I sympathize. I wanted to post a video of the Twins vs. Braves 1991 WS game where Braves are at bat, hitter rockets a fastball towards 3rd, looks like it's gonna be a homer, then Twins 3rd baseman leaps 10 feet into the air and snatches it. Most amazing catch I've ever seen (think about the speed and quickness at that distance, much faster reflexes than outfield).
Sadly I can neither remember the name of the hitter, nor which game of the WS it occurred.
<< <i>I sympathize. I wanted to post a video of the Twins vs. Braves 1991 WS game where Braves are at bat, hitter rockets a fastball towards 3rd, looks like it's gonna be a homer, then Twins 3rd baseman leaps 10 feet into the air and snatches it. Most amazing catch I've ever seen (think about the speed and quickness at that distance, much faster reflexes than outfield).
Sadly I can neither remember the name of the hitter, nor which game of the WS it occurred. >>
Maybe you're joking, but a line drive that the 3rd baseman caught that **would have been a HR**?!? That is not possible (unless you are talking about an inside the park HR, I guess! lol.). The lowest HR in 2014 had an apex of 41' and was not even close to being catchable by an infielder.
<< <i>Maybe you're joking, but a line drive that the 3rd baseman caught that **would have been a HR**?!? That is not possible (unless you are talking about an inside the park HR, I guess! lol.). The lowest HR in 2014 had an apex of 41' and was not even close to being catchable by an infielder. … >>
Not joking, but possibly misremembering. IIRC ... the ball was beaming super fast like a rocket straight for the wall. It was low, but it was definitely going way out there. At least 15' in the air and this guy snatched it. Twins had nobody in the outfield close enough to field the ball. The leap was so high, they did slow-motion instant reply a bunch of times. Announcers were at a loss for words. It was freakish. Perhaps it was an RBI situation, with two outs on the board, and this catch ended the inning. That would make more sense I guess. Wish I could find the tape.
They are both great catches, and Mays is certainly the more beloved player. Mays catch was done on a much bigger stage, but having played baseball the Edmonds catch was without question the more difficult of the two.
Family, Neighborhood, Community, make the World a better place.
The Mays catch was unprecedented in that the level of athleticism had never been seen before. It was decades ahead of its time. By the time Edmonds made his catch, great plays were a nightly occurrence on ESPN.
<< <i>The Mays catch was unprecedented in that the level of athleticism had never been seen before. It was decades ahead of its time. By the time Edmonds made his catch, great plays were a nightly occurrence on ESPN. >>
<< <i>The Mays catch was unprecedented in that the level of athleticism had never been seen before. It was decades ahead of its time. By the time Edmonds made his catch, great plays were a nightly occurrence on ESPN. >>
Mays' catch was not ahead of its time. Great catches were made over a century ago - there's just no video of them.
Even with all of the plays shown on TV these days, there still hasn't been another catch like Edmonds'.
Here's another. Once again, he doesn't have the best of angles -- he's looking back over both shoulders while heading toward an immovable object that he ultimately will have to scale. Edmonds' judgment on these balls was inimitable. And to be able to do so in such an effortless fashion is just insane.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>The Mays catch was unprecedented in that the level of athleticism had never been seen before. It was decades ahead of its time. By the time Edmonds made his catch, great plays were a nightly occurrence on ESPN. >>
Mays' catch was not ahead of its time. Great catches were made over a century ago - there's just no video of them.
Even with all of the plays shown on TV these days, there still hasn't been another catch like Edmonds'. >>
I agree with mlbfan2, tabe, and galaxy27
Family, Neighborhood, Community, make the World a better place.
<< <i>Here's another. Once again, he doesn't have the best of angles -- he's looking back over both shoulders while heading toward an immovable object that he ultimately will have to scale. Edmonds' judgment on these balls was inimitable. And to be able to do so in such an effortless fashion is just insane.
Edit: At :40 he enters the track. He never looks at the wall again until he makes the actual catch. Think about that one for a moment. >>
That one might have even been more difficult than the first..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>How about the catch Endy Chavez made a few years back? youtube link >>
The Chavez catch was a spectacular one...unfortunately, it was for naught.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Edmonds was around 390 feet from the plate when he caught that ball, Mays made his catch 421 feet from the plate. >>
Yeah, and Mays was playing deeper, so why does it even matter? They both ran hard and made a catch, but Edmonds had to leave his feet with his back to home plate.
In terms of significance, there is no comparison. Mays made his catch in the 8th inning with the score tied 2-2, with runners on first and second. If he doesn't make the catch, both runners score and the Indians probably win. The catch shifted the momentum of the World Series in the Giants favor, it was that important.
<< <i>In terms of significance, there is no comparison. Mays made his catch in the 8th inning with the score tied 2-2, with runners on first and second. If he doesn't make the catch, both runners score and the Indians probably win. The catch shifted the momentum of the World Series in the Giants favor, it was that important. >>
But are we talking here about the significance of the catch or its degree of difficulty? Obviously, those are two vastly different things, and no regular season catch can even be mentioned, then, in the conversation, if the question is what is the most "important" as well as difficult catch.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
That is correct, significance and degree of difficulty are apples and oranges. I would say that Edmonds probably made the catch seem more difficult by leaving his feet. If he were swifter afoot, he may not have had to.
<< <i>But are we talking here about the significance of the catch or its degree of difficulty? Obviously, those are two vastly different things, and no regular season catch can even be mentioned, then, in the conversation, if the question is what is the most "important" as well as difficult catch. >>
In sports everything is reduced to the greatest, the fastest, the most valuable and the most important.
The debates and dissection add to the pleasure of witnessing the event.
Sometimes though a play must be accepted only for its extraordinary athleticism and artistry. That is why the Mays catch was presented. Perhaps the Edmonds play was more difficult, perhaps not. One has no bearing on the other.
<< <i>But are we talking here about the significance of the catch or its degree of difficulty? Obviously, those are two vastly different things, and no regular season catch can even be mentioned, then, in the conversation, if the question is what is the most "important" as well as difficult catch. >>
In sports everything is reduced to the greatest, the fastest, the most valuable and the most important.
The debates and dissection add to the pleasure of witnessing the event.
Sometimes though a play must be accepted only for its extraordinary athleticism and artistry. That is why the Mays catch was presented. Perhaps the Edmonds play was more difficult, perhaps not. One has no bearing on the other. >>
Yes, but for a reasonable debate to be conducted, one should understand the parameters wherin the comparisons are being made. PSASAP's contention was that the Mays catch was more important because it took place in the World Series. That is correct but at odds with the point you just made or attempted to make in that "a play must be accepted only for its extraordinary athleticism and artistry." Rarely does debate in sports happen in a vacuum. Context is always important.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
MGLICKER
Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭
Comments
<< <i>I see your Willie Mays catch and raise you this Jim Edmonds catch. link >>
<< <i>I see your Willie Mays catch and raise you this Jim Edmonds catch. link >>
Willie's catch was awesome but I agree - the Edmonds catch was better.
<< <i>
<< <i>I see your Willie Mays catch and raise you this Jim Edmonds catch. link >>
Willie's catch was awesome but I agree - the Edmonds catch was better. >>
Tabe, do you recall the Mickey Stanley climbing the wall catch in the late 1960's. Been trying to find a video or images.
Sadly I can neither remember the name of the hitter, nor which game of the WS it occurred.
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
<< <i>I sympathize. I wanted to post a video of the Twins vs. Braves 1991 WS game where Braves are at bat, hitter rockets a fastball towards 3rd, looks like it's gonna be a homer, then Twins 3rd baseman leaps 10 feet into the air and snatches it. Most amazing catch I've ever seen (think about the speed and quickness at that distance, much faster reflexes than outfield).
Sadly I can neither remember the name of the hitter, nor which game of the WS it occurred. >>
Maybe you're joking, but a line drive that the 3rd baseman caught that **would have been a HR**?!? That is not possible (unless you are talking about an inside the park HR, I guess! lol.). The lowest HR in 2014 had an apex of 41' and was not even close to being catchable by an infielder.
Videos of the lowest apex HRs...
link
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I see your Willie Mays catch and raise you this Jim Edmonds catch. link >>
Willie's catch was awesome but I agree - the Edmonds catch was better. >>
Tabe, do you recall the Mickey Stanley climbing the wall catch in the late 1960's. Been trying to find a video or images. >>
I've heard of the catch but never seen it.
<< <i>Edmonds was a very good CF, but no Mays. In the 2 clips here Mays had to go father back. >>
And Willie was closer to the wall.
<< <i>Maybe you're joking, but a line drive that the 3rd baseman caught that **would have been a HR**?!? That is not possible (unless you are talking about an inside the park HR, I guess! lol.). The lowest HR in 2014 had an apex of 41' and was not even close to being catchable by an infielder. … >>
Not joking, but possibly misremembering. IIRC ... the ball was beaming super fast like a rocket straight for the wall. It was low, but it was definitely going way out there. At least 15' in the air and this guy snatched it. Twins had nobody in the outfield close enough to field the ball. The leap was so high, they did slow-motion instant reply a bunch of times. Announcers were at a loss for words. It was freakish. Perhaps it was an RBI situation, with two outs on the board, and this catch ended the inning. That would make more sense I guess. Wish I could find the tape.
