Home Sports Talk

Who is the third greatest hitter of all time ?

2

Comments

  • thisistheshowthisistheshow Posts: 9,386 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    There are exceptions to sports aging rules, and Tom Brady is a good example of that.

    ..............

    @stevek ,

    @Doubledragon (If I may speak on his behalf) respects your attempt to divert this thread into a Tom Brady discussion.

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,547 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coolstanley said:
    How was it cheating? That's a lie. It was a level playing field.

    @dallasactuary said:

    @coolstanley said:
    How was it cheating? That's a lie. It was a level playing field.

    I am at a complete loss for words. Words that wouldn't get me bammed, anyway.

    So Dallas what would you call it when a guy like Bonds faced a guy like Clemens or both on PEDS? I’d say it’s pretty even there. I know you don’t think either were actually playing baseball but the entire sports world would disagree with you

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @perkdog said:

    @coolstanley said:
    How was it cheating? That's a lie. It was a level playing field.

    @dallasactuary said:

    @coolstanley said:
    How was it cheating? That's a lie. It was a level playing field.

    I am at a complete loss for words. Words that wouldn't get me bammed, anyway.

    So Dallas what would you call it when a guy like Bonds faced a guy like Clemens or both on PEDS? I’d say it’s pretty even there. I know you don’t think either were actually playing baseball but the entire sports world would disagree with you

    Art from artist.

    Simple fact, many people who get to the top do so by abandoning ethics. This is true for all of humanity.

    Ready?

    You are you. You are good at your job. You find out there’s a pill you can take that will make you better than anyone else in the world at the job and in so doing, you will extend your working career and likely earn more in those singular years than you did in your entire career to that point. Your children are set up for life as their children’s children.

    The downside of this pill is some people might think less of you and your profession and you may face health problems. (Consider that you’ll be able to afford the best medical care there is but you also may not be able to undue the damage, if any).

    So, do you want the pill?

    I don’t need to hear any answers nor do I intend to offer my own. I mean, everyone on the Internet has impeccable integrity, after all. Just ask them. 😂

    It’s part of the reason - when put in human terms - why I struggle so much with Barry Bonds.

    As for the ‘level playing field’ stuff, I’m not sure - Jose Canseco’s book sounded absurd when he wrote it and yet time has revealed so much of it, sadly, to be true and he estimated a startlingly high percentage of players using. While Canseco isn’t the most credible person in the history of the world (obviously), time has been on his side so far and “his truth” doesn’t seem so fast and loose as it once did.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So while I hate 73 and despise 762, I also can’t ignore the 3 MVPs by age 28 in 1993. So, I think this idea that steroids made Barry Bonds is rather erroneous and ultimately is part of a false narrative created by those that don’t like him. Steroids can be used to make a horse into a bigger horse…but not a unicorn.

    As much as people may not like it, the drugs he took helped to defy age and injury but they did not give him the ability to hit the baseball. He was around baseball since birth, he went to the cages, to the gym, and made being the best baseball player more important than anything else in his life. Anything. Health, ethics, you name it. And from a statistics standpoint, he did it - he succeeded in achieving his goal.

    I’m not happy about it and I don’t like it.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2021 7:44AM

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @perkdog said:

    @coolstanley said:
    How was it cheating? That's a lie. It was a level playing field.

    @dallasactuary said:

    @coolstanley said:
    How was it cheating? That's a lie. It was a level playing field.

    I am at a complete loss for words. Words that wouldn't get me bammed, anyway.

    So Dallas what would you call it when a guy like Bonds faced a guy like Clemens or both on PEDS? I’d say it’s pretty even there. I know you don’t think either were actually playing baseball but the entire sports world would disagree with you

    Art from artist.

    Simple fact, many people who get to the top do so by abandoning ethics. This is true for all of humanity.

    Ready?

    You are you. You are good at your job. You find out there’s a pill you can take that will make you better than anyone else in the world at the job and in so doing, you will extend your working career and likely earn more in those singular years than you did in your entire career to that point. Your children are set up for life as their children’s children.

