Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Citi Field: Where Homeruns Go To Die Bar-right-arrows



Greatest A's team and more

I've been reading AN for a few months now and joined SBN last month after following the blogs of the teams I like for months.  I grew up watching baseball as a kid in the 60's but in 1972 I really fell in love with baseball and have been a fan ever since.

My memories of the A's goes back to those great 72, 73, 74 teams that won it all and were the last 3 in a row winner till the Yankees of the late 90's.  I remember Rudi, Blue, Hunter, Jackson and the others and that is when I started liking the A's.  Admittedly, they are not my all-time favorite team for I became a fan of two teams that my first memories of baseball came from.

Having said that, I am admittedly not a blind rabid supporter of these two teams for I like baseball and love to meet and share with the fans of other teams for I love to learn about all the MLB teams and who better to do so from than the fans of the team they support.

I also enjoy baseball history and the A's are rich in some great teams and history.  I looked through the blog here and never did find any fan posts on the greatest A's team in history.  If I missed it please let me know an I will pull this post down for I don't want to repeat something already covered.

So, there have been some great teams in the history of the A's, both in Philadelphia and in Oakland.  What is your favorite team you remember?  What is the greatest team in Oakland and the greatest team in Philadelphia in your opinion. Which team is the greatest in all of the A's history in your opinion?  What team gets a honorable mention but didn't quite make it to greatness by not winning the series?

For me, my favorite A's team I remember was the 1972  A's.  Its because it was the first World Championship in Oakland and I was impressed by the club when they smacked Detroit around (literally) in the playoffs.  The best team I remember in Oakland was hard to pick for the 73 was a good ballclub, but I think the 1989 team was the best I ever saw come out of Oakland. With Henderson, McGwire and Canseco the offense was great and a great pitching staff led by Stewart.  My vote for the greatest team in Philadelphia is for the 1929 A's.  The 1910 team was great, but that '29 team I feel was unbelieveable.  My honorable mention team is the 1988 A's.  This could've been the all-time greatest A's team but they lost the Series. To me, the 1929 A's was the greatest A's team ever.... look at the number of Hall of Fame players on the roster. A great team!

Well, I look forward to your opinions and votes.  If you differ please present the reasons why for I would love to learn more about your insights and knowledge of the A's.   I hope this is good for discussion and I look forward to learning more from you all. Thank you for sharing.

 

Poll
In your opinion, what is the greatest all-time team in the history of the A's?
1910 Philadelphia
0 votes
1911 Philadelphia
0 votes
1913 Philadelphia
3 votes
1929 Philadelphia
20 votes
1930 Philadelphia
2 votes
1972 Oakland
3 votes
1973 Oakland
5 votes
1974 Oakland
11 votes
1989 Oakland
43 votes

87 votes | Poll has closed

1 recs | Comment 46 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Welcome to the Show

I may or may not have done a series on this that may or may not have been accidentally deleted.

Anyway, um, I voted the 1974 A’s. From losing their leader Dick Williams (who quit after the 1973 Series, thanks to Finley’s disgusting handling of the Mike Andrews’ fiasco) to every team gunning for them, from Catfish Hunter’s pending departure (and suit against Finley for breach of contract) to clubhouse fights (one of them on the eve of the World Series), those A’s thrived on extra-large amounts of adversity (playing for Finley alone was enough). After Catfish (who won the Cy Young Award that season) took a 6-3 beating in Game 1 of the ALCS, the A’s won seven of their next eight post-season games (the lone loss a 3-2 affair to LA in Game 2 of the World Series) to earn their third straight crown. They didn’t exactly overwhelm their opponents: in those eight games, they only scored 24 runs. But they allowed just 12 Orioles and Dodgers to cross the plate; that’s 1.5 runs a game when the stakes were at their highest. In fact the three runs they gave up in that Game 2 loss was the most in those eight contests; the rest read like this: 0, 0, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2. Plus Ray Fosse homered once in the playoffs and again in the Series (in the clincher); that alone makes them the greatest.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 20, 2008 12:49 PM PST   0 recs

I voted for them too

They had a chance at another decade of dominance if not for Finley’s crappy business practices.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 20, 2008 7:42 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

'29 Athletics

One of the greatest teams of all time, hence my vote as the Greatest A’s team.

Jimmie Foxx, Lefty Grove, Mickey Cochrane, Eddie Collins, & Al Simmons alone probably could have taken all the other teams by themselves. In the snow. Uphill both ways.

Nuff said.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 20, 2008 1:29 PM PST   1 recs

And the last two games of that year's Series

Talk about ripping the heart out of a team’s fan base.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 20, 2008 1:36 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

They probably thought the Cubs would win pretty soon though.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 20, 2008 7:43 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Powerball...1910 Philadelphia A's Edition

19 total team homeruns for the entire season. Frank “Homerun” Baker had 2.

If only Ryan Sweeney could realize his power potential and belt 10-15 HRs a year, then we have a new guy to nickname “Homerun”.

I am Ray Fosse's infatuations with Clay Wood and high-definition television.

by franks a lot on Nov 20, 2008 1:29 PM PST   0 recs

I can't not vote for '89 (because that's the only one I lived)

I imagine that’s why ’89 is winning the poll.

Also, I feel confident saying that (with the appropriate time travel technology) the ‘89 A’s would absolutely demolish any of the first 5 teams on the list.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Nov 20, 2008 1:51 PM PST   0 recs

I don't know about that...

According to Bill James, the ’29 team had the 2nd greatest first baseman of all time (Foxx), the 2nd greatest pitcher of all time (Grove), the 4th greatest catcher of all time (Cochrane), the 2nd greatest second baseman of all time (Collins), and the 7th greatest left fielder of all time (Simmons).

I’ll give you Rickey as the 4th greatest LF. But Foxx still rates higher than Mac, albeit by the slimmest of margins (2nd to 3rd greatest). After that all you’ve got is Jose at 36th for RF and Eck at 32nd.

Now we can debate about the rankings, I took them from the New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract 2001, since the rankings consist of a career rather than just the WS years. But I don’t think anyone can argue that the ’29 team, as well as the ’30 team, had a much better collection of talent.

I was there in ’89. Loved those teams. Those were the teams I grew up with. But there is only a small chance that the ’89 team would win a series against the ’29 team.

Let alone “absolutely demolish” them.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 20, 2008 2:11 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

You're missing my point

Sure the ‘29 team – in it’s own context – was something very very special.

In a universal context, however, no team from that era could hold a candle to great modern teams. The level of competition was dramatically lower (this is even pre-farm systems), the bottom end of the talent pool was WAY worse, and the athleticism doesn’t even compare.

Bill James’ rankings place players in the context of their era, because otherwise their stats would be meaningless (you don’t compare dead-ball pitchers to steroids-era pitchers by looking only at ERA). If you actually put the two teams on one field, however, I don’t know that the ‘29 A’s would even win an inning.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Nov 20, 2008 2:31 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I don't know.

I think your argument has validity for the pre-1920 teams. But I think baseball from 1920 to the present is not terribly dis-similar. I will grant you the athleticism doesn’t compare, although by all accounts Foxx was a tremendously strong man. And certainly you have to take pre-1947 ball with a grain of salt.

That being said, one could argue that the expansion of baseball created greater dilution in the talent pool. More teams = more players that wouldn’t have been in the show before. Suddenly you have guys that would have been scrubs pitching garbage to McGwire.

I also don’t agree with the pre-farm system argument. That certainly affected the Philly A’s after their run, when the old model of buying studs out of college and scouting the sticks was on it’s way out. But I don’t know if that affected them when they were in their run of WS appearances in the late 20’s. They obviously had tremendous talent on those teams.

And, it seems to me, that James’ rankings do try to put the players in context with each other. In that they are grouped together by win shares, and not win-shares-by-era.

Although, I have to admit that I am sick and not totally thinking straight. So I’m sure I’ve left holes all over my argument and I’ll be outed as a faux-intellectual.

But I do think the ‘29 A’s would win a few innings against the ’89 squad.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 20, 2008 3:03 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Maybe

It is, of course, something we’ll never really know (and it could be that I’m wrong).

I would counter your expansion argument with the dramatic expansion of the talent pool (both based on race and geography).

As for the farm-system, the point is that years in the minor leagues improve a player. If you tried to give MLB roles to the very best players out of college today, only a very few would not be disasters (and there are a ton more college programs that are more sophisticated today).

I don’t know enough about your Bill James argument, I had always assumed that he calculated those win shares season-by-season through reference to competitors in the same season (otherwise Joe Wood would be a much better known pitcher). I suppose that assumption could be wrong.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Nov 20, 2008 3:24 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

It goes well beyond race and geography

People (outside of disaster areas like sub-Saharan Africa) nowadays are bigger, stronger, healthier and faster than they were in the 1920s.

