Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mike Piazza vs Josh Gibson

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

  • I wish I could have seen Gibson play. That would clear a heck of a lot up.
    "The first draft of anything is crap." - Ernest Hemingway

    There's no such thing as an ultimate stat.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post
      My post wasn't directed at you.
      I see. You quoted me, but your post wasn't directed at me. Got it, I guess.

      I wasn't accusing you of having a bias or agenda. In fact I haven't accused anyone of that. I referred to your post because you suggested that we have certainty for Piazza but not for Gibson.
      I wasn't suggesting it, I was stating a fact. It's not really open to interpretation.

      And you did say "The idea that one needs absolute certainty is a red herring. No one uses it, needs it, waits for it, or refuses to decide without it. Using it for Black NeL players is an excuse not to rank or vote for them. " By not voting, I'm giving Gibson the benefit of the doubt, not punishing him. If you insist on everyone voting, I'll vote for Piazza.
      They call me Mr. Baseball. Not because of my love for the game; because of all the stitches in my head.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by willshad View Post
        It's one thing to hit like Ruth as an outfielder...to hit like Ruth as a catcher is a whole different story. Ruth didn't hit like Ruth when he was a pitcher..how would he have done as a full time catcher?
        There seems to be a general understanding that catchers have shorter careers, decreased performance, more injuries, and inconsistency. Why does all that go out the window when talking about Gibson?
        Ruth pitched and played OF in '19, managing to lead the league in HR, RBI, slugging, and OBP. This despite the fact that his home park was KILLING him as far as HRs went...he had 20HRs in 232 ABs on the road. Babe also slugged .694 away and could easily have had his first .700 slugging season if he had a more favorable home park like the Polo Grounds or Yankee (which obviously didn't exist yet). What really suffered was his pitching...Babe was way off his previous performance on the mound, for sure.
        As it was, Josh did have a very short career...sort of a necessary consequence of the fact that he died when he was barely 35. Many people still believe he was a truly great player despite this. Is there any reason why Josh couldn't have had 10 or so really prime seasons like Piazza as a catcher?
        "If I drink whiskey, I'll never get worms!" - Hack Wilson

        Comment


        • A study showing the effects of night ball on both hitting and pitching :

          Day for Night article
          Last edited by westfield; 02-16-2015, 01:19 PM.
          ''A sport without black people ain't a sport. That's just a game!... That's like me saying, 'Ooh, I got the highest SAT score in the whole world, but no Asians took the test.' What kind of crap is that? 'I just won the marathon. No Kenyans could run, though!'''
          Chris Rock

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Dude Paskert View Post
            You know, if Ruth had been blackballed from the majors and forced to play in, say, the big nosed guy league, nobody would believe the stories about him, either.
            A great pitcher AND a great hitter? Yeah, that's because he was only playing against other big nosed guys.
            500+ foot home runs on a regular basis? Well, we all know they played with golf balls instead of baseballs in the big nosed league.

            Thing is, quite a few people from Gibson's time felt he was a Ruthian talent. Not everybody agreed and maybe there were reasons why those people would be prone to exaggerate, but it wasn't just one person.
            Is that why they called Ruth "The Big Sneeze"?
            "He's tougher than a railroad sandwich."
            "You'se Got The Eye Of An Eagle."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Dude Paskert View Post
              Ruth pitched and played OF in '19, managing to lead the league in HR, RBI, slugging, and OBP. This despite the fact that his home park was KILLING him as far as HRs went...he had 20HRs in 232 ABs on the road. Babe also slugged .694 away and could easily have had his first .700 slugging season if he had a more favorable home park like the Polo Grounds or Yankee (which obviously didn't exist yet). What really suffered was his pitching...Babe was way off his previous performance on the mound, for sure.
              As it was, Josh did have a very short career...sort of a necessary consequence of the fact that he died when he was barely 35. Many people still believe he was a truly great player despite this. Is there any reason why Josh couldn't have had 10 or so really prime seasons like Piazza as a catcher?
              He COULD have, but the vast majority of catchers DON'T have ten prime seasons in a row...heck the vast majority of players at ANY position do not have ten in a row. I don't see how we can just all assume that he would have...catchers generally miss time, get injured, have off years, etc.

              Comment


              • I like the idea of doing studies.

                The first would be to remove the hitters backdrop.

                After that, we could disable any and all air conditioning, make every game a day game, give them old school unis, and add several double headers.

                For the final study we will take away all video analysis and any technology which aids the player. Helmets, armor, and batting gloves go bye bye too. The zone will extend to the letters and pichers will be allowed to throw inside.