    The downside of this pill is some people might think less of you and your profession and you may face health problems. (Consider that you’ll be able to afford the best medical care there is but you also may not be able to undue the damage, if any).

    So, do you want the pill?

    I don’t need to hear any answers nor do I intend to offer my own. I mean, everyone on the Internet has impeccable integrity, after all. Just ask them. 😂

    It’s part of the reason - when put in human terms - why I struggle so much with Barry Bonds.

    As for the ‘level playing field’ stuff, I’m not sure - Jose Canseco’s book sounded absurd when he wrote it and yet time has revealed so much of it, sadly, to be true and he estimated a startlingly high percentage of players using. While Canseco isn’t the most credible person in the history of the world (obviously), time has been on his side so far and “his truth” doesn’t seem so fast and loose as it once did.

    I'm not sure why some of this reminds me of what I'm about to type, but it does...and also sort of a continuation of what I preciously posted.

    Reminds me of all those Germans in the 1930's who were lustily cheering Hitler. (yes we just reached Godwin's Law - LOL)

    They all cheered and cheered, but then they lost the war and blamed Hitler for the atrocities, etc.

    I'm well read about that era of history. Suffice to say nearly every German knew in the 1930's exactly what Hitler was going to do...and most approved of it.

    Every baseball fan knew, as previously mentioned, what was going on with the juicing. and we cheered and cheered. The time to do something about the juicing was when we all knew it was happening, and either complain about it then or stop going to the ballpark. Perhaps some did.

    Then the repercussions came out, and suddenly we didn't want Bonds in the Hall of Fame. I say enough of the hypocrisy.

    Perkdog made an excellent point about juicer batters verses juicer pitchers. So maybe overall it sort of evened out anyway.

    I look at the bottom line with Bonds...762 homeruns for crying out loud, and he's not in the Hall of Fame? In my opinion it's silly, and it's about time he gets in. With no asterisk or any of that bullchit.

    Frankly, it gives me no pleasure to support a player i don't even like. But fair is fair, the way it should be.

  • Historicalwood71Historicalwood71 Posts: 518 ✭✭✭

    3rd best ever " hitter" ..... Joe DiMaggio

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Many were not cheering the juicing.
    Many were not cheering Hitler.

    I turned off baseball during the McGwire/Sosa days. I knew what it was, and it was a shame and a disgrace.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Historicalwood71 said:
    3rd best ever " hitter" ..... Joe DiMaggio

    It’s amazing to think that he could have also had some stats of those early PCL years on the ledger if he had simply been born East of the Mississippi instead of West…

    …not to say he’d have had the prodigious totals he did but based on his rookie season totals, there’s a decent chance he’d have added something worthwhile.

    Certainly deserves consideration.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:
    Many were not cheering the juicing.
    Many were not cheering Hitler.

    I turned off baseball during the McGwire/Sosa days. I knew what it was, and it was a shame and a disgrace.

    Well at the ballparks and the Reich Chancellery they sure were cheering. 😉

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Many were not cheering the juicing.
    Many were not cheering Hitler.

    I turned off baseball during the McGwire/Sosa days. I knew what it was, and it was a shame and a disgrace.

    Well at the ballparks and the Reich Chancellery they sure were cheering. 😉

    They were cheering in the Roman arenas as well, chanting kill them.

    What’s more disgraceful than the cheaters in baseball are the authorities in baseball whose job was to make sure it was a level playing field and they just turned a blind eye.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:

    @stevek said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Many were not cheering the juicing.
    Many were not cheering Hitler.

    I turned off baseball during the McGwire/Sosa days. I knew what it was, and it was a shame and a disgrace.

    Well at the ballparks and the Reich Chancellery they sure were cheering. 😉

    They were cheering in the Roman arenas as well, chanting kill them.

    What’s more disgraceful than the cheaters in baseball are the authorities in baseball whose job was to make sure it was a level playing field and they just turned a blind eye.

