Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 210
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Phanland
    Posts
    7,246
    Quote Originally Posted by bagwell368 View Post
    There are plenty of still pics, and scads of written descriptions about earlier guys. It's quite possible to know a lot about some of them (before 1890 I grant it's tougher).

    Do we assume these guys if they could be assembled would actually play games for our enjoyment? What rules, what game? Dead ball, tobacco spit, spitters, big strikes zones; or perhaps the NL of the 70's with all the turf? The AL in 2000?

    I know that Pedro Martinez at his peak (and in a 5 man rotation) would dominate in any era. I'm also quite sure Cy Young would not. Does that matter to you? It matters to me.

    Bill James says the game gets better (in terms of skills and athletic skill required) about 1.5% compounded per decade since 1945, before that some of the decade jumps were 2.5% or 3.5% compounded. Do the math.

    Outside of Walter Johnson and Pete Alexander what star dead ball era pitcher did well (not as well, but they were aging after all) in the live ball era for instance?

    Even if you disagree with all of that, what about pitchers before 1893 in terms of IP and Wins?

    Look at the all time IP list by year.

    13 guys with over 600 IP, all before 1893. 85 individual seasons go by before you even get a post 1892 year.

    You have to get to #384 on the list before you get to a non dead ball non knuckeball pitcher. That easily demonstrates that the strain put on pre 1925 pitchers is entirely different, which it follows that it was a different game.
    Considering the amount of innings expected, I'm not too sure Pedro would do as well as you think. He's one of the few pitchers who can be justified used the way he was coming from the Pampered Era, but that would not fly back in the day

    Regarding players be in better physical condition today, I just assume the players of days past would be too if the science was there.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crucis View Post
    Parity is about equality of opportunity, not equality of results.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Phanland
    Posts
    7,246
    Quote Originally Posted by alkalinesolo View Post
    You might want to look at the record book. Who are the biggest sluggers from the non-steroid era?

    Hark Aaron, Willie Mays, Mike Schmidt, Mickey Mantle...all known amphetamine users - and according to most accounts from the MLB in those days, most of the other big names should be on that list too.
    Actually, it's inline with the amount from each era that reached the top in the end of their era. It's not even close. There are only two players who played in both the 70's & 80's. There are 9 from the steroid era with only 3 of those suspected as clean.

    Quote Originally Posted by alkalinesolo View Post
    Why is it ok for one drug to make a mockery of the record books and get a pass, while another drug is demonized by 50% of baseball fans? It's because the sports media wasn't around in 1960 to tell you what to think - but now they are, and they'll make sure that you know of every player connected to steroids because those are the stories that get the most interest.
    The press almost single handedly brought out the charges of the 1919 Black Sox scandal.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crucis View Post
    Parity is about equality of opportunity, not equality of results.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    44,390
    Quote Originally Posted by thefeckcampaign View Post
    Considering the amount of innings expected, I'm not too sure Pedro would do as well as you think. He's one of the few pitchers who can be justified used the way he was coming from the Pampered Era, but that would not fly back in the day

    Regarding players be in better physical condition today, I just assume the players of days past would be too if the science was there.
    I've written about this before, he'd have been treated like Elroy Face in several decades at least (reliever, spot start).

    Of course 200 IP for Pedro in 2000 he put more effort in than any of the 600 IP guys ever did. He could have dominated most eras just throwing his change. Have him in a 5 man rotation in a 154 game schedule in say 1905, his ERA would be sub 0.50.

    No sorry, the money wasn't there, so working off seasons or quitting and going to work for "real" was a much more common thing than now. 42 yr old relievers hang on for a $750k check that they'd never see any other legal way.

    I detect a much more business like way of being in todays players than in the early 60's or early 30's - it follows that they would work out more, not the same or less.

    OTOH there was experience and instinct in players in the 60's and 70's that's absent from a lot of guys now, that's too bad...
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  4. #79
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    48,356
    Quote Originally Posted by thefeckcampaign View Post
    This again? You Giants fans are so predictable.

    Has anyone else noticed Pirates fans are not the ones usually to run to Bonds' defense? It's probably because they know his era with them was honest. They have nothing to defend.
    Pirates fans? Do we even have more than one of those on this site?

    PSD: Where the moderators consistently cave to crybaby tattletales and it's a lot safer to be openly racist, hateful, and ignorant than to be a little rude to the racist, hateful, and ignorant

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    76
    What's there to defend? Bonds was the greatest player to ever play the game. Sorry. Anyone who refuses to accept his greatness is just being extremely ignorant. It's to bad there hasn't been more players like him since he left. Game needs a villain, not all these cookie cutter pansies that make all you men children feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,590
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    What's there to defend? Bonds was the greatest player to ever play the game. Sorry. Anyone who refuses to accept his greatness is just being extremely ignorant. It's to bad there hasn't been more players like him since he left. Game needs a villain, not all these cookie cutter pansies that make all you men children feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
    Even with the fake steroid-inflated numbers, since Bonds couldn't pitch, and because he put up his fake numbers in an inflated offensive era, Ruth beats him hands down.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    48,356
    They're both once in a generation type players. Trying to prove which one was better is fruitless as they played in such wildly different eras.

    PSD: Where the moderators consistently cave to crybaby tattletales and it's a lot safer to be openly racist, hateful, and ignorant than to be a little rude to the racist, hateful, and ignorant

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,590
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    They're both once in a generation type players. Trying to prove which one was better is fruitless as they played in such wildly different eras.

    At the end of the day, all of this discussion is fruitless. But it's fun nevertheless.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    31,449
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Marmol posted the greatest K/9 I'm the history of baseball a few years back. Yes it has been broken since then, but strikeouts have risen drastically since then so those guys don't count. That's enough to put any reliever in GOAT territory. It's ignorant to ignore that dominance.
    Lol Carlos Marmol... this is one of the greatest things I've ever seen. Please keep arguing for Marmol to be a top 5 reliever of all time. It's hilarous.

    BTW, El Patito didn't include Mariano Rivera on his list. So he thinks Marmol was better than Rivera lolololololololol
    Last edited by Wrigheyes4MVP; 02-01-2016 at 01:11 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    31,449
    It's like saying JR Smith > Michael Jordan lol
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrigheyes4MVP View Post
    Lol Carlos Marmol... this is one of the greatest things I've ever seen. Please keep arguing for Marmol to be a top 5 reliever of all time. It's hilarous.

    BTW, El Patito didn't include Mariano Rivera on his list. So he thinks Marmol was better than Rivera lolololololololol
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    31,449
    Lololol this is fantastic
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    31,449
    Thank you El Patito. You just made my sig. Thank you for your contribution.
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    76
    Like scripture.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    31,449
    I've immortalized you and you should be honored
    Quote Originally Posted by El Patito View Post
    Wow, you just won't let this go will you? I'd be more than happy to provide the numbers again if you'd like. The fact is that Marmol in his best season, put up one of the greatest performances by a reliever in the history of baseball. Better than Rivera? Youre damn right. You can't deny this.
    Marmolololololol

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •