When I was very young Williams was my favorite player. I have no data like some of you do but I felt Ted did not swing at many pitches outside the strike zone. If a batter swings wildly at pitches outside the strike zone he will get a lot of pitches there.
This, more than everything else combined, is what separates good hitters from bad hitters. I would add, and I'm sure Ted would agree, when you do swing, swing hard.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@Brick said:
When I was very young Williams was my favorite player. I have no data like some of you do but I felt Ted did not swing at many pitches outside the strike zone. If a batter swings wildly at pitches outside the strike zone he will get a lot of pitches there.
Was he chemically enhanced? Almost certainly. But so was the entire rest of the league. And he still dominated in a way no player in a fully integrated league ever has.
And I have no objection to placing the GOAT cheater crown on Bonds. But I won't make a mockery/travesty of baseball by so much as implying that he is even eligible for a GOAT crown in actual baseball.
Lets eliminate any of the cheater or moral reasoning aspects in the PED area and move on to the more interesting aspect of that(to me anyway), is if the PED players did gain a competitive advantage then that means the non-PED players had a competitive disadvantage. Yet, currently all of the stats still use league average baselines to measure a players.
Lets say we took a player like Eddie Murray that is not very likely to have taken any PED's. I know PED's aren't just weight training or body shape, but I know Eddie Murray was into stretching back then, as opposed to muscle work. If I could go back in time and tell Eddie about 'going against the grain' with stretching and how stretching can actually lead to injury and can hamper strength, he may have had a better twilight, but I digress.
Lets just assume Murray was a non PED user.
In 1995 Eddie Murray had an .891 OPS. That translated into a 129 OPS+
In 1981 Eddie Murray had an .895 OPS. That translated into a 156 OPS+
Eddie hit the same each of those years but was severely penalized in 1995 with his OPS+ because the league scoring environment was plumped. The question is, how much of the plumping was due to PED use, and if Eddie wasn't a PED user, then why does his OPS+ suffer?
In 1996 Eddie Murray had a .743 OPS. Translated into an 87 OPS+
In 1989 Eddie Murray had a .743 OPS. Translated into an 113 OPS+
I had posited that a big part of the change in offense in that era was due to the ball. If that is the case, then Murray benefitted as much as anyone and his OPS+ is on the money.
But, if Bonds and his stats are not taken at face value and is said he only got there because of PED, then that means Eddie Murray is being unfairly penalized in his OPS+.
I know it will end up being un-answerable but the considerations should be there for either direction it would go.
My Secret Inside Source dropped in last night. I asked him the question..... Without skipping a beat he said..... Tony Gwynn. Runner-up Ted Williams. Interesting...
Whatever. I'm off to the game. Rams/Broncos. It ought to be a real snooze-fest. Can't wait......NOT!
Buck O’Neal was in Kansas City for a game and heard someone in the batting cage. He turned and quotes
“I’ve only heard that sound twice before
Babe Ruth
Joe Jackson and now
Bo Jackson
W.C.Fields "I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
@Hydrant said:
My Secret Inside Source dropped in last night. I asked him the question..... Without skipping a beat he said..... Tony Gwynn.
This is a silly answer. The greatest hitter of all-time has to hit for power. Period. Tony didn't.
Tabe, I was surprised at the answer too. Especially at the way he said it.....QUICK!....NO HESITATION!.... But it's not silly.....Secret Inside Source is .....well.......He knows what he's talking about
from up front and personal experience.... He's not a silly guy!....
Has to hit for power?.... THINK TY COBB.....
Yes, has to hit for power. Especially over a guy both didn't hit for power or walk, like Gwynn. Gwynn had a career OPS of .847 behind megastars like Bob Nieman and Kent Hrbek.
@Hydrant said:
My Secret Inside Source dropped in last night. I asked him the question..... Without skipping a beat he said..... Tony Gwynn.
This is a silly answer. The greatest hitter of all-time has to hit for power. Period. Tony didn't.
Tabe, I was surprised at the answer too. Especially at the way he said it.....QUICK!....NO HESITATION!.... But it's not silly.....Secret Inside Source is .....well.......He knows what he's talking about
from up front and personal experience.... He's not a silly guy!....
Has to hit for power?.... THINK TY COBB.....
Ty Cobb led the league in doubles 3 times, triples 4 times, homers 1 time, and slugging average 8 times.
Tony Gwynn led the league in doubles 0 times, triples 0 times, homers 0 times, and slugging average 0 times.
@Tabe is exactly right, your Inside Source is silly.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@Hydrant said:
My Secret Inside Source dropped in last night. I asked him the question..... Without skipping a beat he said..... Tony Gwynn.
This is a silly answer. The greatest hitter of all-time has to hit for power. Period. Tony didn't.
Tabe, I was surprised at the answer too. Especially at the way he said it.....QUICK!....NO HESITATION!.... But it's not silly.....Secret Inside Source is .....well.......He knows what he's talking about
from up front and personal experience.... He's not a silly guy!....
Has to hit for power?.... THINK TY COBB.....
