Home Sports Talk

Aaron Judge is 20 HR's ahead of the next guy in MLB...and is more impressive than what Ruth did!

2»

Comments

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:
    Judge still has 2 months before he finishes with that measurement. Ruth also never got the juiced balls Judge gets when hes approaching a record. The fact that Ruth would have won a Cy Young had that award existed at the time is more than enough to say what he did is more impressive

    Whenever Judge has a Cy Young pitching season maybe theres an argument. Ruths numbers will end up being better than Judges and they have held up for almost a 100 years. Judge isnt even the best player of his generation

    You mean out distancing less qualified peers, and vs 85 MPH fastballs, has held up for 100 years.

    Even if Judge only ends up with one OPS+ over 200 that is still more impressive than Ruth's time where they were 'giving those out' like candy.

    A for best player of the generation, even being second or third is more impressive considering the talent he is going up against.

    So juiced balls means nothing? Ruth being a Cy Young pitcher means nothing? Equipment and training means nothing? Comparison to their peers means nothing?

    Judge isnt even a top 10 player against his peers, he had a big year helped out by special balls in a very offensive friendly stadium and division.

    Juiced balls just for Judge? OK. So there are subbing in juiced balls just for him this year when he comes up to bat? lol.

    Did you get that info from the same guy who sold Jack his bean stalk beans?

    Yes, the peers is the whole point...You mean Ruth out distancing less qualified peers, and vs 85 MPH fastballs, has held up for 100 years.

    THat's the point, Judge is going against EVERYONE with superior equipment and training and that is one of the reasons why it is so hard to outdistance them, hence why only one 200 OPS+ season in last 20 years as opposed to Ruth's time where it was common for the elite to reign vs lesser talent overall.

    And regardless of how it got there, the fact is the pitchers are throwing harder now, are bigger and taller, and have more command. Thus, hitting 62 home runs vs a league of six foot four pitchers averaging 94 MPH is more impressive than hitting 60 vs a league of six foot one pitchers throwing 85 MPH.

    As for the parks, you do realize that the parks then were favorable to left handed hitters league wide. There is another thread that shows that.

    As for Ruth's pitching, it would have been more impressive if he did it while he also hit full time, which he barely did...in the end it goes to his overall playing ability and nothing to do with the post. I never said Judge will have a better career. His late start almost precludes that automatically.

    Its well documented that the first season you mentioned Judge was having special balls brought in for his at bats for at least a month. Even ignoring that the balls today travel significantly further than they did back in Ruths days.

    I'm not trying to hate on Judge hes a very good player no doubt, but Stanton and Trout are both better when healthy, Acuna is better, Othani is better just to name a few.

    Pitchers do throw harder now but Ruth was a two way player and if he grew up with the modern training and had the modern balls and bats he would still be elite. Its not even possible for Judge to match his numbers since he doesnt pitch. Ruth could have done both full time but was so good at hitting they stopped letting him pitch. That was probably a smart move given whats happened to Othani

    The only thing we can really do is just compare people against their peers

    Wisconsin 2-6 against the SEC since 2007

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,885 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    Gavvy Cravath in 1915 hit the same amount(or more) home runs than 12 teams in the league that year....I guess according to some, Cravath would have hit 219 home runs last year in MLB.

    In the last 20 years(not counting 2020) an OPS+ of over 200 has only happened one time. It will be twice this year. Both of those times by Aaron Judge. No other player out of all this worldwide exceptionally trained BETTER talent has been able to eclipse a 200 OPS+ in the last 20 years....and Judge will do it twice.

    From 1916-1934(Ruth's career), an OPS+ of 200 or more was eclipsed TEN different times from players OTHER THAN RUTH.

    So @coinkat damn skippy right that Judge's accomplishment is more impressive.

    >
    >

    First off, you need to stop quoting the "Ruth out homered most/all teams" fact.
    Yes, it happened, but it quickly went away and it's just a statistical anomaly, a huge change in the game made it happen.

    Carl Lewis finishing time being last in the latest Olympics, by how much, .002 of a second?

    There were very few professional athletes in the United States from 1900-1940.
    Forget the rest of the world's population.

    Many college athletes (see Jay Berwanger the first Heisman winner) went out and got a job, it paid more than pro sports, especially football.

    Hockey? 95% of the players during those years were born in Canada.

    The Boston Celtics originated in 1946.

    Not too many guys playing golf back then either.

    You guys need to forget about world population and get your database where it belongs.

    White America.

    It's a shame blacks weren't allowed to play until almost the 1950's, but they need To be excluded from the pool of available people.

    When 85 mph fastballs in Ruth's era are being used as a reason, why weren't more guys hitting 50 HR?

