Ty Cobb discussion

[RuthMayBond]

I just think he'd serve his team better by expanding the strike zone at times, using his natural hitting ability to drive the ball to all fields. Rather than walking to first, where he cannot steal, and cannot go first to third on a regular basis like he used to.

Wow, you know more about hitting than Barry

<I'm saying, that if I'm paying a guy 20 million a year, and he's my best hitter, I want him to swing the bat.>

I thought you'd want him to not make outs

<Honestly man, I've seen every piece of footage,>

I've seen those choppy films too

<His assists numbers don't tell you everything. His pitching record doesn't tell you everything. His fielding percentage doesn't tell you everything. His stolen base numbers surely don't tell you everything. >

Poor Ruth, everything was against him. If only he had the Philly media instead of New York.

<But yes, Ruth was a complete player who could do everything on a ballfield. Like I said, it was only for a short time. >

Actually you said 1918-1928, which is a LONG "short time"

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I've seen those choppy films too

If thats all you've seen then I understand your view. Fortunately there's much more footage out there, than of him just trotting around the bases. These are not choppy, and are in real time.

[four tool]

With the bandboxes we have today, Cobb would get his share of HRs. the real question would be his power numbers in the 50s and 60s.

[Bill Burgess]

pjf contributed this one.

Ty Gives Credit to Modern Players:
Due to Ty Cobb's many rants about his good old days, many people mistakenly assume that he couldn't appreciate any modern players. He wrote some rants in his 1961 autobiography, which cemented his curmegeon image.

But Ty researchers are well aware of a different Ty. A gentler, kinder, more appreciative one. It is well known that he was extremely tight pals with Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Casey Stengel, Fred Haney, Dan Howley, Taylor Spink, Harry Heilmann, Rogers Hornsby, Oscar Vitt, Del Baker, George Weiss.

Bill, thanks for the heads quotes by Cobb on Mantle. It sort of suprised me since Mantle, although he had the ability and perhaps due to injury, didn't really play Cobb's type of running game. This just adds to all the quotes I presented in past posts from both modern and former players, National and American league that Mantle was the best player in baseball from 1951-1962. Mays, had his supporters but the consensus backed by the statistics had Mantle #1. What most who never saw him fail to understand is that during all that time he was an injured player, had a tendency to play hurt and played in a ballpark that minimized all his statistics, especially home runs.

[Bill Burgess]

In 1919, conditions changed enough to allow a player with a limited skill set, but a supreme skill, to dominate the game, and crush the competition, more than a player with a more broad-based skill set (Wagner, Cobb)

Bill Burgess

Bill, I assume that you're referring to Ruth right here, so let me respond if I may. You used 1919, a time when Ruth was a strong 6'2" 190 lbs, had a great arm, could run better than you must realize, and we know about his hitting. There was nothing he couldn't do on a baseball field. Ruth's quote of "If I'd tried for them dinky singles, I could've batted around .600," probably isn't too far off. Think of what he was able to do batting average wise, even with his mindset of slugging. Then imagine if he actually wanted to work on the art of not striking out, not hitting the ball hard at all times, just placing it. He had to skills to do just that had he chose to, but he preferred to slug. He like to hit home runs. He used to say "I feel hitterish today," with a smile because ya know what, he loved to crush the baseball.

Its possible for me, even as a huge Ruth fan, to seperate the styles of play. I accept that Cobb was many things that Ruth was not, and vice versa. They both dominated in their chosen styles unlike no others. I just can't accept if you're eluding to a point, that Ruth, would have been "washed down river" had the livelier ball not come into play. He would have done ok, trust me. The hard fact is, that the rule changes (no spitty, clean ball) had much more to do with increased offense than any "livelier" ball theory anyway. It was the copying of Ruth's style, and these rule changes that made a difference above all else.

[Bill Burgess]

Randy,

When I wrote those lines, I wasn't trying to murder the Babe, but trying to contrast him with Ty/Honus. But I will go over your post, out of respect, and will not be trying to undermine Babe.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill, I assume that you're referring to Ruth right here, so let me respond if I may. You used 1919, a time when Ruth was a strong 6'2" 190 lbs, had a great arm, could run better than you must realize, and we know about his hitting.

(Bill - So far so good)

There was nothing he couldn't do on a baseball field.