Ty Cobb led the league in doubles 3 times, triples 4 times, homers 1 time, and slugging average 8 times.
Tony Gwynn led the league in doubles 0 times, triples 0 times, homers 0 times, and slugging average 0 times.
@Tabe is exactly right, your Inside Source is silly.
Ty Cobb watched guys hot home runs while he was concentrating on hits and RBI’s. The HR’s were getting all the press. So Cobb said, screw this I can do that too. He led the league in HR’s that year.
Best hitter of all time. Ty Cobb. Again, end of discussion.
W.C.Fields "I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
My above comment reminded me of Barry Bonds. While Bonds was tearing up the league doing his 40-40-40 McGuire and Sosa were getting all the press. So he said screw this, I can do that too. 73 HR’s later he proved it.
Bonds before steroids was a sure fire HOFer and should be a shoe in.
W.C.Fields "I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
Ty Cobb watched guys hot home runs while he was concentrating on hits and RBI’s. The HR’s were getting all the press. So Cobb said, screw this I can do that too. He led the league in HR’s that year.
Best hitter of all time. Ty Cobb. Again, end of discussion.
He hit 9 the year he led the league.
This isn't exactly the praise you think it is. "I COULD be more successful but I am CHOOSING not to be."
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery; it certainly seems like just about every player today is taking some variation on the Bambino’s swing. And nobody today swings like Cobb.
Now, admittedly, this may be a case where no one copies the greatest free throw shooter of all time (Rick Barry) or the greatest scorer of all time’s signature shot in basketball (Kareem’s Skyhook) because they don’t like the way it looks.
But I thought it was worth mentioNing, since no one else brought it up.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
If players were trying to hit the ball Ty Cobb was hitting they, too, would stop swinging for the fences because it just didn't go that far. Cobb hit double digits in HR a couple times with the new ball, but after that many years I imagine it was very hard to completely change your swing. Also, and for whatever reason, even when Cobb was playing nobody else swung like Cobb. It worked for him, though.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Hall of Fame shortstop Joe Sewell. No player in the history of MLB was harder to strike out, e.g., ability to hit the baseball, than Joe Sewell.
In 7,132 career at-bats / 8,333 career plate appearances, Sewell struck out just 114 times or one strikeout for every 62.6 at-bats / every 73.1 plate appearances. In comparison, Babe Ruth struck out once every 6.3 at-bats / every 8.0 plate appearances and Ted Williams struck out once every 10.9 at-bats / every 13.8 plate appearances. So it's not even close.
All kidding aside, I'll go with Babe Ruth first and Rogers Hornsby second.
All kidding aside, I'll go with Babe Ruth first and Rogers Hornsby second.
Hornsby is a name that never comes up in these discussions but probably should. Dude hit .404 over a four-year span while averaging over 30 homers a year. That's incredible. Led the NL in OPS+ 12 times - the same number of times that Babe Ruth led the AL.
All kidding aside, I'll go with Babe Ruth first and Rogers Hornsby second.
Hornsby is a name that never comes up in these discussions but probably should. Dude hit .404 over a four-year span while averaging over 30 homers a year. That's incredible. Led the NL in OPS+ 12 times - the same number of times that Babe Ruth led the AL.
Also won 2 Triple Crowns, like Williams.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
All kidding aside, I'll go with Babe Ruth first and Rogers Hornsby second.
Hornsby is a name that never comes up in these discussions but probably should. Dude hit .404 over a four-year span while averaging over 30 homers a year. That's incredible. Led the NL in OPS+ 12 times - the same number of times that Babe Ruth led the AL.
He was able to stay over .400 for a five year span. Hit .402 from 1921 through 1925.
All kidding aside, I'll go with Babe Ruth first and Rogers Hornsby second.
Hornsby is a name that never comes up in these discussions but probably should. Dude hit .404 over a four-year span while averaging over 30 homers a year. That's incredible. Led the NL in OPS+ 12 times - the same number of times that Babe Ruth led the AL.
Amazing player, but yet it seems people dont even think he is the greatest Cardinal in history
All kidding aside, I'll go with Babe Ruth first and Rogers Hornsby second.
Hornsby is a name that never comes up in these discussions but probably should. Dude hit .404 over a four-year span while averaging over 30 homers a year. That's incredible. Led the NL in OPS+ 12 times - the same number of times that Babe Ruth led the AL.
He was able to stay over .400 for a five year span. Hit .402 from 1921 through 1925.
Tremendous hitter. SLG a little low for GOAT hitter.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Comments
@Brick said:
This, more than everything else combined, is what separates good hitters from bad hitters. I would add, and I'm sure Ted would agree, when you do swing, swing hard.
That is put so amazingly simple and true.
Lets eliminate any of the cheater or moral reasoning aspects in the PED area and move on to the more interesting aspect of that(to me anyway), is if the PED players did gain a competitive advantage then that means the non-PED players had a competitive disadvantage. Yet, currently all of the stats still use league average baselines to measure a players.