    I really like Judge and am fascinated by him, but he's had ONE full season, up till now, where he's in Babe Ruth territory. Probably 2 after this year. I really hope he stays healthy, along with Ohtani, it would be great to see these two challenge the Ruth or Williams numbers, but they have to do it for more than a couple of years.

    I think we need to see a couple more great seasons before we anoint Judge into Babe Ruth land.

    Great discussion.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,098 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    Its well documented that the first season you mentioned Judge was having special balls brought in for his at bats for at least a month.

    Special balls <> juiced balls

    MLB has, for decades, used specially marked balls that can be authenticated and tracked when someone approaches milestones.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    Its well documented that the first season you mentioned Judge was having special balls brought in for his at bats for at least a month.

    Special balls <> juiced balls

    MLB has, for decades, used specially marked balls that can be authenticated and tracked when someone approaches milestones.

    True, but the foul balls for it were tested by astrophysicists and they were more are dynamic than the normal balls

    Wisconsin 2-6 against the SEC since 2007

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,872 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Tested by astrophysicists. Sure. Where is this compelling report?

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,098 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 9, 2024 9:22AM

    @bgr said:
    Tested by astrophysicists. Sure. Where is this compelling report?

    It's a single astrophysicist sampling a small number of balls:

    https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2022/12/7/23498096/mlb-different-baseballs-2022-juiced-yankees-aaron-judge

    The report suggests that the Yankees were the only team to have a certain type of ball show up. That is certainly a possible issue but also has possible benign explanations (like random luck of baseball delivery).

    TL;DR - single physicist, small sample of balls, but possible for to the smoke

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,872 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @bgr said:
    Tested by astrophysicists. Sure. Where is this compelling report?

    It's a single astrophysicist sampling a small number of balls:

    https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2022/12/7/23498096/mlb-different-baseballs-2022-juiced-yankees-aaron-judge

    The report suggests that the Yankees were the only team to have a certain type of ball show up. That is certainly a possible issue but also has possible benign explanations (like random luck of baseball delivery).

    TL;DR - single physicist, small sample of balls, but possible for to the smoke

    I had seen this one. The sbnation article is a report of the original business insider report. The sbnation article does contain the meat of the report, but it's not as clearly articulated in the sbnation article that the discussion as they kind of feed you number soup until hiding the "it could be months until they (MLB) own up to the three balls in 2022, if at all".

    Astrophysics is not really much of a feather in their cap for this study either. Understanding the macro interactions of astronomical objects or the math involved in the 3-body problem isn't all that important to the aerodynamics of a baseball. That said it's obviously hit the mark as Basebal21 repromoted that authoritative appeal. I'm sure she's a smart Harvard educated physicist, but maybe she should brush up on scientific ethics - the sample size is unethically small.

    What bothers me about this is that the guy had a historic season, but there's those "people" out there who need to find a way to tear it down. If they can't prove it, they will pretend they have proven it and let the mob handle the rest.

  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 23,226 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Seems the discussion has drifted in a different direction about baseballs. And that is okay for those that missed the fairway and are stuck out in the weeds.

    The real issue here about the progression of human development, what is learned through that progression and how that relates to the DEVELOPMENT of professional sports… And that extends beyond MLB. Progression is a good thing. It measures where we have been as well as where we can go. And it applies to all walks of life- well beyond Professional sports. Consider art, jazz, music in general, film, architecture. Take a moment to think about those that have benefitted from what transpired before them. Babe Ruth had no mentor and no previous MLB star that even offered a glimpse as to what was possible in terms of what he was able to accomplish. In contrast, Judge had the benefit of Ted Williams, Ralph Kiner and even Frank Howard to learn from and follow in their foot steps. One simply can not remove history from the equation because it is those that follow that benefit from what has been done. The difference is players like Ruth and Williams shaped and defined what is possible. And those that follow gain from accomplishments that were not even contemplated.

    @1948_Swell_Robinson

    I understand your argument… clearly you have not even considered mine. And that is NOT fine mainly because progression over time needs to be measured and considered as part of any reasonable analysis to advance your argument in connection with who/what is the most impressive. Your view that somehow population numbers that increased overtime that adds to the competition pool to promote what Judge is doing today is simply misplaced. Sort of like that dead herring in the moonlight… it shines but it stinks.

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,872 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Not much information there to be considered... Just another assertion of superiority here on this cancer of a forum.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Tabe said:

    @bgr said:
    Tested by astrophysicists. Sure. Where is this compelling report?