If anyone doubts this, go watch some footage of the 1960 Olympics, or something such, and compare it to footage from the recent games. And then realize that every medalist in those games, who wouldn’t stand much of a chance today, would have kicked the ass of anyone from 1928.

I mean, Babe Ruth had a ridiculous hitch in his swing. There’s no way on the planet he could have caught up to a 97 MPH heater with how long it took him to load up.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 20, 2008 3:45 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

The obvious question is, if Babe Ruth regularly faced pitchers throwing 97, would he still have had the hitch?

But yes, as I said before athletic improvements have been massive in the last 80 years.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Nov 20, 2008 3:50 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

That's a good question.

It would be interesting to see career stats on how he fared against the hardest throwers in the game vs. the soft tossers.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 12:21 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Two things:

1) People threw high 90’s heat back then. Obviously there’s no radar, but Walter Johnson probably did, Lefty Grove probably did. I think less people probably threw that hard, but there’s no way better conditioning led to people suddenly being able to throw that hard.

Some people are just freaks like that. Bob Feller could throw that heat at around 17 years old, possibly younger. I mean, to take it to the absurd, does that mean people in ancient times were throwing stones 10 mph? That analogy is probably not the best, but it’s the best I could come up with.

2) I think baseball in general is probably the one sport where conditioning matters the least. Obviously if you were take someone from the ‘28 Olympics they’d get killed in almost every event. But baseball is wierd like that.

You can have a guy like Millar that’s not in great shape, but still make solid contact cause he just can hit. You got a guy like Lincecum who’l throwing high 90’s and it looks like I could beat him in an arm wrestling match.

Athleticism surely helps on defense and getting from station to station quicker, and it can’t hurt when talking pitching and hitting. But I’m not sold that players today are in such great shape that they’d take apart some of those old teams

Paul, you’re obviously very bright as well as well-versed on baseball. Do you think the ‘29 A’s, given that they had some of the greatest ever at five positions, would be “absolutely demolished” by the ’89 team?

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 12:13 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Position by position

C — Cochrane over Steinbach, but Terry was likely the 2nd best A’s catcher ever
1B – Foxx over McGwire, but Mark was likely the 2nd best A’s 1B ever
2B – Phillips over Bishop, although Max could walk all day
SS – Gallego over Boley, although neither could hit
3B – Lansford over Dykes, similar stats but tougher league and Hale was really bad
LF – Rickey over Simmons, unless you penalize Rickey for his Yankeeness, but Al #2 all-time A’s LF
CF – Haas and Dave even, Mule better raw stats but weaker league (EqA almost the same)
RF – Canseco over Miller, unless you penalize him for his injury

I say 1989 has the advantage at 6 positions, although all are arguably close.

P1 – Grove over Moore, but it’s sort of close since Mike had a career year
P2 – Earnshaw over Welch
P3 – Walberg over Stewart
P4 – Quinn over Davis or Young

RP – Eckersley over Rommel
RP – Honeycutt and Shores even
RP – Nelson and Ehmke even
RP – Burns over Yerkes or Orwoll, Todd had a career year

Looks like pitching favors the 1929 team. So it’s pretty close one way or the other overall. I was expecting the hitting to favor the 1929 team, but that’s not what the numbers say. I looked at OPS+ and EqA for hitting and ERA+ and NRA/DERA for pitching. Both teams had great defenses, but the 1989 team had an even better one.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 21, 2008 1:13 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Just the kind of thing the '74 team would love

Being overlooked. And while the Dodgers stayed awake at night wondering how the A’s could be so lucky during that year’s Series, the A’s slept soundly, not giving a shit what it looked or smelled like.

Love my ‘89 A’s- hell, I dig on the ’29 team, too- but I say the ’74 club earns the right to play the winner of those two.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 21, 2008 5:26 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

BTW Collins wasn't on the 1929 A's

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 21, 2008 1:17 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Unless you count his 9 games at a -39 OPS+ as being on the team.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 21, 2008 1:18 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Ah.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 1:18 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Just out of curiosity...

who wins in a one at bat duel:

Rube Waddell or Jose Canseco?

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 1:20 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Alas we shall never know.

I didn’t pick either just because of their on field prowess anyway.

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 21, 2008 6:42 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Who's the pitcher?

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 21, 2008 7:18 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

Just was writing a reply...

Wiki has him back with the A’s in ’27. No?

