MLB: Is Shohei Ohtani as good as Babe Ruth?
WildWestHalfDollars
Posts: 6,749 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
?
Member here for 5 years
0
Comments
!
No and I can't believe the discussion even starts.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
I just want to see how people feel nothing else. Do not take it any other way. Just curious is all. No disrespect to Ruth.
Member here for 5 years
No.
If he has 4 more years like the last 4.
Ask at that time.
prior to yesterday's game: the prevailing narrative was that Ohtani was the best player the sport had ever seen
a day later: he takes an o-fer at the plate, gets outpitched by Justin Bieber and suddenly mum's the word
such a fluid situation i tell ya
according to sources Babe Ruth was a better drinker.
Babe could eat more hot dogs as well.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Come on now, let's scale the mountain. Babe Ruth had the bestest penmanship. Ever.
@galaxy27, I think you meant Shane Bieber, but maybe not.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
.
Definitely needs more seasons but the biggest difference between Ruth and Othani is the separation they have between their peers. You see a true two way player once in your lifetime and Ruth wasnt allowed to pitch many years but he also out homered entire teams as a hitter. Othani is one surgery away from not being allowed to pitch anymore given that hes already had two TJ surgeries and a 3rd just ends a pitchers career. It could even end up impacting his hitting at that point as good of a hitter as he is
Fire AJ Preller
the separation isn't as pronounced as it may look on the surface without taking into consideration variance.
What’s weird about Ohtani’s stats is last year he stole 59 bases and was caught 4 times. But the year before that and the year after that he stole 20 and was caught 6 times both years.
What’s up with 1 great year of base stealing and very pedestrian the rest of his career. Not that it’s important in the grand scheme of comparing him to Ruth but just find it odd. 🤔
I was also wondering if it’s interesting how he compares to Ruth. What makes it interesting to consider?
So Ohtani's gone 0/3 thus far in game 5, it looks like he had that one good game and suddenly he's scheduled to have his bust made for Cooperstown.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
Ohtani's had 5 superb seasons and he's as great as Babe Ruth? He's missed 2 seasons with injury and really only pitched part time for 3 years.
Trout had 8 consecutive superb seasons and according to some here, he sucks.
Is it too soon to put Trey Yesavage in the hall of fame?
Cool name…..
not Bill McCool cool, but cool nonetheless.
MLB is now regretting not having him start the All-Star Game.
Never heard of him.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ohio State Buckeyes - National Champions
no, Ohtani is not better than Ruth. He got started too late and missed too much time from injury to make up the career value.
He is the greatest player of this generation, I believe though.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I would agree on that above with career length.
Considering the vast difference in eras between then and now it is almost impossible at this point to compare those eras....
Ruth did only pitch full time and hit full time for one season. He was a pitcher. Did both for a year. Then he was a hitter.
Ohtani has done both for a few years now(but some are partial pitching years due to injury like this year)
Ohtani would out homer teams too if nearly everyone in his league was taught to hit like Bret Butler. Ruth wasn't the only player to out homer teams back then. Again, vastly different circumstances.
However, to be fair, Ohtani does benefit from the rule that allows him to interchange being pitcher and DH. Ruth would have hit and pitch at the same time more often early in his career if he had the Ohtani rule with the DH. Different circumstances.
So in the end, it is almost impossible to compare at this point.
@1948_Swell_Robinson
agreed, it is very difficult to compare across eras. we can compare how much players dominated their own contemporaries though. regardless of circumstances, Ruth dwarfed his competition. completely.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I don't think Ohtani is there close to as as a hitter as Ruth vs their leagues. If you look at the runs produced offensively and the runs saved via pitching for their best five year prime, Ruth's hitting is still above Ohtani's combined pitching and hitting.
Ohtani needs more offensive years like 2024 to be closer in the mix.
But I don't know how to quantify Ohtani doing both pitching and hitting and its value beyond the runs produced or saved. You see in the post season his value. Just being able to pitch six innings has value.
Babe used to stay out all night drinking and womanizing then show up to the games hungover and would eat 6 hotdogs before the game started - nobody can top that except for Andre the Giant -
"When they can't find anything wrong with you, they create it!"
I have to add, though, that there needs to be some sort of qualifier put on Ruth because he played pre-integration. That factor is important and I am not quite sure how to quantify it, but it is there. Level of competition opened up in 1947, and by the time the 1960s came around, I believe it was a much better league.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Agreed.
