

                          1993-2002 (24-33): .322/.389/.579, wRC+ 152, 346 HR (7th, 14.6 AB/HR)

                          Piazza was clearly the better hitter in this stretch, and his numbers are very similar if we just consider him during the same age range, 27-33, or 1996-2002. But Campy did have one bad year in his stretch, 1954, when he was 32. Take that out, and his wRC+ rises to 143. Most of the difference is that Piazza hit for a better average, not power. In fact, Campy hit more HR in his best season than Piazza, setting a long-standing record for HR by a catcher playing that position.

                          So while Piazza was a better hitter than Campy, it was not by a huge margin, and if Campy had been able to play in MLB at an early age, it’s reasonable to believe that for a ten year stretch ending in his early 30s, his numbers wouldn’t have been that inferior to Piazza’s. In fact, he started playing pro ball at age 15, it may well be that by the time he made the majors he had experienced a lot more wear and tear than the typical 26 year old.

                          Based on these comparisons, it’s hard for me to believe that if Josh Gibson had played in the majors, he wouldn’t have hit better than Piazza. I think the best case for this that can be made is the argument that we can never be certain how performance at one level will translate to another level. But this argument assumes that the Negro Leagues were another level, that the level of play there was not as good as in the majors. That may be the case, but I think this is very debatable.

                          Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post

                          Another piece of evidence from a 2-time MVP MLB player who saw Gibson play and actually was behind the plate when Gibson was a hitter. Campy is of course widely considered as a top 3-4 all-time catcher by most people.
                          Don't undersell him, won it three times.
                          Last edited by Stolensingle; 02-11-2015, 08:08 PM.

                          Comment


                          • NeL Veterans In The Minor Leagues

                            Originally posted by Stolensingle View Post
                            About time Campanella has been brought up. Here’s a catcher who played in the Negro Leagues, then entered MLB later, so we have some records from both to compare:

                            Negro League (from BBRef):

                            Code:
                             Player PA	HR	AB/HR	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS
                            RC	500	14	33.86	.314	.346	.481	.827
                            JG	1987	107	17.05	.350	.401	.624	1.026
                            These numbers aren’t strictly comparable, because Campy started playing in the Negro Leagues at a very young age, and last played there at age 23, which for most players would be before his peak. However, here are some other comparisons to Gibson:

                            And here’s a comparison of Campy with Piazza, to their age 33 seasons (Campy’s period is shorter, because he didn’t enter MLB till age 26):

                            1949-55 (27-33): .288/.370/.531 wRC+ 134, 200 HR (6th, 16 AB/HR)

                            1993-2002 (24-33): .322/.389/.579, wRC+ 152, 346 HR (7th, 14.6 AB/HR)

                            Piazza was clearly the better hitter in this stretch, and his numbers are very similar if we just consider him during the same age range, 27-33, or 1996-2002. But Campy did have one bad year in his stretch, 1954, when he was 32. Take that out, and his wRC+ rises to 143. Most of the difference is that Piazza hit for a better average, not power. In fact, Campy hit more HR in his best season that Piazza, setting a long-standing record for HR by a catcher playing that position.

                            So while Piazza was a better hitter than Campy, it was not by a huge margin, and if Campy had been able to play in MLB at an early age, it’s reasonable to believe that for a ten year stretch ending in his early 30s, his numbers wouldn’t have been that inferior to Piazza’s. In fact, he started playing pro ball at age 15, it may well be that by the time he made the majors he had experienced a lot more wear and tear than the typical 26 year old.

                            Based on these comparisons, it’s hard for me to believe that if Josh Gibson had played in the majors, he wouldn’t have hit better than Piazza. I think the best case for this that can be made is the argument that we can never be certain how performance at one level will translate to another level. But this argument assumes that the Negro Leagues were another level, that the level of play there was not as good as in the majors. That may be the case, but I think this is very debatable.
                            Monte Irvin

                            NeL [ages 19-29]
                            9 seasons|613 PA|570 AB|117 R|202 H|27 doubles|7 triples|20 HR|135 RBI|17 SB|36 BB|.354/.393/.532/.924
                            ^ Missed '43-44 entirely.

                            Minors - all AAA [ages 30, 31, 36, 38]
                            4 seasons|663 PA|515 AB|141 R|193 H|43 doubles|7 triples|34 HR|139 RBI|18 SB|135 BB|55 K|.375/.509/.683/1.193

                            Bus Clarkson

                            NeL [ages 23-31, 34]
                            8 seasons|471 PA|451 AB|88 R|143 H|21 doubles|4 triples|18 HR|103 RBI|8 SB|20 BB|.317/.346/.501/.847
                            ^ Missing '41, 43-45, '47, '48 entirely.

                            Minors - 66% AA, 33% AAA [ages 35-41]
                            7 seasons|3134 PA|2686 AB|401 R|869 H|128 doubles|11 triples|146 HR|437 RBI|36 SB|405 BB|231 K|.324/.418/.542/.960

                            Quincy Trouppe

                            NeL [ages 17-35]
                            10 seasons|335 PA|311 AB|50 R|83 H|16 doubles|6 triples|2 HR|17 RBI|3 SB|23 BB|.267/.317/.376/.694

                            Minors [age 39]
                            1 season|262 PA|205 AB|39 R|53 H|7 doubles|2 triples|8 HR|40 RBI|57 BB|32 K|.259/.420/.429/.849

                            Willard Brown

                            NeL [ages 20-34]
                            14 seasons|933 PA|901 AB|172 R|304 H|42 doubles|25 triples|30 HR|139 RBI|42 SB|31 BB|.337/.359/.539/.899
                            ^ Missed '45.

                            Minors - all AA [ages 38-41]
                            4 seasons|2382 PA|2085 AB|306 R|639 H|125 doubles|10 triples|94 HR|405 RBI|10 SB|145 BB|186 K|.306/.351/.507/.858

                            Jim Gilliam

                            NeL [ages 17-21]
                            5 seasons|57 PA|51 AB|4 R|11 H|2 doubles|1 HR|2 RBI|2 SB|.216/.286/.314/.599
                            ^'49 and '50 - no data.

                            Minors - all AAA [ages 22-23]
                            2 seasons|1376 PA|1126 AB|228 R|331 H|61 doubles|18 triples|16 HR|185 RBI|33 SB|217 BB|65 K|.294/.412/.423/.834

                            Roy Campanella

                            NeL [ages 15-23]
                            9 seasons|500 PA|474 AB|82 R|149 H|23 doubles|7 triples|14 HR|108 RBI|5 SB|23 BB|.314/.346/.481/.827

                            Minors - 66% AAA, 33% B [ages 24-26]
                            3 seasons|1055 PA|959 AB|95 R|275 H|49 doubles|13 triples|39 HR|114 RBI|7 SB|89 BB|64 K|.287/.349/.487/.836

                            Willie Mays

                            NeL [age 17]
                            1 seasons|73 PA|61 AB|9 R|16 H|2 doubles|12 RBI|12 BB|.262/.384/.295/.679

                            Minors - 75% B, 25% AAA [ages 19-20]
                            2 seasons|470 PA|455 AB|38 R|179 H|38 doubles|11 triples|12 HR|30 RBI|5 SB|14 BB|10 K|.393/.413/.604/1.017

                            Minnie Minoso

                            NeL [ages 20-22]
                            3 seasons|274 PA|257 AB|46 R|79 H|15 doubles|7 triples|4 HR|33 RBI|4 SB|16 BB|.307/.348/.467/.815

                            Minors - all AAA [ages 23-24]
                            2 seasons|1470 PA|1309 AB|251 R|408 H|70 doubles|17 triples|46 HR|216 RBI|49 SB|121 BB|144 K|.312/.381/.497/.877

                            Luke Easter

                            NeL [ages 21-31]
                            2 seasons|127 PA|115 AB|23 R|31 H|6 doubles|4 triples|5 HR|26 RBI|1 SB|12 BB|.270/.339/.522/.860

                            Minors - all AAA [ages 33, 36, 38-48]
                            13 seasons|4926 PA|4150 AB|677 R|1227 H|224 doubles|17 triples|269 HR|919 RBI|6 SB|708 BB|948 K|.296/.401/.552/.953

                            Sam Jethroe

                            NeL [ages 21, 25-31]
                            8 seasons|233 PA|219 AB|37 R|62 H|9 doubles|6 triples|2 HR|26 RBI|9 SB|13 BB|.283/.323/.406/.730

                            Minors - all AAA [ages 31, 32, 36-41]
                            8 seasons|4369 PA|3750 AB|752 R|1108 H|189 doubles|62 triples|119 HR|457 RBI|232 SB|515 BB|640 K|.295/.388/.474/.862

                            Al Smith

                            NeL [ages 18-20]
                            3 seasons|72 PA|68 AB|9 R|19 H|5 doubles|3 triples|12 RBI|2 SB|4 BB|.279/.319/.441/.761

                            Minors - all AAA
                            4 seasons|1368 PA|1183 AB|241 R|341 H|64 doubles|25 triples|51 HR|204 RBI|31 SB|158 BB|222 K|.288/.381/.514/.895
                            Last edited by bluesky5; 02-11-2015, 08:11 PM.
                            "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

                            Comment


                            • I found this at the Baseball-Reference.com site:

                              "He (Gibson) has been credited with as many as 84 home runs in one season. His Hall of Fame plaque says he hit "almost 800" homers in his 17-year career. These statistics are unverified and include games against amateur and semipro teams. Based on research of historical accounts performed for the Special Committee on the Negro Leagues, Gibson hit 224 homers in 2,375 at-bats against top black teams, 2 home runs in 56 at-bats against white major-league pitchers and 44 home runs in 450 AB in the Mexican League."