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 1:18 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I really doubt that Johnson, Grove or Feller threw that hard

Really doubt it. By comparison to the times, low-90s heat was probably damn nearly untouchable. And they simply don’t have the K rates that you would expect from guys throwing that kind of gas consistently.

So, yes, I think the ’89 team would have absolutely demolished the ’29 team.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 21, 2008 9:12 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I tried finding a decent article

and this is about as close as I got.

Johnson was “clocked”, using something I’m certain Montgomery Burns would approve of, at 134 ft/sec. Or roughly 91.3 mph, using their fancy automatic slide-rule. That certainly appears to favor your point.

Then it says Feller was clocked, using the same machine, at 119 ft/sec, which is a paltry 81.1 mph. Apparently Feller also was clocked at 98.6 at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. I’m not sure if the same device was used for this test. This was used as a basis of comparison for some guy named Steve Dalkowski.

Dalkowski was considered, if the article is to be believed, to have one of the fastest fastballs ever. His top speed at the proving grounds was 93.5 with a wave of excuses following why it was not as fast as expected. He blew out his arm fielding a bunt in practice from none other than Jim Bouton.

My favorite stat from the article is this gem:

In 995 minor league innings, he (Dalkowski) walked 1,354 batters and struck out 1,396.

So I really have no idea. But I have no good reason to refute your K rate stat.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 3:29 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Good points.

I’m not willing to let go of my stance, but since I don’t have much else to argue, I’m willing to let it rest.

Damn that time travel. At the least it’d be a great series to watch.

For what it’s worth, Smokey Joe’s career ended, for intents and purposes, before the dead-ball era ended, though not by much. I think pre-1920 ball really is a different beast.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 12:19 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

2001 and 2002 should at least make the list...

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Nov 20, 2008 2:06 PM PST   0 recs

and 1990

Despite being smacked in the series, the 1990 team was pretty great. 2001 though, I think, was the most stacked A’s team in a very long time, definitely of the BB reign. To this day I can’t believe they didn’t even escape the first round. God damn it. I still remember that series like it was yesterday, from the Giambi non-slide to the Zito 1-0 loss on Posada’s HR. God damn it.

by jdr on Nov 20, 2008 3:06 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I was in the restroom

when Posado homered. Thought it was safe to go. As my family filed out after that game- and there was about 20 of us- I couldn’t leave. Hell, I couldn’t move. I just stared out at the field until Mom came to where I was, bringing me back to a reality I wanted no part of.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 20, 2008 3:27 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

What he said

It pains me to no end that those teams didn’t go deeper into the playoffs.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 20, 2008 3:23 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Sigh at the freak broken leg.

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Nov 20, 2008 3:25 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

That just added to Lidle's bad outing

and the ungodly heat that day.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 20, 2008 3:28 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I was at that game

Literally the most unpleasant ballpark experience I have ever had and it’s not even close. Lidle completely melted down, literally taking 40-50 seconds between pitches. The first three innings took two hours. The home crowd was yelling at him to hurry it up because it was blisteringly hot – I have a picture of me and three of my friends with our shirts on top of our heads looking miserable, just miserable. The broken leg. Lidle going out in the 4th and then the deep dank end of the bullpen coming in to get beaten like a drum. And then knowing they were going to go all the way back to NYC to lose. Ugh.

by jdr on Nov 20, 2008 5:36 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Re: 2001/2002

The other day when we were arguing about the velocity of Barry Zito’s seven year-old fastball, I said to myself:

“Fricking PT. Thinks he knows everything. Dammit, I remember what I remember, and PT was probably still peeing the bed and playing with toy firetrucks in 2001. Zito threw 90. I know this. I will obtain indisputable confirmation! I must!”

So I scoured the Internet for streamable A’s games from that season. Possibly “scoured” is a bit hyperbolic – more precisely, I spent 8-10 minutes Googling various combinations of “a’s”, “stream”, “download”, “broadcast”, and “2001”.

In any event, I wound up at the mlb.com’s “Baseball’s Best” page, where, you guessed it, one of the darkest days in Oakland Athletics history can be re-lived for a mere $2.95.

I was torn.

On one hand, how could I justify bringing such blasphemous filth into my home? Watching Spankenstein 6 on your iPod in church on Easter is probably more cosmically acceptable than paying for the privilege of watching Derek Jeter execute that ninny-flip to home plate. Just thinking about it produces a stabbing pain in my abdomen.

On the other hand, faith in the integrity of my memory was at stake. I mean, if I was wrong about this, what else was I misremembering? Have I subconsciously burnished boatloads of past mediocrities such that they appear more palatable to my present self?