Talent wise, he's right there with Ruth. Ohtani's value comes from his unique ability to be elite in both roles in the same season, year after year, in the modern era. He's a special player, a once in a lifetime player, enjoy him.
I thought about that. It's interesting. I suspect it would be seen as somewhat counterfactual to consider what might have been if things were different. In this case, you could draw a direct comparison with Ohtani, but I think that sort of juxtaposition is just past where many would feel comfortable going.
I don't have an answer as it requires way too many assumptions.
Segregation, sports medicine, training, for what it's worth... technology and science and a general understanding of more stuff and things over time, and... you know... the economics of sports which has produced so much more supply.
Was Ruth playing against professional pitchers or were they part-time bartenders? Sometimes. So it's a study of relative disadvantage - the principle of proportional disadvantage. At this point my mind starts to wander because I'm deep within the hypocrisy of the thought-experiment.
So I would ask. How does knowing whether he was better help us understand what we're looking at now. Ruth was larger than life - charismatic, iconic... I can quote Ruth and I never saw him play a game. I couldn't tell you one thing Ohtani has said. I think I would have enjoyed watching Ruth play. Ohtani better step it up in this WS but I'm a fan. He's great.
I remember reading about some of Ruth's barnstorming tours with Negro League teams. One thing to take note of is that Ruth was very much against and was outspoken against segregation in baseball and I always appreciated that footnote about him as I respect the character and conviction that must have taken. Perhaps that's where I see the most contrast between the two players and their respective greatness thus far - what is Ohtani using his platform for.
I have argued and nauseum about Brady being the GOAT but over time I believe that the only fair way to compare greatness is by generation or era, it's completely ridiculous to believe otherwise at this point
Regarding Ruth he was the greatest of his time and it's not even close.
Ohtanhi might or might not be the greatest player of this era but there are players that are close
Comparing a modern day player to anyone from the 20's is impossible to really compare
The question: Is Shohei Ohtani as good as Babe Ruth? I cannot honestly believe people ponder this based on such a small sample and due to one superb World Series performance.
In order to be "as good as Babe Ruth" it follows logically that you have to do what Babe did. Let us only consider one statistic to keep things simple. Babe Ruth had 714 HR's and retired from MLB at the age of 40. Ohtani currently has 280 HR's and is 31 years old. In his career he has averaged 45 HR's/season which he would have to maintain well into a 10th season, age 41, from this point to equal Babe Ruth. Even if he averaged 50 HR's/season it would take him to age 40 and 9 more seasons to equal Babe Ruth. It's worth mentioning that during a 22 year career the Babe averaged 46 HR's/season.
Do you think Ohtani cane or will do either of those things?? I don't. It logically follows that he isn't as good as Babe Ruth.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
I was listening to the radio in 1948 when the announcement was made that the Babe had died! The name the program was "our baby snooks" or some thing like that. I was 9 years old at the time!
This is one of the greatest performances I've ever seen on a baseball field. He might not be Babe Ruth, but he's pretty darn close.
You forgot to assert that it’s logic.
Its ultimately going to come down to his pitching. He wont be able to out hit Ruth or out his his peers to the extent that he did, but he could get like 500 homeruns and a ton of strikeouts as a pitcher and the two way factors come to play.
Personally I think he will lose another season to TJ and his pitching career will be over especially since hes a right handed pitcher that hits lefty which puts extra stress on his throwing arm
Fire AJ Preller
Can't really do much better than this
I would say this. Shohei Ohtani is a much better athlete than Ruth. If you were transport him to that time I believe he would put up better numbers than Ruth. I also believe if you transported Ruth to this time that he would a shell of himself. That being said nobody has dominated their time like Ruth and nobody ever will again.
Matt
With a 34 oz bat and hitting pure white baseballs, Ruth might also hit 85-100 HR a year.
If you were transport him to that time
This is a fantasy.
Laws from the era prevented Asian immigration and encouraged segregation which led to things like "Chinatown" while the Supreme Court affirmed those laws. There is absolutely no chance that Ohtani could have played during that era. In that time an Asian life had even less value in America than a Black life. No, while Babe Ruth played it was an all-white MLB.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
This hypothesis has now been tested.
In this case, you could draw a direct comparison with Ohtani, but I think that sort of juxtaposition is just past where many would feel comfortable going.