(Bill - That is true, but we don't ask if one could do something, but how well they could do it, compared with the best at that skill. And here, Babe was world class at power hitting, high average hitting, and throwing/pitching. But outside of those tools/skills, Babe was not world class at fielding, or running.

When he was young & trim, Babe was a servicable/adequate fielder. But the standard we use is how many balls he caught up with. And Babe was 3rd in his OF, after fleet Earle Combs/Bob Meusel. Which is why Babe had to be played in the smallest field where-ever they played.

Babe did run well, for his size. He could go from 1st to 3rd as well as anyone else. But so could all the rest of the league.)

Ruth's quote of "If I'd tried for them dinky singles, I could've batted around .600," probably isn't too far off. Think of what he was able to do batting average wise, even with his mindset of slugging. Then imagine if he actually wanted to work on the art of not striking out, not hitting the ball hard at all times, just placing it. He had to skills to do just that had he chose to, but he preferred to slug. He like to hit home runs. He used to say "I feel hitterish today," with a smile because ya know what, he loved to crush the baseball.

(Bill - In 1923-24, Babe abandoned his trying to hit a HR every time up. He tried his best to hit for BA. And he didn't hit .400. But he did prove he was a great all around player. 1923-24 was his playing peak. He was awesome. But his quip about .400 was like Ty saying he could hit lots of HRs. I think he could have too, but not 60. And not even 50, without bringing his BA way down. I figure Ty could hit 35 without his BA suffering too terribly.)

Its possible for me, even as a huge Ruth fan, to seperate the styles of play. I accept that Cobb was many things that Ruth was not, and vice versa. They both dominated in their chosen styles unlike no others. I just can't accept if you're eluding to a point, that Ruth, would have been "washed down river" had the livelier ball not come into play. He would have done ok, trust me. The hard fact is, that the rule changes (no spitty, clean ball) had much more to do with increased offense than any "livelier" ball theory anyway. It was the copying of Ruth's style, and these rule changes that made a difference above all else.

(Bill - I think Ty/Babe were enormously jealous of each other's respective skills. I think Babe was more jealous. I agree that Babe would have been a great player in the deadball era. He would not have been washed anywhere. I don't know which had more effect, ball or rule changes. They combined to allow Babe's supreme gift to be showcased in such sharp relief that we will never know what would have happened otherwise.)

I realize you are a very big Babe fan, and I hope this isn't too strong for you, Randy. I will no longer bash Babe. As a matter of fact, I want to praise him more, and I intend to show some rather rare stuff showing Babe in a very positive light.

I guess I will use the Babe Ruth Thread to do that. I hope you will enjoy them.

[Blackout]

With the bandboxes we have today, Cobb would get his share of HRs. the real question would be his power numbers in the 50s and 60s.

considering it took someone other than Ruth himself all the way until 1930 to hit 50 homers (Hack Wilson), I doubt it

[four tool]

It took a while for sluggers to learn to swing for the fences. Considering some of the people who hit 50 at least once and never come close again, why do you doubt Cobb hitting at least the thirty range consistently?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

If Cobb could ever free himself of his stubborn style of play, he could probably do whatever he damn well wanted to on a baseball field. 35+ homers a year isn't far fetched, not in todays game.

[Blackout]

It took a while for sluggers to learn to swing for the fences. Considering some of the people who hit 50 at least once and never come close again, why do you doubt Cobb hitting at least the thirty range consistently?

i was doubting Cobb would get into the 50s, not 30s

he could easily have gotten into the 30s

but 50s is out of his reach at the age

[four tool]

When kji said the 50s and sixties I meant the era not the number of HR. He wouldn't be Willie Mays or Mickey Mantle, but he might have been Joe Adcock with better BA

[Bill Burgess]

Joe Adcock? Wow. Golly. Gee. I was hoping for Billy Bruton with a higher BA.

[four tool]

I can live with Bruton

[Bill Burgess]

I can't. Best compliment Billy Bruton ever received, I'd imagine.

[oscargamblesfro]

cobb and kenny williams

on another thread, i wondered about cobb's hatred of st. louis browns outfielder kenny williams that, i think, i recalled reading somewhere, i think it was charlie gehringer that said that. it's probably a better topic on this thread..i take it that williams for some reason was not exactly well liked at the time...can anyone shed more light on this? why did cobb hate williams?thanks