    It's a single astrophysicist sampling a small number of balls:

    https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2022/12/7/23498096/mlb-different-baseballs-2022-juiced-yankees-aaron-judge

    The report suggests that the Yankees were the only team to have a certain type of ball show up. That is certainly a possible issue but also has possible benign explanations (like random luck of baseball delivery).

    TL;DR - single physicist, small sample of balls, but possible for to the smoke

    It hasnt just been him but theres some more evidence where this year and things nationally televised other than the playoffs have had a higher number of balls that are traveling significantly longer than they should be based off of the expected range of the launch angles and exit velocity.

    There is no doubt though that the balls used today (even the ones considered dead) travel further today than they did 80 years ago

    Wisconsin 2-6 against the SEC since 2007

  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 23,226 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If you really believe what you wrote… just another assertion of superiority here on this cancer of a forum…why do you participate?

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,872 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @Tabe said:

    @bgr said:
    Tested by astrophysicists. Sure. Where is this compelling report?

    It's a single astrophysicist sampling a small number of balls:

    https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2022/12/7/23498096/mlb-different-baseballs-2022-juiced-yankees-aaron-judge

    The report suggests that the Yankees were the only team to have a certain type of ball show up. That is certainly a possible issue but also has possible benign explanations (like random luck of baseball delivery).

    TL;DR - single physicist, small sample of balls, but possible for to the smoke

    It hasnt just been him but theres some more evidence where this year and things nationally televised other than the playoffs have had a higher number of balls that are traveling significantly longer than they should be based off of the expected range of the launch angles and exit velocity.

    There is no doubt though that the balls used today (even the ones considered dead) travel further today than they did 80 years ago

    So provide the evidence. You consistently produce incorrect information without any source information or evidence and assert it as fact.

    Here’s a fun little tool to play around with to understand how changes to the ball affect aerodynamics.

    So what changes were identified in the handful of samples?

    https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/beginners-guide-to-aeronautics/aerodynamics-of-baseball/

    The study mentioned by Wills is not recent. MLB concluded that the balls were more aerodynamic but no one could determine why.. definitively. The last thing I could find about it was that perhaps the pill was better centered which returned perturbation and thus, wobble, which reduced drag.

    While Wills focused on the smoothness of the leather and the height of the laces this can be disputed easily. Wills full study mentioned the drying of the leather by Rawlings as the likely cause assuming they had adjusted their process. She listed the positioning of the pill as a third potential cause which impacted the flight in a negligible way. If you understand how drag works though you might question this as we know that the surface texture has a very minuscule impact on ballistic drag. Consider that when we’re talking about a possible minor improvement to smoothing of the leather. Any drag force calculator will do and you don’t need to be an astrophysicist to figure this out - Newtonian physics has you covered here.

    If they did improve the manufacturing process to improve the center of mass in the ball that’s good and if it diminishes anyone’s opinion of the all time greats that’s unfortunate as it shouldn’t.

    Just because I think Judge is probably a better player than Ruth, head to head, across the eras, doesn’t mean I think any less of Ruth. No one even mentioned Gehrig here who I think was every bit as good as Ruth - imagine his dismay at this insult. I think Ruth was the first real baseball superstar and may have done more for the building of the sport than anyone. I would retire number 3 in baseball personally based on what he did for the game and what he did in the game.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @Tabe said:

    @bgr said:
    Tested by astrophysicists. Sure. Where is this compelling report?

    It's a single astrophysicist sampling a small number of balls:

    https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2022/12/7/23498096/mlb-different-baseballs-2022-juiced-yankees-aaron-judge

    The report suggests that the Yankees were the only team to have a certain type of ball show up. That is certainly a possible issue but also has possible benign explanations (like random luck of baseball delivery).

    TL;DR - single physicist, small sample of balls, but possible for to the smoke

    It hasnt just been him but theres some more evidence where this year and things nationally televised other than the playoffs have had a higher number of balls that are traveling significantly longer than they should be based off of the expected range of the launch angles and exit velocity.

    There is no doubt though that the balls used today (even the ones considered dead) travel further today than they did 80 years ago

    So provide the evidence. You consistently produce incorrect information without any source information or evidence and assert it as fact.

    Here’s a fun little tool to play around with to understand how changes to the ball affect aerodynamics.

    So what changes were identified in the handful of samples?

    https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/beginners-guide-to-aeronautics/aerodynamics-of-baseball/

    The study mentioned by Wills is not recent. MLB concluded that the balls were more aerodynamic but no one could determine why.. definitively. The last thing I could find about it was that perhaps the pill was better centered which returned perturbation and thus, wobble, which reduced drag.