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
Dave
Family, Neighborhood, Community,
make the World a better place.
<< <i>The Mays catch was unprecedented in that the level of athleticism had never been seen before. It was decades ahead of its time. By the time Edmonds made his catch, great plays were a nightly occurrence on ESPN. >>
Well said.
<< <i>The Mays catch was unprecedented in that the level of athleticism had never been seen before. It was decades ahead of its time. By the time Edmonds made his catch, great plays were a nightly occurrence on ESPN. >>
Mays' catch was not ahead of its time. Great catches were made over a century ago - there's just no video of them.
Even with all of the plays shown on TV these days, there still hasn't been another catch like Edmonds'.
part deux
Edit: At :40 he enters the track. He never looks at the wall again until he makes the actual catch. Think about that one for a moment.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Must be a Met!
Edmonds was around 390 feet from the plate when he caught that ball, Mays made his catch 421 feet from the plate.
<< <i>
<< <i>The Mays catch was unprecedented in that the level of athleticism had never been seen before. It was decades ahead of its time. By the time Edmonds made his catch, great plays were a nightly occurrence on ESPN. >>
Mays' catch was not ahead of its time. Great catches were made over a century ago - there's just no video of them.
Even with all of the plays shown on TV these days, there still hasn't been another catch like Edmonds'.
I agree with mlbfan2, tabe, and galaxy27
Family, Neighborhood, Community,
make the World a better place.
<< <i>Here's another. Once again, he doesn't have the best of angles -- he's looking back over both shoulders while heading toward an immovable object that he ultimately will have to scale. Edmonds' judgment on these balls was inimitable. And to be able to do so in such an effortless fashion is just insane.
part deux
Edit: At :40 he enters the track. He never looks at the wall again until he makes the actual catch. Think about that one for a moment. >>
That one might have even been more difficult than the first..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
youtube link
youtube
<< <i>How about the catch Endy Chavez made a few years back?
youtube link >>
The Chavez catch was a spectacular one...unfortunately, it was for naught.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Opening catch.
<< <i>Edmonds was around 390 feet from the plate when he caught that ball, Mays made his catch 421 feet from the plate. >>
Yeah, and Mays was playing deeper, so why does it even matter? They both ran hard and made a catch, but Edmonds had to leave his feet with his back to home plate.
<< <i>In terms of significance, there is no comparison. Mays made his catch in the 8th inning with the score tied 2-2, with runners on first and second. If he doesn't make the catch, both runners score and the Indians probably win. The catch shifted the momentum of the World Series in the Giants favor, it was that important. >>
But are we talking here about the significance of the catch or its degree of difficulty? Obviously, those are two vastly different things, and no regular season catch can even be mentioned, then, in the conversation, if the question is what is the most "important" as well as difficult catch.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>But are we talking here about the significance of the catch or its degree of difficulty? Obviously, those are two vastly different things, and no regular season catch can even be mentioned, then, in the conversation, if the question is what is the most "important" as well as difficult catch. >>
In sports everything is reduced to the greatest, the fastest, the most valuable and the most important.
The debates and dissection add to the pleasure of witnessing the event.
Sometimes though a play must be accepted only for its extraordinary athleticism and artistry. That is why the Mays catch was presented. Perhaps the Edmonds play was more difficult, perhaps not. One has no bearing on the other.
<< <i>
<< <i>But are we talking here about the significance of the catch or its degree of difficulty? Obviously, those are two vastly different things, and no regular season catch can even be mentioned, then, in the conversation, if the question is what is the most "important" as well as difficult catch. >>
In sports everything is reduced to the greatest, the fastest, the most valuable and the most important.
The debates and dissection add to the pleasure of witnessing the event.
Sometimes though a play must be accepted only for its extraordinary athleticism and artistry. That is why the Mays catch was presented. Perhaps the Edmonds play was more difficult, perhaps not. One has no bearing on the other. >>
Yes, but for a reasonable debate to be conducted, one should understand the parameters wherin the comparisons are being made. PSASAP's contention was that the Mays catch was more important because it took place in the World Series. That is correct but at odds with the point you just made or attempted to make in that "a play must be accepted only for its extraordinary athleticism and artistry." Rarely does debate in sports happen in a vacuum. Context is always important.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.