                              Also:
                              "The first official statistics for the Negro leagues were compiled as part of a statistical study sponsored by the National Baseball Hall of Fame and supervised by Larry Lester and Dick Clark, in which a research team collected statistics from thousands of box scores of league-sanctioned games. The first results from this study were the statistics for Negro league Hall of Famers elected prior to 2006, which were published in Shades of Glory by Lawrence D. Hogan. These statistics include the official Negro league statistics for Josh Gibson: In sixteen seasons in the Negro Leagues Gibson hit 115 home runs in 1,855 at-bats." It's obvious from the most cursory examination that most records of the Negro Leagues are notoriously inconclusive. No doubt Josh Gibson was great. I couldn't find any info of his dominance in his league. I know Ruth out homered individual teams ninety times and he bested pairs of teams eighteen times (see link below). Nobody in baseball history dominated contemporary competition like Ruth. This is irrefutable, so comparing Gibson to Ruth is ridiculous. I don't know how many polls have been done about the greatest ever but my guess is Ruth is tops in over ninety-five percent of them, and I'm not referring to polls by casual fans. I'm referring to polls by The Sporting News, ESPN, Bleacher Report, baseball writers, etc. You might fool the layman, but not those who make a living by writing and studying baseball. I realize Ruth didn't play against the great black players of his time but the reverse is also true, the great black players didn't face Grover Cleveland Alexander, Lefty Grove, Walter Johnson, etc., either. I suspect the training (a reflection of the segregated society of the time) was much better in white camps than black. That's speculation but I've never read about the black leagues having anything even remotely comparable to those white MLB teams. There's a great deal of thinly veiled accusations (and some not so lightly veiled) of racism, both latent and overt, on this site and that's unfortunate. I think this a reflection of projection, it's easy to demonize those who disagree with us by accusing them of something they are not. I can't improve on what the late Peter Hathaway Capstick once wrote: "History is the often unpleasant record of the way things actually were, not the way they should have been."

                              Re: Ruth's dominance -

                              http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/01/...-sabermetrics/
                              ". . . the Ruth, the whole Ruth and nothing but the Ruth . . ."

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Badge714 View Post
                                I found this at the Baseball-Reference.com site:

                                "He (Gibson) has been credited with as many as 84 home runs in one season. His Hall of Fame plaque says he hit "almost 800" homers in his 17-year career. These statistics are unverified and include games against amateur and semipro teams. Based on research of historical accounts performed for the Special Committee on the Negro Leagues, Gibson hit 224 homers in 2,375 at-bats against top black teams, 2 home runs in 56 at-bats against white major-league pitchers and 44 home runs in 450 AB in the Mexican League."

                                Also:
                                "The first official statistics for the Negro leagues were compiled as part of a statistical study sponsored by the National Baseball Hall of Fame and supervised by Larry Lester and Dick Clark, in which a research team collected statistics from thousands of box scores of league-sanctioned games. The first results from this study were the statistics for Negro league Hall of Famers elected prior to 2006, which were published in Shades of Glory by Lawrence D. Hogan. These statistics include the official Negro league statistics for Josh Gibson: In sixteen seasons in the Negro Leagues Gibson hit 115 home runs in 1,855 at-bats." It's obvious from the most cursory examination that most records of the Negro Leagues are notoriously inconclusive. No doubt Josh Gibson was great. I couldn't find any info of his dominance in his league. I know Ruth out homered individual teams ninety times and he bested pairs of teams eighteen times (see link below). Nobody in baseball history dominated contemporary competition like Ruth. This is irrefutable, so comparing Gibson to Ruth is ridiculous. I don't know how many polls have been done about the greatest ever but my guess is Ruth is tops in over ninety-five percent of them, and I'm not referring to polls by casual fans. I'm referring to polls by The Sporting News, ESPN, Bleacher Report, baseball writers, etc. You might fool the layman, but not those who make a living by writing and studying baseball. I realize Ruth didn't play against the great black players of his time but the reverse is also true, the great black players didn't face Grover Cleveland Alexander, Lefty Grove, Walter Johnson, etc., either. I suspect the training (a reflection of the segregated society of the time) was much better in white camps than black. That's speculation but I've never read about the black leagues having anything even remotely comparable to those white MLB teams. There's a great deal of thinly veiled accusations (and some not so lightly veiled) of racism, both latent and overt, on this site and that's unfortunate. I think this a reflection of projection, it's easy to demonize those who disagree with us by accusing them of something they are not. I can't improve on what the late Peter Hathaway Capstick once wrote: "History is the often unpleasant record of the way things actually were, not the way they should have been."

                                Re: Ruth's dominance -

                                http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/01/...-sabermetrics/
                                What does Babe Ruth's legacy have to do with anything?
                                "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X