March 22, 200521 yr You're right Das, he would've been the greatest ever. But he took a risk and now his legacy will be marred forever because he got greedy.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well. Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB). Aaron benefited from expansion weakening the quality of pitching as well as the hesitancy of managers to use bullpen "specialists." If you want to get technical, any record could have an * next to it. Put aside nostalgia and realize you're witnessing greatness; even if you don't like him. Besides, it's not his fault that the drug testing policy was impotent last year, and didn't even exist before then. He didn't do anything against the rules, illegal (but it's yet to be proven) maybe, but never against baseball's rules...
March 22, 200521 yr f***. This is not how the best player of this generation needs to be going out. And to all you haters who will respond, or at least think, that this is what he deserves and such...you're gay. Of course, he's probably just being Barry and will be back in mid-May and still win the batting title. 717971[/snapback] No, YOUR "gay".....this guy is not only the biggest jerk off in sports, but the biggest cheater as well. This is as close to happy I've ever been at an injury.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well. Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB). Aaron benefited from expansion weakening the quality of pitching as well as the hesitancy of managers to use bullpen "specialists." If you want to get technical, any record could have an * next to it. Put aside nostalgia and realize you're witnessing greatness; even if you don't like him. Besides, it's not his fault that the drug testing policy was impotent last year, and didn't even exist before then. He didn't do anything against the rules, illegal (but it's yet to be proven) maybe, but never against baseball's rules... 718074[/snapback] Those were natural changes that were going on in the game. Baseball and other sports evolve as time goes on. The changes he and others made were not natural.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well. Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea. 718090[/snapback] I disagree with the tayloring of Yankee Stadium asterisk. There was no rule at the time for minimum distance on a ballpark. A the time many of the parks had very short distances down the line. (Yankee Stadium, Fenway, Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds to name a few.)
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea. 718090[/snapback] I disagree with the tayloring of Yankee Stadium asterisk. There was no rule at the time for minimum distance on a ballpark. A the time many of the parks had very short distances down the line. (Yankee Stadium, Fenway, Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds to name a few.) 718111[/snapback] well, there was no rule against steroids, but that doesn't make it right you're not supposed to taylor your ballpark to your best hitter, even though it might not be illegal its the exact same thing, really
March 22, 200521 yr you guys have to be kidding me about questioning Ruth's record.... if you going to do that why dont they but an asterisk next to Aarons record that it took him an extra 1500AB's to brake ruth's record.. as for Bonds i would hate to see this be the end of his career..the guy is the best player in the league and he's 40 years old...steroids doesnt help you hit 370.
March 22, 200521 yr you guys have to be kidding me about questioning Ruth's record.... if you going to do that why dont they but an asterisk next to Aarons record that it took him an extra 1500AB's to brake ruth's record.. 718149[/snapback] i was trying to support him... if you read farther up i'm just saying that's the only possible thing you could have an asterisk for
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea. 718090[/snapback] I disagree with the tayloring of Yankee Stadium asterisk. There was no rule at the time for minimum distance on a ballpark. A the time many of the parks had very short distances down the line. (Yankee Stadium, Fenway, Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds to name a few.) 718111[/snapback] well, there was no rule against steroids, but that doesn't make it right you're not supposed to taylor your ballpark to your best hitter, even though it might not be illegal its the exact same thing, really 718144[/snapback] I guess you would them have to put an asterisk next to Williams name because the Red Sox taylored Fenway for him.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea. 718090[/snapback] I disagree with the tayloring of Yankee Stadium asterisk. There was no rule at the time for minimum distance on a ballpark. A the time many of the parks had very short distances down the line. (Yankee Stadium, Fenway, Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds to name a few.) 718111[/snapback] well, there was no rule against steroids, but that doesn't make it right you're not supposed to taylor your ballpark to your best hitter, even though it might not be illegal its the exact same thing, really 718144[/snapback] I guess you would them have to put an asterisk next to Williams name because the Red Sox taylored Fenway for him. 718158[/snapback] YOU CAN PUT AN ASTERISK NEXT TO EVERYTHING yes, I would i would also put an asterisk next to bonds for roids, ruth for his stadium, aaron for expansion, maris for 162 games, mcgwire for steroids, sosa for steroids, gehrig for his ballpark, canseco for roids, caminiti for roids, perry for messing with his balls, and while were at it, an asterisk for every pitcher who pitche when spitballs were allowed. That would be cy young, walter johson, christy mathewson, and look: BABE RUTH AGAIN, to name a few asterisks are dumb if you use one, then you open up the floodagtes and i don't see how fenway was tailored to Williams. It's much harder on lefties than righties.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea. 718090[/snapback] I disagree with the tayloring of Yankee Stadium asterisk. There was no rule at the time for minimum distance on a ballpark. A the time many of the parks had very short distances down the line. (Yankee Stadium, Fenway, Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds to name a few.) 718111[/snapback] well, there was no rule against steroids, but that doesn't make it right you're not supposed to taylor your ballpark to your best hitter, even though it might not be illegal its the exact same thing, really 718144[/snapback] I guess you would them have to put an asterisk next to Williams name because the Red Sox taylored Fenway for him. 718158[/snapback] and i don't see how fenway was tailored to Williams. It's much harder on lefties than righties. 718177[/snapback] The bullpens were added a year after he joined the team to make it easier for him.