    "Cheating" is in the eye of the beholder.

    Is Tom Brady technically "cheating" because of his phenomenal diet and vitamin program? Of course not. But perhaps some haters out there may think otherwise.

    i'm just saying that whatever Bonds did, call it cheating if you wish, shouldn't preclude him from the Hall of Fame.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,060 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @Goldenage said:

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Possibly - Lol

    Oh, I think he used, no question :)

    Williams and Ruth had no control over that. Bonds did.

    This is irrelevant.

    What black pitchers in the AL in the 60s would have shut down Ruth or Williams ?

    All of them since they were over the hill or dead? :)

    Your question misses the point:

    Go back to the 1880s and make baseball fully integrated. Now, 40 years later, what do the black pitchers in the majors look like? How about 65 years later? Hint: There'd be a lot more of them and they'd be a lot better overall than there ended up being in 1960.

    Setting that aside - Bonds put up his numbers while playing with airline travel, night games (unlike Ruth), and far better relief pitchers with significantly higher pitch velocity. He faced tougher conditions in an integrated environment - and still exceeded Ruth's home run record by over 20% and beat Williams' OBP record.

    Bonds beat Williams OBP record ?

    Baseball reference says Williams and Ruth are 1 and 2 and Bonds is a distant 7th.

    Single season, I think

    Yes, single season like the Ruth record I mentioned.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @Goldenage said:

    @stevek said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Many were not cheering the juicing.
    Many were not cheering Hitler.

    I turned off baseball during the McGwire/Sosa days. I knew what it was, and it was a shame and a disgrace.

    Well at the ballparks and the Reich Chancellery they sure were cheering. 😉

    They were cheering in the Roman arenas as well, chanting kill them.

    What’s more disgraceful than the cheaters in baseball are the authorities in baseball whose job was to make sure it was a level playing field and they just turned a blind eye.

    "Cheating" is in the eye of the beholder.

    Is Tom Brady technically "cheating" because of his phenomenal diet and vitamin program? Of course not. But perhaps some haters out there may think otherwise.

    i'm just saying that whatever Bonds did, call it cheating if you wish, shouldn't preclude him from the Hall of Fame.

    Should Lance Armstrong’s championships stand ?

  • JustacommemanJustacommeman Posts: 22,847 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2021 8:41AM

    @Goldenage said:

    @stevek said:

    @Goldenage said:

    @stevek said:

    @Goldenage said:
    Many were not cheering the juicing.
    Many were not cheering Hitler.

    I turned off baseball during the McGwire/Sosa days. I knew what it was, and it was a shame and a disgrace.

    Well at the ballparks and the Reich Chancellery they sure were cheering. 😉

    They were cheering in the Roman arenas as well, chanting kill them.

    What’s more disgraceful than the cheaters in baseball are the authorities in baseball whose job was to make sure it was a level playing field and they just turned a blind eye.

    "Cheating" is in the eye of the beholder.

    Is Tom Brady technically "cheating" because of his phenomenal diet and vitamin program? Of course not. But perhaps some haters out there may think otherwise.

    i'm just saying that whatever Bonds did, call it cheating if you wish, shouldn't preclude him from the Hall of Fame.

    Should Lance Armstrong’s championships stand ?

    According to a few on these boards. Yes. Level playing field to boot I guess. The rules aren't the rules I guess. Why bother with them. Rewarding or condoning cheating is literally the beginning of the end.

    m

    Walker Proof Digital Album
    Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Just look at Brady Anderson’s lifetime stats, and see the year he was heavily juiced, and then he went off it because of a health scare is the word on the street.

    Why do they give horses a drug test after the races ?
    Because they know the greedy owners would drug the horses to death just for the money, and it’s humane to protect the horses health from their greedy owners.

    MLB owners didn’t care to protect their employees health. Just like the NFL didn’t care about concussions.

