Who's the best hitter in MLB history?

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

Thanks for adding to the debate.

Thanks for ****ing off.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Thanks for ****ing off.

And the keen insight continues.

Do you have nothing to say about the talent level being not up to full speed? Or the fact that some of the best players just weren't allowed to play against Ruth? Do you have anything to add other than "you are all wrong for disagreeing with me?"

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

And the keen insight continues.

Do you have nothing to say about the talent level being not up to full speed? Or the fact that some of the best players just weren't allowed to play against Ruth? Do you have anything to add other than "you are all wrong for disagreeing with me?"

Maybe if you would read the thread you would have your own question answered.

[darkhorse]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Maybe if you would read the thread you would have your own question answered.

Didn't work for me, bish.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Maybe if you would read the thread you would have your own question answered.

You mean this gem:

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Yeah, just to add to that point, The Iron Horse was his teammate, and one of the best if not the best first baseman of all time, and yet he didn't put up numbers approaching those of Ruth.

I guess that is the only thing you added to the thread outside of telling us we were just wrong. You are right. That answers all my questions.

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

You mean this gem:




I guess that is the only thing you added to the thread outside of telling us we were just wrong. You are right. That answers all my questions.

I also responded to darkhorse's question in response to my post.

As for my statement that anyone who doesn't vote Ruth is wrong, that's not about my ego or anything like that. It's just an objective fact. By any measure, Babe Ruth is the best hitter of all time. The only argument that could be made against him is the era argument, which Dagrims covered and I added to.

So what are you doing man? Are you just trying to pick a fight? Are you trying to make me look like a hypocrite? Whatever you're doing, its not adding to the discussion either.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

I also responded to darkhorse's question in response to my post.

As for my statement that anyone who doesn't vote Ruth is wrong, that's not about my ego or anything like that. It's just an objective fact. By any measure, Babe Ruth is the best hitter of all time. The only argument that could be made against him is the era argument, which Dagrims covered and I added to.

So what are you doing man? Are you just trying to pick a fight? Are you trying to make me look like a hypocrite? Whatever you're doing, its not adding to the discussion either.

I think the ERA question answered about the talent, but there is still the fact that there were no black players or domnincans or any other race playing. If the league was not segregated I would believe his numbers more. But as of now I will put him at number 2 until someone convinces me that there having a league where only whites played didn't help Ruth's numbers look better.

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I think the ERA question answered about the talent, but there is still the fact that there were no black players or domnincans or any other race playing. If the league was not segregated I would believe his numbers more. But as of now I will put him at number 2 until someone convinces me that there having a league where only whites played didn't help Ruth's numbers look better.

That's assuming that blacks and hispanics are better baseball players than whites are. I don't think they are. There are blacks and hispanics who are really good, and there are blacks and hispanics who are Neifi Perez and Korey Patterson. To me, when judging the best hitter or player, you can't use what if scenarios, you have to look about what they actually did in the context of their time. No one dominated the game the way that Babe Ruth did when he played.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

That's assuming that blacks and hispanics are better baseball players than whites are. I don't think they are. There are blacks and hispanics who are really good, and there are blacks and hispanics who are Neifi Perez and Korey Patterson. To me, when judging the best hitter or player, you can't use what if scenarios, you have to look about what they actually did in the context of their time. No one dominated the game the way that Babe Ruth did when he played.

The problem I see is that we may never know. I mean we saw in World Baseball Championship that the White Americans really weren't that much better than Mexicans or Japanese or Koreans or Dominicans. In a time when those players were kept out of the league it is hard for me to say his number wouldn't have been as dominant if those players were allowed. I generally don't like What if scenarios but in this case it is a very valid point.

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

The problem I see is that we may never know. I mean we saw in World Baseball Championship that the White Americans really weren't that much better than Mexicans or Japanese or Koreans or Dominicans. In a time when those players were kept out of the league it is hard for me to say his number wouldn't have been as dominant if those players were allowed. I generally don't like What if scenarios but in this case it is a very valid point.

But that's just the thing, we will never know. It could be that Ruth would have put up worse numbers if blacks and hispanics had played, but its just as possible that he would have dominated exactly the way he did. Its impossible to know for sure, so we can't discount him for it, IMO.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

But that's just the thing, we will never know. It could be that Ruth would have put up worse numbers if blacks and hispanics had played, but its just as possible that he would have dominated exactly the way he did. Its impossible to know for sure, so we can't discount him for it, IMO.

I don't think I am discounting him all together. I just think Bonds is close enough to his numbers that being that Bonds is playing against all races I am giving Bonds a little more credit.

PS: I also think Ruth is the best player of all-time because he could pitch too.

[swampdragon]

Originally Posted by swampdragon

The greatest hitter in the history of the game is SuperBonds. (That Barry Bonds guy is about No. 15). The greatest hitter over an entire career is Ruth, and if you give Williams the years he lost to military service he's awfully close. No one else belongs in the conversation.

I'll throw this back into the mix. If you downgrade Ruth's numbers, why not Bonds'?

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by swampdragon

I'll throw this back into the mix. If you downgrade Ruth's numbers, why not Bonds'?

True dat. It would also be based on a what if scenario. As long as we're doing that, might as well go hog wild.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by swampdragon

I'll throw this back into the mix. If you downgrade Ruth's numbers, why not Bonds'?

Because he is playing against all the talent from all over the world. I don't understand why I would.

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

Because he is playing against all the talent from all over the world. I don't understand why I would.

What if he hadn't used steroids is, I believe, what swampy is saying.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

What if he hadn't used steroids is, I believe, what swampy is saying.

I still haven't seen anything to make me think he has, and if he did what good does steroids do. Until he fails a drug test I think I will just continue to say he didn't use them and forget the media circus around it.

[TonyJ]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I still haven't seen anything to make me think he has, and if he did what good does steroids do. Until he fails a drug test I think I will just continue to say he didn't use them and forget the media circus around it.

I guess you haven't read the book then. He knowingly used steroids, there is no longer any doubt.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by TonyJ

I guess you haven't read the book then. He knowingly used steroids, there is no longer any doubt.

I guess since he has denied the book I am going to just give him the benifit of the doubt. And the fact that Ken Griffey Jr. says that there was never a party where Bonds says the things the book says he said.

[swampdragon]

Barry Bonds was (is?) a great player. James had him as the #4 left fielder of all time back in 2000. SuperBonds is the greatest player in the history of the game, and it started in his mid 30s. I think it's awfully naive not to think something caused that, and Barry Bonds does not belong in a greatest hitter conversation without the accomplishments of SuperBonds.

[Dagrims]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I think the ERA question answered about the talent, but there is still the fact that there were no black players or domnincans or any other race playing. If the league was not segregated I would believe his numbers more. But as of now I will put him at number 2 until someone convinces me that there having a league where only whites played didn't help Ruth's numbers look better.

There were also one half the number of players in the major leagues. Should we speculate how Bonds' statistics might look were he to have batted against only the top 50% of the major league pitchers?

Also, how could having a league where only whites played make Ruth's numbers look better but not other players' numbers look better? Ruth was the only one who took full advantage of playing against whites?