Interesting Test (concerning Barry Bonds and the Giants)

[Joshv02]

Yes, not sure that this is the right forum anymore, but I think testing is important because, well, people think it is important. That is about it.

But, make sure testing reduces the report of false positives to as close to 0 as possible.

[jackson41]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

"The only way to recover what was lost is to ban the players who participated, and wipe their records from the books. Give the records back to Maris, Ruth, Aaron, and the rest. And let a new generation of players learn that there is honor in baseball." - Ben Shapiro

Ruth's records can't be compared to baseball today. Baseball is a different game today. Ruth never faced a middle reliever who came into the game in the 7th and threw 95 mph. He never had to hit a slider. He never had to hit a black/Latino/Asian pitcher. The bats today are better, the balls today are better, and the talent today is better.

If we want to immortalize Ruth in the record books, than we need to have a different record book for each era. Baseball is a change game and I think...and I'm sure I'll get run off for saying this, but...If Ruth played today he'd never get out of AA ball. It's not fair to compare him to today's players.

[DamnYankees]

Originally Posted by jackson41

Ruth's records can't be compared to baseball today. Baseball is a different game today. Ruth never faced a middle reliever who came into the game in the 7th and threw 95 mph. He never had to hit a slider. He never had to hit a black/Latino/Asian pitcher. The bats today are better, the balls today are better, and the talent today is better.

If we want to immortalize Ruth in the record books, than we need to have a different record book for each era. Baseball is a change game and I think...and I'm sure I'll get run off for saying this, but...If Ruth played today he'd never get out of AA ball. It's not fair to compare him to today's players.

OK, yes, you will get run off for that. That's insane. It's ok to say that baseball has gotten better and the slope of history has inclined. It's damn ludicrous to think that the great player of baseball's 50-60 years, and maybe the best ever, would not even make it today. Ruth didn't have to face a Gagne or a slider, but he had to face a Walter Johnson and a Lefty Grove and a spitball. He had no conditioning. He had no airplanes. He had a ton of disadvantages players today don't have.

Oh, and he could kind of pitch a little himself.

That would be a damn steep incline of history, and I can't accept that. I doubt any rational person would agree with you here.

[jackson41]

In my defense. Lets take a different look at athletics since 1915. This is a proggression of the mile world record.

4.12,6 Norman Taber USA 15/07/16 Cambridge, Mass.
4.10,4 Paavo Nurmi FIN 23/08/23 Stockholm
4.09,2 Jules Ladoumegue FRA 31/10/04 Paris
4.07,6 Jack Lovelock NZL 33/07/15 Princeton, NJ.
4.06,8 Glenn Cunningham USA 34/06/16 Princeton, NJ.
4.06,4 Sydney Wooderson GBR 37/08/28 Motspur Park
4.06,2 Gunder Hägg SWE 42/07/01 Gothenburg
4.06,2 Arne Andersson SWE 42/07/10 Stockholm
4.04,6 Gunder Hägg SWE 42/09/04 Stockholm
4.02,6 Arne Andersson SWE 43/07/01 Gothenburg
4.01,6 Arne Andersson SWE 44/07/18 Malmö
4.01,4 Gunder Hägg SWE 45/07/17 Malmö
3.59,4 Roger Bannister GBR 54/05/06 Oxford
3.58,0 John Landy AUS 54/06/21 Turku
3.57,2 Derek Ibbotson GBR 57/07/18 Lontoo
3.54,5 Herb Elliott AUS 58/08/07 Dublin
3.54,4 Peter Snell NZL 62/02/27 Wanganui
3.54,1 Peter Snell NZL 64/11/17 Auckland
3.53,6 Michel Jazy FRA 65/06/09 Rennes
3.51,3 Jim Ryun USA 66/07/17 Berkeley, Calif.
3.51,1 Jim Ryun USA 67/06/23 Bakersfield, Calif.
3.51,0 Filbert Bayi TAN 75/05/17 Kingston
3.49,4 John Walker NZL 75/08/12 Gothenburg
3.48,95 Sebastian Coe GBR 79/07/17 Oslo
3.48,8 Steve Ovett GBR 80/07/01 Oslo
3.48,53 Sebastian Coe GBR 81/08/19 Zurich
3.48,40 Steve Ovett GBR 81/08/26 Koblenz
3.47,33 Sebastian Coe GBR 81/08/28 Brussels
3.46,32 Steve Cram GBR 85/07/27 Oslo
3.44,39 Noureddine Morceli ALG 93/09/05 Rieti
3.43

The record in 1915 was 4:12, there are high school runners today that break 4:12. My point is, the best in the world in 1920 wouldn't even qualify to compete against the best in the world today, why would baseball be any different.

