Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mike Piazza vs Josh Gibson

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

  • Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post
    I hear ya. My oldest son loves military history too and he surprises me with the level of knowledge he has on the subject (not from me mind you.) And I completely agree....ranking generals is subjective, but it's fun and no one seems too emotionally attached to any one general. Maybe that's the problem---some of us (me included) take this ranking a little too seriously.
    It's a problem and it's not. We all love baseball. There is a ton of disagreement, but mostly there is amazing discourse. I'm trying to take the edge off more, but it's hard because we love this stuff.
    This week's Giant

    #5 in games played as a Giant with 1721 , Bill Terry

    Comment


    • Originally posted by drstrangelove View Post
      I hear ya. My oldest son loves military history too and he surprises me with the level of knowledge he has on the subject (not from me mind you.) And I completely agree....ranking generals is subjective, but it's fun and no one seems too emotionally attached to any one general. Maybe that's the problem---some of us (me included) take this ranking a little too seriously.
      Include me also.
      It's all about the game of baseball, a big part is the numbers.
      This particular thread deals with players but the board is often dealing with numbers, records.
      The past and the present. Which record is more impressive, the old or the new, the game has changed.

      I have to bring this guy back because there has been so many debates, discussions dealing with him, Babe Ruth.
      At times I may be debating another poster who puts less value on him then I do.
      Then I have to stop and think, the other poster did put up some good points. Obvious I think I have it right but so does the other poster
      Then I conclude, maybe were both off the mark. I'm a bit too high on Ruth and he may be too low.
      So I'm satisfied with saying, with concluding maybe Ruth is some where in the middle.
      I only use Ruth as an example, it could be any other player, any record.

      Comment


      • Yeah Al Simmons or someone. I think he's a consensus top 100 or Hof, but rarely gets cited now. I honestly have never seen anyone claim he didn't merit being in the Hall, but you never know.

        Comment


        • I'm not sure how I missed this 10 year old essay on the Bill James Online website. The poll was dead even.

          Mike Piazza vs Josh Gibson

          This quote stood out to me.

          "I’ll be honest with you. It doesn’t really matter to me. Because I’m not actually out to prove Gibson is better than Piazza, or vice versa. I’m here to see how we make our decisions. I’m here to see how we decide what we believe in."
          Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 10-16-2018, 08:53 AM.
          Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
            Can't really compare a guy who spent much of his career playing exhibition and amateur quality games, whose argument is based largely on anecdotal and apocryphal evidence, in leagues that might not have even touched the quality of our minor leagues, with a guy who spent his career in the established, well-known highest level of baseball in the entire world.
            To me, this is the bottom line. Not a put down of Gibson, impossible to compare the two.

            Comment


            • My first reaction to the thread title, and then the "defense not considered" part of the OP, was that they're not really comparable because Piazza was a CINO (Catcher in Name Only), pretty much a first baseman with extra gear. That's a defensive argument, I know, but at least, according to what we know, Gibson fielded his position at an above-average level.
              They don’t think it be like it is, but it do.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by pedrosrotatorcuff View Post
                My first reaction to the thread title, and then the "defense not considered" part of the OP, was that they're not really comparable because Piazza was a CINO (Catcher in Name Only), pretty much a first baseman with extra gear. That's a defensive argument, I know, but at least, according to what we know, Gibson fielded his position at an above-average level.
                That's an incorrect and misinformed statement. Piazza was good at all aspects of catching besides throwing out base stealers. Overall he was probably above average defensively.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by willshad View Post

                  That's an incorrect and misinformed statement. Piazza was good at all aspects of catching besides throwing out base stealers. Overall he was probably above average defensively.
                  Yea, he definitely gets a bad rap defensively.
                  "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 have to wonder which Mike Piazza some of you guys were watching. prc is exactly right. He was an utter oaf back there.
                    3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

                    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?
                      Yes! Josh Exley! My favorite episode by far from one of my favorite shows ever. This is the episode that took me on my deep-dive of the NeL and my discovery of Josh Gibson who X was named after and very, very, very loosely based on, being that he was an actual alien.

                      Screenshot006-1.jpg

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by willshad View Post
                        How can we possibly know how good Gibson would have been in the majors?
                        Thats the whole deal here. No disrespect for Josh, no doubt a great hitter and given hi chance in MLB maybe the HOF.
                        But I can't see rating Josh over Piazza because through no fault of his own he never played MLB.
                        Unfair, of course if you lead with your heart you may give Josh the nod because of the circumstances.
                        If you use your brain go by fact, I can't put him over Piazza. If in MLB could he prove to have been better of course..................but it never happened.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
                          Unfair, of course if you lead with your heart you may give Josh the nod because of the circumstances.
                          If you use your brain go by fact, I can't put him over Piazza.
                          Incredibly sick of this patronizing garbage. It's entirely possible to construct a fact and logic based case that has Gibson ahead of Piazza. To repeatedly dismiss everyone who does so as being motivated solely by sentiment is insulting and I doubt I'm the only one who resents it.

                          3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Los Bravos View Post

                            Incredibly sick of this patronizing garbage. It's entirely possible to construct a fact and logic based case that has Gibson ahead of Piazza. To repeatedly dismiss everyone who does so as being motivated solely by sentiment is insulting and I doubt I'm the only one who resents it.
                            I don't think anyone is trying to be disrespectful to those who feel okay ranking Gibson.

                            Let's say there are 15 factors that must take place in order for Gibson to have a lengthy HOF career as a Major League catcher and put up the best offensive numbers ever seen. You choose to give him the benefit of the doubt across the board, all on assumptions or based on extrapolating Negro League numbers. That's okay.

                            Some of us just view things more realistically. What if there was a different Negro League catcher who didn't get the praise who would have faired better in the Major Leaguers than Gibson. Perhaps not likely but it's possible. Baseball is weird like that.
                            Last edited by GoslinFan; 03-20-2022, 07:36 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Really subtle.
                              3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Los Bravos View Post
                                Really subtle.
                                What do you mean?

                                Tried to explain it. It's like you have blinders on.
                                Last edited by GoslinFan; 03-20-2022, 07:59 PM.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X