    The Mike Greenwells of the world who played by the rules were cheated out of All Star and MVP money because the juicers has an unfair advantage.

    A greedy executive could care less about his workers.

    Just read about Andrew Carnegie killing his own workers because he made working conditions and wages so bad just so he could try to catch Rockefeller as the worlds richest man. He hired Frick, who hired a private army, who shot and killed Carnegies workers while they were striking.

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,770 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    >

    Bottom line - Bonds clearly deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, and i believe that he will eventually get there. Despite him being "despised", he deserves it.

    NO!

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Babe Ruth died of cancer at age 53. Lou Gehrig died at 37, and likely would have been privy to what the Babe was using.

    Ahh, those two early deaths were just a coincidence, right? Perish the thought that our legendary baseball heroes may have been "cheating" in some way. Couldn't have happened, right?

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,547 ✭✭✭✭✭

    During the McGwire HR chase against Sosa and Griffey I naively never even gave a thought about these guys doing steroids, I just didn’t think of it. Part of it was back in the early 90’s I knew a lot of guys on steroids and aside from making them look incredibly Gym strong it really didn’t do much else for them like make them tougher or whatever they were trying to accomplish so I sort of just ignored it. But the McGwire HR chase was a great season, tainted or not it brought me back in to watching MLB a lot more and I enjoyed the hell out of it, it was fun and I got no regrets about enjoying it. I admit it’s a shame that hallowed records got destroyed but there is no way to tell who was 100% clean and of sound mind over the history of the sport. I think at the time people just didn’t realize what was going on until it was too late and cringed at the thought of breaching the subject

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Question for Steve so I know exactly where his heart is on this subject.

    Would you enter a poker tournament where it was on the level, or would you enter a poker tournament where a few guys had an unfair advantage ?

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:
    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Babe Ruth died of cancer at age 53. Lou Gehrig died at 37, and likely would have been privy to what the Babe was using.

    Ahh, those two early deaths were just a coincidence, right? Perish the thought that our legendary baseball heroes may have been "cheating" in some way. Couldn't have happened, right?

    ALS killed Lou Gehrig.

    Babe Ruth put so many bad things in his body that it’s probably impossible to cite anything other than ‘wild lifestyle’ leading to his early death.

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Lance Armstrong ?

  • JustacommemanJustacommeman Posts: 22,847 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:
    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Babe Ruth died of cancer at age 53. Lou Gehrig died at 37, and likely would have been privy to what the Babe was using.

    Ahh, those two early deaths were just a coincidence, right? Perish the thought that our legendary baseball heroes may have been "cheating" in some way. Couldn't have happened, right?

    ALS killed Lou Gehrig.

    Babe Ruth put so many bad things in his body that it’s probably impossible to cite anything other than ‘wild lifestyle’ leading to his early death.

    Plus life expectancy was 60 years for men entering the 1940's. Labeling Ruth or others as cheaters because they "could have been cheating" to bring them down to others levels is bs. Period.

    m

    Walker Proof Digital Album
    Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:
    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Babe Ruth died of cancer at age 53. Lou Gehrig died at 37, and likely would have been privy to what the Babe was using.

    Ahh, those two early deaths were just a coincidence, right? Perish the thought that our legendary baseball heroes may have been "cheating" in some way. Couldn't have happened, right?

    ALS killed Lou Gehrig.

    Babe Ruth put so many bad things in his body that it’s probably impossible to cite anything other than ‘wild lifestyle’ leading to his early death.

    Completely understood about ALS. That is not normally a disease associated with using steroids.

    That being said, it is fact that placing drugs in our bodies, destroys the internal organs, the immune system, and the overall proper functioning of our bodies. That is FACT.

    Lou of course had a predisposition to one day have ALS. The question is are there circumstances that trigger the predisposition to occur? I believe the answer to that is a definitive yes.

    Environmental hazards, drugs, smoking, etc, without question increase our predisposition for disease. Perhaps if Lou led a complete perfect drug free life he would have died at 37 anyway. Then again, perhaps it would have been a lot later in his life or maybe not at all, if he didn't have access to some of the Babe's stash, if it existed?