[IatricSB]

Originally Posted by Aadik

fair enough Stacy- I just can't see a reasonable defense for pre integration baseball.

I wouldn't argue the integration aspect. I just look at "better" in a different way than the criteria you chose. For me, baseball is not nearly as enjoyable now because of all the financial garbage that goes on, unions and threats of strike every few years, an increase in HRs to the point of decreasing the enjoyment of seeing them hit, and in the past few years all the roid talk and overseeing this whole mess is a fox put in charge of guarding the chicken coop (Selig). Seems like I'm forgetting a couple of the things that I thought of during the ride home and I'm too tired to give it much thought.

[Giants44]

I just got back from Spring Training in Phoenix. for those pining for better days, I highly recommend it.

It was great, there was not the non-stop assault of loud music and ridiculous nonsense designed to entertain us between innings that you get in major league games these days, most of the fans actually knew and cared about the game - of course the one major down fall is the games are meaningless - but the atmosphere is fantastic.

[asamford]

Originally Posted by Giants44

I just got back from Spring Training in Phoenix. for those pining for better days, I highly recommend it.

It was great, there was not the non-stop assault of loud music and ridiculous nonsense designed to entertain us between innings that you get in major league games these days, most of the fans actually knew and cared about the game - of course the one major down fall is the games are meaningless - but the atmosphere is fantastic.

on that same note, if you live close enough to a AA or AAA team, go! The talent level is high enough that you can really enjoy the game, and the atmosphere can't be beat. I went to my first minor league game last year to see Prince Fielder play with Milwaukee's AA team, and it was the most fun I can remember having at a baseball game. I still love going to see major league games, sure, but a high level minor league game is an experience any fan of baseball should have.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by jackson41

It's not fair to compare him to today's players.

You're right, but for the wrong reasons.

Ruth utterly dominated his era, like no one does today.

Ruth was the prototype Wayne Gretsky/Michael Jordan - the superstar that made his sport into something bigger - also like no one else today.

Besides being one of the best - if not the best - batters of his era, Ruth was also a star pitcher. Like no one else today.

Barry Bonds can hit 800, 900, 1000 home runs and it won't matter a damn. Babe Ruth will still always be a legend, and Barry Bonds will still be nothing but a steroid-juiced cheating jerk.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by IatricSB

For me, baseball is not nearly as enjoyable now because of all the financial garbage that goes on, unions and threats of strike every few years, an increase in HRs to the point of decreasing the enjoyment of seeing them hit, and in the past few years all the roid talk and overseeing this whole mess is a fox put in charge of guarding the chicken coop (Selig). Seems like I'm forgetting a couple of the things that I thought of during the ride home and I'm too tired to give it much thought.

Exactly. Free agency made baseball a game of contracts, lawyers, and arbitrators and killed the long-term team aspects of the game. Baseball used to be about talent, not about contracts and salaries.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by jackson41

My point is, the best in the world in 1920 wouldn't even qualify to compete against the best in the world today, why would baseball be any different.

And the real point is that you compete against the other players of your era given the environmental constraints of your era, and that Babe Ruth dominated and owned the other players of his era - and the era itself - in a manner that no one else really has since.

[IatricSB]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

And the real point is that you compete against the other players of your era given the environmental constraints of your era, and that Babe Ruth dominated and owned the other players of his era - and the era itself - in a manner that no one else really has since.

I agree with MD on this one but it depends on how you want to view it. If you want to yank Ruth out of 1921 with a time machine and plop him into today's lineup, I think he'd still be good but not one of the best. However, the way I view it is if Ruth was born 80 years later with the same inner talent, he'd have the benefit of growing up with the same qualities of medicines, knowledge, food, etc., and therefore would be dominant. In other words, same ability as he had, but with today's body types though I'm not implying he'd be a greek god. Maybe a huskier guy like Giambi or McGwire but the Ruthian ability.

[QuestGAV]

Originally Posted by jackson41

In my defense. Lets take a different look at athletics since 1915. This is a proggression of the mile world record.

Yes, this shows that people train harder and better today. More is known about the human body and nutrition. Much more attention is given to techniques that yield the optimal result. However, as human beings, they're no better than their 20s/30s/40s counterparts. If Ruth had been born in 1970 and had the benefits of today's expanded knowledge & training he'd have an OPS of 1.500-1.600 - without being suspected of using any performance enhancers.