                Should be pretty interesting.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Dude Paskert View Post
                  You know, if Ruth had been blackballed from the majors and forced to play in, say, the big nosed guy league, nobody would believe the stories about him, either.
                  A great pitcher AND a great hitter? Yeah, that's because he was only playing against other big nosed guys.
                  500+ foot home runs on a regular basis? Well, we all know they played with golf balls instead of baseballs in the big nosed league.

                  Thing is, quite a few people from Gibson's time felt he was a Ruthian talent. Not everybody agreed and maybe there were reasons why those people would be prone to exaggerate, but it wasn't just one person.
                  That's an excellent point.
                  3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post
                    Yes that's true for both. I didn't say it was different for white people in 1871-1890. Where did I say that only Black players are being ignored?

                    But your right. All sorts of people from all sorts of eras of all different colors going back dozens of centuries are viewed differently. We are talking 2 particular players in the 20th century baseball however




                    Open you mind.

                    We weren't, I wasn't, we aren't comparing Cap Anson or Dan Brouthers to Mike Piazza. And I never said this was a race issue. And I've already said it's not an issue for people who refuse to vote.

                    So. Are there more things that I didn't say that you'd like to reply when you quote me?
                    All that I posted was not a reply to your quotes.
                    I was just pointing out how in the past "some" say, difficult to compare MLB players from way back, because the game is so different.
                    But yet "some" can now do so with black players.
                    I say, why is there a difference, those black players in black baseball played a game much different than today.

                    Comment


                    • I thought so. Sublime and Dick Allen not always associated.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by willshad View Post
                        It's one thing to hit like Ruth as an outfielder...to hit like Ruth as a catcher is a whole different story. Ruth didn't hit like Ruth when he was a pitcher..how would he have done as a full time catcher?
                        There seems to be a general understanding that catchers have shorter careers, decreased performance, more injuries, and inconsistency. Why does all that go out the window when talking about Gibson?
                        What years are you speaking of, Ruth the pitcher.
                        As a pitcher only-1914-1917.
                        Or Ruth the part time pitcher/first base/outfielder 1918-1919.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
                          All that I posted was not a reply to your quotes.
                          I was just pointing out how in the past "some" say, difficult to compare MLB players from way back, because the game is so different.
                          But yet "some" can now do so with black players.
                          I say, why is there a difference, those black players in black baseball played a game much different than today.
                          Oh I see what you mean. If I was missing your point each time, then I apologize. Anyway, I don't know why people have a hard time comparing players from different eras.

                          I think that if military historians can compare Patton to Alexander, or Napoleon to Hannibal, then comparing baseball players 70 years apart should be easier. But that's me.
                          Last edited by drstrangelove; 02-16-2015, 05:32 PM.
                          "It's better to look good, than be good."

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post
                            Oh I see what you mean. If I was missing your point each time, then I apologize. Anyway, I don't know why people have a hard time comparing players from different eras.
                            This is why it is hard (I firmly believe impossible) to compare players who played decades apart. Let's look at Piazza and Gibson for example. Josh Gibson played his last Negro League game 46 years before Piazza played his first major league game. They played in vastly different playing environments. They played against completely different set of competition (different pitchers who emphasized different pitching strategies), different ballparks, different baseball gloves, different baseballs, different bats, different rules, different strategies, and vastly different schedule lengths. Gibson played almost entirely day games while Piazza played day and night games. Gibson didn't wear a batting helmet and Piazza did. Given the desperate playing conditions they played IMO there is no rational basis for a direct comparison. I have no idea whether Gibson was "greater" than Piazza or vice versa.

                            Using statistics is useless in comparing players across decades. A player's statistics are in a sense proxy for a player's baseball skill, but it is not 100% so. A player's statistics are heavily influenced by the the playing environment he plays in as well.
                            Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                            Comment


                            • I'm amazed that this thread has taken off like it has. I bumped it up on 02/05/15 with post #54. We are now over 400 posts!
                              Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post
                                Oh I see what you mean. If I was missing your point each time, then I apologize. Anyway, I don't know why people have a hard time comparing players from different eras.

                                I think that if military historians can compare Patton to Alexander, or Napoleon to Hannibal, then comparing baseball players 70 years apart should be easier. But that's me.
                                OK. Every time we get on the subject of the early black players, I get that feeling, what was missed. The history of the game is my favorite part of the game.
                                Black players missed out the most, terrible injustice. Also fans of MLB back then missed out.
                                I, and fans of today missed out. The history of the game would have been enriched so much more. Reading about Gibson facing Lefty Grove, Paige pitching in MLB in his prime.
                                What a shame.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X