    Yes, coincidences do happen. but sometimes there are reasons for it which can't be ruled out, but can't be ruled in either. 😉

    In any event, the way i see it, 762 home runs is 762 home runs, and 714 is 714. However, Ruth's home run record is much more impressive for various reasons. Which is one reason I've got Ruth at #1 on my all time hitters list. :)

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2021 9:57AM

    @Justacommeman said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:
    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Babe Ruth died of cancer at age 53. Lou Gehrig died at 37, and likely would have been privy to what the Babe was using.

    Ahh, those two early deaths were just a coincidence, right? Perish the thought that our legendary baseball heroes may have been "cheating" in some way. Couldn't have happened, right?

    ALS killed Lou Gehrig.

    Babe Ruth put so many bad things in his body that it’s probably impossible to cite anything other than ‘wild lifestyle’ leading to his early death.

    Plus life expectancy was 60 years for men entering the 1940's. Labeling Ruth or others as cheaters because they "could have been cheating" to bring them down to others levels is bs. Period.

    m

    I didn't google it but that stat can be very misleading. I'm not about to research it, but the infant mortality rate, and number of incurable diseases back then such as polio, dramatically lowered the life expectancy rate. That is a FACT.

    i would have to believe that the average life span of a ballplayer ending his playing career back then, was greater than 60 years, perhaps at least ten years or more.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If the little league World Series says the age limit is 12, and Taiwan puts two 15 year olds who are 5’11 190 pounds on their team with fake birth certificates, and they win the title, is that a legit title just because they got away with it, and it’s the other teams fault that they didn’t ?

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Just for the yell of it, i decided to google some well known baseball names of that era:

    Ty Cobb died 74 years old
    Honus Wagner died 81 years old
    Rogers Hornsby died 66 years old

    Ahh, I'm sure i could go on and on, but it's just a coincidence that with Ruth and Gehrig it was 53 and 37, right?

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    No problem, I enjoyed the debate.

    Just as long as i'm considered the winner. 😉 😉

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Hmm.....

    I googled it further. The third leading home run hitter on that great 1927 Yankees team along with Ruth and Gehrig, was Tony Lazzeri with 18 home runs. That's a lot of home runs back then, especially for a second baseman.

    Tony Lazzeri died 42 years old.

    The old saying goes...once an accident, twice a coincidence, three times a pattern.

    But at this point, I'm gonna let dead dogs lie.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    No problem, I enjoyed the debate.

    Just as long as i'm considered the winner. 😉 😉

    Case closed?

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,547 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    No problem, I enjoyed the debate.

    Just as long as i'm considered the winner. 😉 😉

    Case closed?

    Only when it’s not even debatable 😂😂😂

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,060 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:
    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Pretty much confirmed that he, at the very least, TRIED steroids.

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @perkdog said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    No problem, I enjoyed the debate.

    Just as long as i'm considered the winner. 😉 😉

    Case closed?

    Only when it’s not even debatable 😂😂😂

    I think we’ve learned about and explained a lot of good things today.

    I know I’ve grown…

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,060 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Goldenage said:
    If the little league World Series says the age limit is 12, and Taiwan puts two 15 year olds who are 5’11 190 pounds on their team with fake birth certificates, and they win the title, is that a legit title just because they got away with it, and it’s the other teams fault that they didn’t ?

    So you're OK with McGwire and Palmeiro going into the Hall then since there was no rule against steroids during their careers?

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    No problem, I enjoyed the debate.

    Just as long as i'm considered the winner. 😉 😉

    Case closed?

    Not until i win the Sports Talk, Poster of the Year award.

    My chances must have improved with this thread. The Vegas odds just moved from a million to one, to 995,000 to 1. :|

  • 1951WheatiesPremium1951WheatiesPremium Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    No problem, I enjoyed the debate.