    While Wills focused on the smoothness of the leather and the height of the laces this can be disputed easily. Wills full study mentioned the drying of the leather by Rawlings as the likely cause assuming they had adjusted their process. She listed the positioning of the pill as a third potential cause which impacted the flight in a negligible way. If you understand how drag works though you might question this as we know that the surface texture has a very minuscule impact on ballistic drag. Consider that when we’re talking about a possible minor improvement to smoothing of the leather. Any drag force calculator will do and you don’t need to be an astrophysicist to figure this out - Newtonian physics has you covered here.

    If they did improve the manufacturing process to improve the center of mass in the ball that’s good and if it diminishes anyone’s opinion of the all time greats that’s unfortunate as it shouldn’t.

    Just because I think Judge is probably a better player than Ruth, head to head, across the eras, doesn’t mean I think any less of Ruth. No one even mentioned Gehrig here who I think was every bit as good as Ruth - imagine his dismay at this insult. I think Ruth was the first real baseball superstar and may have done more for the building of the sport than anyone. I would retire number 3 in baseball personally based on what he did for the game and what he did in the game.

    You can do your own research since you seem to just want to argue with me. Theres plenty of analytical pitching and baseball data sites and twitter accounts out there that provide the information

    Despite what some may think I do pay a lot of attention to the nuances of baseball and analytics, I just dont live and die by them which is something I learned playing and coaching professionally.

    MLB controls the manufacturing of the balls and can do whatever they want to them whenever they want. As I said there is no debate that the balls today go further than the balls 80 years ago. Its a fact

    Wisconsin 2-6 against the SEC since 2007

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,872 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @bgr said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @Tabe said:

    @bgr said:
    Tested by astrophysicists. Sure. Where is this compelling report?

    It's a single astrophysicist sampling a small number of balls:

    https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2022/12/7/23498096/mlb-different-baseballs-2022-juiced-yankees-aaron-judge

    The report suggests that the Yankees were the only team to have a certain type of ball show up. That is certainly a possible issue but also has possible benign explanations (like random luck of baseball delivery).

    TL;DR - single physicist, small sample of balls, but possible for to the smoke

    It hasnt just been him but theres some more evidence where this year and things nationally televised other than the playoffs have had a higher number of balls that are traveling significantly longer than they should be based off of the expected range of the launch angles and exit velocity.

    There is no doubt though that the balls used today (even the ones considered dead) travel further today than they did 80 years ago

    So provide the evidence. You consistently produce incorrect information without any source information or evidence and assert it as fact.

    Here’s a fun little tool to play around with to understand how changes to the ball affect aerodynamics.

    So what changes were identified in the handful of samples?

    https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/beginners-guide-to-aeronautics/aerodynamics-of-baseball/

    The study mentioned by Wills is not recent. MLB concluded that the balls were more aerodynamic but no one could determine why.. definitively. The last thing I could find about it was that perhaps the pill was better centered which returned perturbation and thus, wobble, which reduced drag.

    While Wills focused on the smoothness of the leather and the height of the laces this can be disputed easily. Wills full study mentioned the drying of the leather by Rawlings as the likely cause assuming they had adjusted their process. She listed the positioning of the pill as a third potential cause which impacted the flight in a negligible way. If you understand how drag works though you might question this as we know that the surface texture has a very minuscule impact on ballistic drag. Consider that when we’re talking about a possible minor improvement to smoothing of the leather. Any drag force calculator will do and you don’t need to be an astrophysicist to figure this out - Newtonian physics has you covered here.

    If they did improve the manufacturing process to improve the center of mass in the ball that’s good and if it diminishes anyone’s opinion of the all time greats that’s unfortunate as it shouldn’t.

    Just because I think Judge is probably a better player than Ruth, head to head, across the eras, doesn’t mean I think any less of Ruth. No one even mentioned Gehrig here who I think was every bit as good as Ruth - imagine his dismay at this insult. I think Ruth was the first real baseball superstar and may have done more for the building of the sport than anyone. I would retire number 3 in baseball personally based on what he did for the game and what he did in the game.

    You can do your own research since you seem to just want to argue with me. Theres plenty of analytical pitching and baseball data sites and twitter accounts out there that provide the information

    Despite what some may think I do pay a lot of attention to the nuances of baseball and analytics, I just dont live and die by them which is something I learned playing and coaching professionally.

    MLB controls the manufacturing of the balls and can do whatever they want to them whenever they want. As I said there is no debate that the balls today go further than the balls 80 years ago. Its a fact

    That is a fact. But saying they are intentionally assisting a player to reach a record is what I am challenging. I would like proof of that. Whether balls are better now than they were in the 1920s isn’t being debated.

Sign In or Register to comment.