Never said it was reality. Ruth would never hit 85-100 Home runs now.
Matt
Ok, but seriously Godzilla vs. Sasquatch.
Yes he would. HRs are up with better equipment etc. The whole time argument goes both ways. If you brought Ruth forward in time with modern training and modern equipment hes still a monster.
The best most talented players will be the best most talented players of any generation as long as they have all the same training. equipment etc
Fire AJ Preller
Ohhh snap. He would. You heard it here first.
When Babe Ruth was still active and at his best there were a good amount of experts/historians/players from then who swore that both Cobb and Wagner were better baseball players than Ruth. They did not hit the Home Runs that Ruth did, but the game then was less about Home Runs(which is also the biggest reason why Ruth and a few other guys were able to out homer teams), and more about what Wagner and Cobb did.
Ruth certainly did change that thinking a good amount over time(although many fans now still don't think HR are as important as batting average, putting the ball in play etc..)
Hornsby also was just behind Ruth offensively when Hornsby and Ruth were both in their primes...and Hornsby did it while playing 2B. Hornsby hit over .400, out homered three teams, tied with another team, and was within three Home Runs of four other teams.
Ruth wasn't quite as far as ahead of the few other elites in that era as the out homering of team suggest. The out homering of teams was more a product of the type of hitters that dominated the league in that era more than anything else. Other guys did it too, including Hornsby. It really should say "Ruth and others out-homered teams that predominately employed Bret Butler/Jose Oquendo type hitters on their roster."
From 1921 to 1925 Hornsby had a .402 batting average and a 204 OPS+. Yes, he had a plus .400 average for a five year stretch.
Hornsby, Cobb, and Wagner also all struck out far far less than Ruth...another aspect that even fans today put big weight on...and back then there was tremendous weight on that aspect.
Ruth did change the strategy going forward, though some still think the Cobb/Wagner/ Hornsby way of hitting is more effective than the strikeout King of Ruth.
So if you are one of the fans that rail on today's guys for striking out and then annoint the strikeout king of his era as without question the all time best, then that doesn't quite make sense..
Hornsby was a second baseman and a RH hitter in a league where the parks favored LH more throughout.
I don't think people realize that league wide the park configurations back then favored LH hitters.
King Kong vs Godzilla would make more sense
Honus Wagner could be the greatest player of the first half of the 1900's. That is what many thought. He was the absolute best at what the era expected, a combination of high batting average, high contact, stolen bases, and defense(at shortstop nonetheless).
Wagner led his league in WAR 11 times. Ruth also led his league in WAR 11 times. WAR wasn't a thing then, but looking back Wagner still holds par.
HOWEVER when you consider their home parks Left field and Right field dimensions, of which WAR or OPS+ does not account for, Wagner gets a boost. Ruth played in a league where RF walls were more hitter friendly than LF overall.
Exposition park was Wagner's home park until age 34. The dimensions were 400 feet down the left field line. 413 feet to LF and 450 feet to center. Forbes field even had 465 ft Left center at times with Wagner there( their dimensions changed a few times).
People often mistakingly say Ruth played in big parks. He did in some, but the majority of his parks were actually very small to RF when he was a hitter full time. Some were flat out band boxes to RF like League Park and the Polo Grounds among others.
It is players like Wagner who had to endure the big parks and mush ball. Ruth played with the live ball era as a hitter(not the mush ball that is mistakingly applied to him). WAGNER PLAYED WITH THE MUSH BALL.
There was no point for a player like Wagner to try and tailor a swing to hit home runs. It would have resulted in a lot of fly outs and ultimately the bench for him. As such the league was filled with players who would have very little chance of hitting any home runs(even in favorable HR parks because their swing and skill set was simply not built for it) and many of those players were still there when Ruth came, and that is why Ruth was out homering teams so easily. That fact and the era of the live ball and small RF parks allowed Ruth to also do what he did to the degree he did greater than anyone else that followed.
Ruth would not be hitting 60 HR with a 400 FT right field line in his home park and with the mush ball Wagner had to hit. He simply wouldn't.
Honus dominated his era as good or better than Ruth especially when you account for all I said above too.
This video is Wagner in 1933 doing some hitting and fielding. Still has thunder in his bat and I absolutely love how he throws a little shade at the hitters in 1933 saying pitchers have harder work now due to pitches being banned. Wagner had it harder than Ruth(see above) and dominated the same or better.