    Just as long as i'm considered the winner. 😉 😉

    Case closed?

    Not until i win the Sports Talk, Poster of the Year award.

    My chances must have improved with this thread. The Vegas odds just moved from a million to one, to 995,000 to 1. :|

    Try a Farrah Fawcet poster?

    I’d guess even money with this lot…

    Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:
    I think there’s a lot of bad logic (and analogies 😂) going around. I’ll leave that there.

    Back to the matter at hand, though, is the rules that govern election. I’d suggest anyone look them over to educate themselves.

    https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/voting-rules-history

    If you’re not a big reader, I’ll save you time. There are no statistics mentioned anywhere. Implied rules - 300 wins, 500 HR, 3,000 hits and 3,000 Ks - are milestones only not free entry passes and are not actual rules. However, there are actual rules that govern induction (above) and here’s the relevant one:

    CHARACTER, INTEGRITY AND SPORTSMANSHIP
    Implemented in 1945. Rule applies to how the game was played on the field, more so than character off the field.

    For those of you scoring at home?

    No character, no integrity, no sportsmanship.

    There may never be a more apt and ironic application of the phrase “three strikes…you’re out” than me typing it just now.

    As @stevek might say? Case closed.

    The travesty, then, is not leaving him out but it is to put him in.

    Yea sure, and I wonder how many out there want Pete Rose in, but keep Barry Bonds out?

    If that's the case with you, it would be hypocrisy. I'll stand corrected if you also don't want Rose in the Hall of Fame. At least you would be consistent.

    @stevek - I just think one of humanities great tragedies being compared to a home run record is a bridge too far for me, that’s all.

    And it is not difficult to find my writings on Pete Rose; you’ve responded to a great many.

    You can sit or stand but I am consistent and not correcting you or coming at you.

    No problem, I enjoyed the debate.

    Just as long as i'm considered the winner. 😉 😉

    Case closed?

    Not until i win the Sports Talk, Poster of the Year award.

    My chances must have improved with this thread. The Vegas odds just moved from a million to one, to 995,000 to 1. :|

    Try a Farrah Fawcet poster?

    I’d guess even money with this lot…

    A newbie member with his first post and the content was, "I'm sorry, i was looking for the Testing Forum", would beat anyone here for the award. LOL

  • AFLfanAFLfan Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    I'm not sure why some of this reminds me of what I'm about to type, but it does...and also sort of a continuation of what I preciously posted.

    Reminds me of all those Germans in the 1930's who were lustily cheering Hitler. (yes we just reached Godwin's Law - LOL)

    They all cheered and cheered, but then they lost the war and blamed Hitler for the atrocities, etc.

    >

    I'm having a very difficult time connecting these two. Let's please leave Hitler's atrocities out of any further discussions here. To attempt to associate his actions and how they were viewed in any way to modern sport is terribly disrespectful to millions of people.

    Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
  • AFLfanAFLfan Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:
    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Babe Ruth died of cancer at age 53. Lou Gehrig died at 37, and likely would have been privy to what the Babe was using.

    Ahh, those two early deaths were just a coincidence, right? Perish the thought that our legendary baseball heroes may have been "cheating" in some way. Couldn't have happened, right?

    ALS killed Lou Gehrig.

    Babe Ruth put so many bad things in his body that it’s probably impossible to cite anything other than ‘wild lifestyle’ leading to his early death.

    Completely understood about ALS. That is not normally a disease associated with using steroids.

    That being said, it is fact that placing drugs in our bodies, destroys the internal organs, the immune system, and the overall proper functioning of our bodies. That is FACT.

    Lou of course had a predisposition to one day have ALS. The question is are there circumstances that trigger the predisposition to occur? I believe the answer to that is a definitive yes.

    Environmental hazards, drugs, smoking, etc, without question increase our predisposition for disease. Perhaps if Lou led a complete perfect drug free life he would have died at 37 anyway. Then again, perhaps it would have been a lot later in his life or maybe not at all, if he didn't have access to some of the Babe's stash, if it existed?