Lets say we took a player like Eddie Murray that is not very likely to have taken any PED's. I know PED's aren't just weight training or body shape, but I know Eddie Murray was into stretching back then, as opposed to muscle work. If I could go back in time and tell Eddie about 'going against the grain' with stretching and how stretching can actually lead to injury and can hamper strength, he may have had a better twilight, but I digress.
Lets just assume Murray was a non PED user.
In 1995 Eddie Murray had an .891 OPS. That translated into a 129 OPS+
In 1981 Eddie Murray had an .895 OPS. That translated into a 156 OPS+
Eddie hit the same each of those years but was severely penalized in 1995 with his OPS+ because the league scoring environment was plumped. The question is, how much of the plumping was due to PED use, and if Eddie wasn't a PED user, then why does his OPS+ suffer?
In 1996 Eddie Murray had a .743 OPS. Translated into an 87 OPS+
In 1989 Eddie Murray had a .743 OPS. Translated into an 113 OPS+
I had posited that a big part of the change in offense in that era was due to the ball. If that is the case, then Murray benefitted as much as anyone and his OPS+ is on the money.
But, if Bonds and his stats are not taken at face value and is said he only got there because of PED, then that means Eddie Murray is being unfairly penalized in his OPS+.
I know it will end up being un-answerable but the considerations should be there for either direction it would go.
My Secret Inside Source dropped in last night. I asked him the question..... Without skipping a beat he said..... Tony Gwynn. Runner-up Ted Williams. Interesting...
Whatever. I'm off to the game. Rams/Broncos. It ought to be a real snooze-fest. Can't wait......NOT!
Ty Cobb. End of discussion
"I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
Buck O’Neal was in Kansas City for a game and heard someone in the batting cage. He turned and quotes
“I’ve only heard that sound twice before
Babe Ruth
Joe Jackson and now
Bo Jackson
"I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
This is a silly answer. The greatest hitter of all-time has to hit for power. Period. Tony didn't.
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
The Babe.> @3stars said:
I liked Pete Rose but I wouldn't include him in this group.
Yes, has to hit for power. Especially over a guy both didn't hit for power or walk, like Gwynn. Gwynn had a career OPS of .847 behind megastars like Bob Nieman and Kent Hrbek.
Ty Cobb led the league in doubles 3 times, triples 4 times, homers 1 time, and slugging average 8 times.
Tony Gwynn led the league in doubles 0 times, triples 0 times, homers 0 times, and slugging average 0 times.
@Tabe is exactly right, your Inside Source is silly.
Bonds
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
Ty Cobb watched guys hot home runs while he was concentrating on hits and RBI’s. The HR’s were getting all the press. So Cobb said, screw this I can do that too. He led the league in HR’s that year.
Best hitter of all time. Ty Cobb. Again, end of discussion.
"I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
My above comment reminded me of Barry Bonds. While Bonds was tearing up the league doing his 40-40-40 McGuire and Sosa were getting all the press. So he said screw this, I can do that too. 73 HR’s later he proved it.
Bonds before steroids was a sure fire HOFer and should be a shoe in.
"I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
He hit 9 the year he led the league.
This isn't exactly the praise you think it is. "I COULD be more successful but I am CHOOSING not to be."
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery; it certainly seems like just about every player today is taking some variation on the Bambino’s swing. And nobody today swings like Cobb.
Now, admittedly, this may be a case where no one copies the greatest free throw shooter of all time (Rick Barry) or the greatest scorer of all time’s signature shot in basketball (Kareem’s Skyhook) because they don’t like the way it looks.
But I thought it was worth mentioNing, since no one else brought it up.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
If players were trying to hit the ball Ty Cobb was hitting they, too, would stop swinging for the fences because it just didn't go that far. Cobb hit double digits in HR a couple times with the new ball, but after that many years I imagine it was very hard to completely change your swing. Also, and for whatever reason, even when Cobb was playing nobody else swung like Cobb. It worked for him, though.
Hall of Fame shortstop Joe Sewell. No player in the history of MLB was harder to strike out, e.g., ability to hit the baseball, than Joe Sewell.
In 7,132 career at-bats / 8,333 career plate appearances, Sewell struck out just 114 times or one strikeout for every 62.6 at-bats / every 73.1 plate appearances. In comparison, Babe Ruth struck out once every 6.3 at-bats / every 8.0 plate appearances and Ted Williams struck out once every 10.9 at-bats / every 13.8 plate appearances. So it's not even close.
All kidding aside, I'll go with Babe Ruth first and Rogers Hornsby second.
Hornsby is a name that never comes up in these discussions but probably should. Dude hit .404 over a four-year span while averaging over 30 homers a year. That's incredible. Led the NL in OPS+ 12 times - the same number of times that Babe Ruth led the AL.
Also won 2 Triple Crowns, like Williams.
He was able to stay over .400 for a five year span. Hit .402 from 1921 through 1925.
Bonds> @Tabe said:
Amazing player, but yet it seems people dont even think he is the greatest Cardinal in history
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
Tremendous hitter. SLG a little low for GOAT hitter.
"Greatest hitter of all-time"
I'm sorry - my mind went straight here -
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"