[jazzrack]

players today use tylenol & asprin for sore muscles, players back in the good ole days did't get to use drugs to improve their performace. anybody who has ever used a pain reliever should be banned from baseball.

[Tiger Fan]

Originally Posted by IatricSB

I wouldn't argue the integration aspect. I just look at "better" in a different way than the criteria you chose. For me, baseball is not nearly as enjoyable now because of all the financial garbage that goes on, unions and threats of strike every few years, an increase in HRs to the point of decreasing the enjoyment of seeing them hit, and in the past few years all the roid talk and overseeing this whole mess is a fox put in charge of guarding the chicken coop (Selig). Seems like I'm forgetting a couple of the things that I thought of during the ride home and I'm too tired to give it much thought.

I agree 100%. All the financial crap, basically due to tv revenue money and the whole "chicks dig the longball" mentality has ruined the game of baseball for me.

In the early 70's I dreamed of being able to watch virtually every game like you now can. Unfortunately, now that we are able to see every game I no longer have any desire to do so because it is not the same game.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

Free agency did IMO ruin baseball, but you should be aware that the critical ruling on free agency (Peter Seitz's ruling on the Messersmith-McNally case) didn't happen until 1975 and that its impact was not felt immediately. Free agency is yet another red herring here - it's a very different subject than steroids.

Cute- you want to discuss that Hunter actually set the precedence before the Messersmith ruling - although the latter is probably the most significant impact. Perhaps you prefrred the crap the owners dolled out before that.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by IatricSB

I wouldn't argue the integration aspect. I just look at "better" in a different way than the criteria you chose. For me, baseball is not nearly as enjoyable now because of all the financial garbage that goes on, unions and threats of strike every few years, an increase in HRs to the point of decreasing the enjoyment of seeing them hit, and in the past few years all the roid talk and overseeing this whole mess is a fox put in charge of guarding the chicken coop (Selig). Seems like I'm forgetting a couple of the things that I thought of during the ride home and I'm too tired to give it much thought.

See, I understand that- but before, baseball had people working for a labor that was unfair. I expect the right to earn as much as I'm worth, and I find it very hard to oppose anyone essentialy asking for the same thing. I see the idea on the large scale, but the owners would be making more money if players made less- what they charge you is almost irrelevant of their costs- its what you can bear.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

You're right, but for the wrong reasons.

Ruth utterly dominated his era, like no one does today.

Ruth was the prototype Wayne Gretsky/Michael Jordan - the superstar that made his sport into something bigger - also like no one else today.

Besides being one of the best - if not the best - batters of his era, Ruth was also a star pitcher. Like no one else today.

Barry Bonds can hit 800, 900, 1000 home runs and it won't matter a damn. Babe Ruth will still always be a legend, and Barry Bonds will still be nothing but a steroid-juiced cheating jerk.

Simplistic measure, since I dont' have win shares or WARP 3 in front of me.

Ruth's 3 best seasons: OPS+ of 255, 239, 227
Bonds 3 best seasons: 275, 262, 260

Furthermore, Ruth had a more limited talent base - as any basic statistic will show you, if you raise the mean level of talent, the outlier is liable to less of one, reducing one's domination in context to a league. Ruth played in a lily white league- today the major leagues are about 50% white. Even ignoring the fact that the vast majority of benchplayers tend to be white, that's a whole bunch of talent that wasn't allowed to play Mal - you think that might have stiffened the competition ?

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by Tiger Fan

I agree 100%. All the financial crap, basically due to tv revenue money and the whole "chicks dig the longball" mentality has ruined the game of baseball for me.

In the early 70's I dreamed of being able to watch virtually every game like you now can. Unfortunately, now that we are able to see every game I no longer have any desire to do so because it is not the same game.

Amen. Now that we finally *can* see all the baseball games, they're no longer really worth watching.

My satellite radio has a 24/7 baseball channel. I would have loved to have had that back in the sixties and seventies. But now? 90% of what they talk about is contracts, free agency, money, etc. There's hardly any point to listening to it; sometimes you might think that you were listening to a money management program.

Before free agency, baseball was about *baseball*. Not money or legal mumbo-jumbo, but *baseball*.

[Malleus Dei]

"If Barry played in Ruth's era, he'd be a rumor." - Andy Behrens

[Crapshoot]

Again, I'm curious what quoting good ol' idiots is doing for your arguement.