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea. 718090[/snapback] I disagree with the tayloring of Yankee Stadium asterisk. There was no rule at the time for minimum distance on a ballpark. A the time many of the parks had very short distances down the line. (Yankee Stadium, Fenway, Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds to name a few.) 718111[/snapback] well, there was no rule against steroids, but that doesn't make it right you're not supposed to taylor your ballpark to your best hitter, even though it might not be illegal its the exact same thing, really 718144[/snapback] I guess you would them have to put an asterisk next to Williams name because the Red Sox taylored Fenway for him. 718158[/snapback] and i don't see how fenway was tailored to Williams. It's much harder on lefties than righties. 718177[/snapback] The bullpens were added a year after he joined the team to make it easier for him. 718188[/snapback] i know that still doesnt make it a park that's easy on lefties if it were taylored to the degree that yankee was, he'd probably have 700 as well *edit*: that was an exaggeration, but he would have much more
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB) 718074[/snapback] Ruth's record needs no explanation only possible asterisk you could add is that they tailored the stadium to his strengths and weaknesses Babe not only marked the transition into the live ball era, he WAS the transition. Pitchers back then didn't just "get the ball to the batter", it was then when pitching was at its peak. That was when pitchers stats were better. Just go back and look at stats of the best pitchers then to the best pitchers now. I don't know how you came up with that idea. 718090[/snapback] I disagree with the tayloring of Yankee Stadium asterisk. There was no rule at the time for minimum distance on a ballpark. A the time many of the parks had very short distances down the line. (Yankee Stadium, Fenway, Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds to name a few.) 718111[/snapback] well, there was no rule against steroids, but that doesn't make it right you're not supposed to taylor your ballpark to your best hitter, even though it might not be illegal its the exact same thing, really 718144[/snapback] I guess you would them have to put an asterisk next to Williams name because the Red Sox taylored Fenway for him. 718158[/snapback] and i don't see how fenway was tailored to Williams. It's much harder on lefties than righties. 718177[/snapback] The bullpens were added a year after he joined the team to make it easier for him. 718188[/snapback] i know that still doesnt make it a park that's easy on lefties if it were taylored to the degree that yankee was, he'd probably have 700 as well 718196[/snapback] But it was taylored. That would be like saying Bonds deserves a bigger asterisk because he used more roids than Jason Giambi.
March 22, 200521 yr i'm just discouraging the use of asterisks entirely, because like I said: if you use one, then you're opening up something you don't want to mess with on a different note: this has gotta be the first barry based thread that has shifted to something else, instead of the other way around
March 22, 200521 yr I don't encourage the use of asterisk either. 718216[/snapback] :plain that was a useful argument
March 22, 200521 yr I don't encourage the use of asterisk either. 718216[/snapback] :plain that was a useful argument 718217[/snapback] It was a nice argument on ballpark standards.
March 22, 200521 yr Babe Ruth out homered the league once. His career began in the dead ball era. The live ball era ensued in teh mid to late 20s. Babe had already been knocking em out of the park for close to 10 years when this began. Hank Aaron with the homerun record, is probably one of the most underrated players ever. He could and did do it all.
March 22, 200521 yr As RFerry said before, Ruth and his record (and Aaron and his record) all deserve to be "explained" as well.? Ruth played in a time when pitching was regarded more as a way of getting the ball to the batter (not to mention, many superior or at least equal black athletes were kept out of the MLB).? Aaron benefited from expansion weakening the quality of pitching as well as the hesitancy of managers to use bullpen "specialists." If you want to get technical, any record could have an * next to it.? Put aside nostalgia and realize you're witnessing greatness; even if you don't like him.? Besides, it's not his fault that the drug testing policy was impotent last year, and didn't even exist before then.? He didn't do anything against the rules, illegal (but it's yet to be proven) maybe, but never against baseball's rules... 718074[/snapback] When babe ruth hit 60 homers he outhomered ever other AL team. It had nothing to do with era b/c no one else was close to matching his totals. Ruth invented the homerun. Hank Aaron was a solid player for many years. Bonds was a great player who CHEATED to become the best. Neither ruth nor aaron cheated, they played the game of their own times and excelled. What i say they do is mark the era of 1986-2002 as the steroid era or the performance enhancing drugs era. Maintian all records, dont put asterisks, but acknowledge in the record books that during that time this problem was occuring. It cannot be ignored either.
March 23, 200521 yr Consider that Ruth was one of the few hitters of his time that hit with an uppercut swing. Coaches at that time rarely signed players with such a technique and those that did, were never given much playing time. Concidentally his arrival into the league came at a time when permanent metal and concrete ballparks were being built. Gone were the wooden structures with no outfield bleachers. All the ballparks Ruth played in had stable outfield fences that allowed for more home runs. His three home ballparks, Fenway Park, Polo Grounds and Yankee Stadium had short left field fences. Also the ball was changed in 1913. A cork center was added that added significant pop to the ball. The ball used by the AL was made more livelier again in the early to mid 20s. After he proved the 'experts' wrong, many players began using uppercut swings. In due time, some of those took advantage of the new conditions and were hitting 40 to 50 home runs and challenging Ruth for the yearly HR title.
March 23, 200521 yr So does anyone know for sure how long Bonds is out for... some say a few months, some say forever. Will he be back before the Giants are in town in mid-August?
March 23, 200521 yr So does anyone know for sure how long Bonds is out for... some say a few months, some say forever. Will he be back before the Giants are in town in mid-August? 718624[/snapback] He says maybe to mid-season or maybe 2006.
March 23, 200521 yr maybe this is just my opinion, but i think he could be back by june might just be a false alarm. Maybe he will want to come back after sitting out for 2 months. Maybe i'm totally wrong.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.