    Yes, coincidences do happen. but sometimes there are reasons for it which can't be ruled out, but can't be ruled in either. 😉

    In any event, the way i see it, 762 home runs is 762 home runs, and 714 is 714. However, Ruth's home run record is much more impressive for various reasons. Which is one reason I've got Ruth at #1 on my all time hitters list. :)

    If I have read your prior statements correctly, you are attempting to say that ALS might have killed Lou Gehrig later in life had he not been associated with Babe Ruth, whom a couple of folks have postulated might have taken horse steroids in the 1920s and might have shared some with Gehrig? Is that correct?

    I am all for questions that insight thought and different points of view, but it seems like you've passed that stage and are just trying to stir the pot.

    Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @AFLfan said:

    @stevek said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @stevek said:
    What I think is interesting is that there's always been rumors flying around that Babe Ruth took horse steroids or something to that affect. All unsubstantiated, but I've read that in a few articles throughout the years.

    Babe Ruth died of cancer at age 53. Lou Gehrig died at 37, and likely would have been privy to what the Babe was using.

    Ahh, those two early deaths were just a coincidence, right? Perish the thought that our legendary baseball heroes may have been "cheating" in some way. Couldn't have happened, right?

    ALS killed Lou Gehrig.

    Babe Ruth put so many bad things in his body that it’s probably impossible to cite anything other than ‘wild lifestyle’ leading to his early death.

    Completely understood about ALS. That is not normally a disease associated with using steroids.

    That being said, it is fact that placing drugs in our bodies, destroys the internal organs, the immune system, and the overall proper functioning of our bodies. That is FACT.

    Lou of course had a predisposition to one day have ALS. The question is are there circumstances that trigger the predisposition to occur? I believe the answer to that is a definitive yes.

    Environmental hazards, drugs, smoking, etc, without question increase our predisposition for disease. Perhaps if Lou led a complete perfect drug free life he would have died at 37 anyway. Then again, perhaps it would have been a lot later in his life or maybe not at all, if he didn't have access to some of the Babe's stash, if it existed?

    Yes, coincidences do happen. but sometimes there are reasons for it which can't be ruled out, but can't be ruled in either. 😉

    In any event, the way i see it, 762 home runs is 762 home runs, and 714 is 714. However, Ruth's home run record is much more impressive for various reasons. Which is one reason I've got Ruth at #1 on my all time hitters list. :)

    If I have read your prior statements correctly, you are attempting to say that ALS might have killed Lou Gehrig later in life had he not been associated with Babe Ruth, whom a couple of folks have postulated might have taken horse steroids in the 1920s and might have shared some with Gehrig? Is that correct?

    I am all for questions that insight thought and different points of view, but it seems like you've passed that stage and are just trying to stir the pot.

    That's precisely what I was attempting to say. I stated evidence to back that up. Something is wrong when the top three home run hitters on a team, all pass at a way too early age.

    I later stated that I'm gonna let dead dogs lie. If I stirred the pot, i already expressed a desire not to stir it any further.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @Goldenage said:
    If the little league World Series says the age limit is 12, and Taiwan puts two 15 year olds who are 5’11 190 pounds on their team with fake birth certificates, and they win the title, is that a legit title just because they got away with it, and it’s the other teams fault that they didn’t ?

    So you're OK with McGwire and Palmeiro going into the Hall then since there was no rule against steroids during their careers?

    That is a very good question.

    If your question is asking me if I was judge Landis, then I’d say wipe all their records away.

    I would also rule that baseball will pay for any future medical bills these athletes incur from their steroid damage.

    I would come up with other hard rules too.

    Authorities need to protect citizens. The greed of the owners and players created a health hazard physically and emotionally.

    I would not tolerate any of it.

    Congress forced mlb to enact strict laws. Baseball never would have.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @AFLfan said:

    @stevek said:

    I'm not sure why some of this reminds me of what I'm about to type, but it does...and also sort of a continuation of what I preciously posted.

    Reminds me of all those Germans in the 1930's who were lustily cheering Hitler. (yes we just reached Godwin's Law - LOL)

    They all cheered and cheered, but then they lost the war and blamed Hitler for the atrocities, etc.

    >

    I'm having a very difficult time connecting these two. Let's please leave Hitler's atrocities out of any further discussions here. To attempt to associate his actions and how they were viewed in any way to modern sport is terribly disrespectful to millions of people.

    <<< To attempt to associate his actions and how they were viewed in any way to modern sport is terribly disrespectful to millions of people. >>>

    Todd if you knew me better, you would understand how utterly distasteful this remark is to me. That I would in any way shape or form be "terribly disrespectful to millions of people", especially when i share much of their same heritage.

    I'm not going to elaborate further, but sorry I can't let that remark go.

    So i bid everyone here, a fond farewell and adieu, and i've immensely enjoyed my time on this forum.

    Signing out,

    stevek

  • AFLfanAFLfan Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If I misinterpreted what you were trying to say, then I apologize. My point is that Hitler's atrocities should never be taken so lightheartedly that they are compared to how fans viewed a baseball at one time. if you misinterpreted what I was saying, then we can just chalk that up to the limitations of text communication. No need to leave, but of course that is up to you.

    Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,253 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I can not shake the image of someone (surely not anyone here) telling their child that Bonds should be in the HOF.

    "But didn't he cheat, Daddy?"
    "Yes, he did, but other people were also cheating so it doesn't count."
    "Thanks for the lesson, Daddy, I'll remember that."

    The next day...

    "Daddy, teacher wants to talk to you."

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • AFLfanAFLfan Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @AFLfan said:
    If I misinterpreted what you were trying to say, then I apologize. My point is that Hitler's atrocities should never be taken so lightheartedly that they are compared to how fans viewed a baseball at one time. if you misinterpreted what I was saying, then we can just chalk that up to the limitations of text communication. No need to leave, but of course that is up to you.

    You’re a very good person, Todd.

    I give you a lot of credit, man.

    Thanks, although I think I am more confused by that brief interaction than anything.

    Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
  • JustacommemanJustacommeman Posts: 22,847 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2021 5:00PM

    @AFLfan said:

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @AFLfan said:
    If I misinterpreted what you were trying to say, then I apologize. My point is that Hitler's atrocities should never be taken so lightheartedly that they are compared to how fans viewed a baseball at one time. if you misinterpreted what I was saying, then we can just chalk that up to the limitations of text communication. No need to leave, but of course that is up to you.

    You’re a very good person, Todd.

    I give you a lot of credit, man.

    Thanks, although I think I am more confused by that brief interaction than anything.

    You are not alone. I had to step away from the forum for several hours. I was probably mumbling to myself.

    m

    @1951WheatiesPremium said:

    @AFLfan said:
    If I misinterpreted what you were trying to say, then I apologize. My point is that Hitler's atrocities should never be taken so lightheartedly that they are compared to how fans viewed a baseball at one time. if you misinterpreted what I was saying, then we can just chalk that up to the limitations of text communication. No need to leave, but of course that is up to you.

    You’re a very good person, Todd.

    I give you a lot of credit, man.

    Hear hear!

    @dallasactuary said:
    I can not shake the image of someone (surely not anyone here) telling their child that Bonds should be in the HOF.

    "But didn't he cheat, Daddy?"
    "Yes, he did, but other people were also cheating so it doesn't count."
    "Thanks for the lesson, Daddy, I'll remember that."

    The next day...

    "Daddy, teacher wants to talk to you."

    Yep.

    @stevek

    Good luck.

    m

    Walker Proof Digital Album
    Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,547 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I surely hope @stevek will reconsider and clear this misunderstanding up in private chat with @AFLfan. Both of you guys are well respected in my opinion and I’m sure would be able to reach an understanding of exactly where each of you were coming from.

Sign In or Register to comment.