Did I really encounter Joe Don Baker on an escalator at Harrah’s? Did I really hitch hike to Chicago just to hear Muddy Waters play? (wait, that’s a Chuck Berry song … shit)

Whatever. The Rashoman thicket is endless and bewildering. I really did not want to go down that path. And anyway, I just needed to watch a few innings of Zito, grab a screen a screen shot or three, and wash my hands of the whole experience (that is, after I penned an epic, mocking post belittling your foolish assertions).

So I choked down the vomit welling in my throat, bought the 24 hour pass, and queued up the game.

Except it wasn’t the normal television feed. It was King, Korach, and Fosse on audio, with no graphics. No radar readings. Dead end.

I considered flinging my laptop out the window and/or bellowing obscenities at some hapless mlb.com customer service representative, but ultimately I settled on a single primal scream and a semi-cathartic session of on-line Scrabble.

Now I’m left with no choice but to accept the cartoonish unreliability of my recollections. I may or may not have eaten buttered hamburger buns for lunch yesterday. Maybe I talked to a co-worker about George Jones this morning, but then again who knows, maybe it was really George Will. Uncertainty pervades. Everything is in disarray. And that $2.95 check card transaction is a permanent stain on my record; if there is a God, and heaven exists, that’s definitely going to come up when I reach the end of the line.

This is all your fault.

by 74mk on Nov 20, 2008 4:52 PM PST to parent up   2 recs

here at Athletics nation

It is always 1974. There is always Jefferson Airplane on the radio, and we are always in the bush. You can never escape the bush.

by jdr on Nov 20, 2008 5:44 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Ha!

It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver

by WaddellCanseco on Nov 20, 2008 7:47 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Holy crap!

I’m not even born yet.

99 MPH with as much control as a deflating balloon - CurveballKing on H-Rod

by Scottbass on Nov 21, 2008 12:25 AM PST to parent up   0 recs

I read the second sentence

and I knew it was you.

Not exactly sure how to feel about that.

I'm here to talk about the past.

by 67MARQUEZ on Nov 20, 2008 6:17 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

You should watch it

They may comment on his velocity…

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Nov 20, 2008 6:34 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

I watched the first at-bat (Knoblauch, all fastballs). Bill King, God love him, didn’t mention velocity once.

I’d forgotten Tejada booted that ball.

In any case, that was all I could stomach.

by 74mk on Nov 20, 2008 6:55 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Tough one to answer

There were great years that we won it all, but there were great years where we fell short, but was full of excitement. ‘71 was a great year, ’75 was good but you could see the dynasty falling apart. Even 1976 was good, we almost pulled it off. That year was the year of the steal, the A’s broke the record for stolen bases passing the Washington Senators 50 year old record. Although it was a strike shortened year 1981 was my favorite. The team was on a constant roll until the stinkin strike. 11-0 to start the season pushing the div champs of 1980, the Royals 10 games back by may. Every game was just pure excitement, Billy Martin pulled out every stop to win, and win we did. Great pitching, hitting and SPEED. The strike killed the team, they fell in the playoffs against N.Y. Then the pitching fell apart in ’82. many people blame Billy for overworking the staff in 1980 and 81. Almost every game was a complete game.
I have spoken to some of the starters from those years, and they told me it was the strike that did them in. None of them threw during the strike to keep in shape. Bummer,

Stomp,em, stomp the piss out of em.Then pound the budweiser after the game. Joe Schultz Seattle Piolts Mgr 1969

by billyball1981 on Nov 20, 2008 6:32 PM PST   0 recs

It isn't fair to compare 1989 versus 1929

Humans have come a long way in such a short time period & Baseball has evolved right along with it.

We cannot project what Babe Ruth would be like if he was born in 1965 or 1985.

While I agree with PT that the 1989 team would destroy the 1929 team, I don’t think it’s fair to the 1929 team to make that comparison.

To me it’d be like comparing a product now to a product form yesteryear, such as televisions, or cars. If you consider our body as our product, we have evolved methods to reach higher performance that was not conceivable in 1929.

For these very same reasons, I like to put Baseball in historical perspective in this sort of way:
Babe Ruth is the greatest Baseball player ever due to how ridiculous his numbers are compared to the era in which he played. This is not arguing statistics, which are protected too carefully. Greatness is subjective. Bonds can hit as many home runs as he wants, I will never consider him a greater player than Ruth, Aaron or Mays in historical perspective.

Borrowing from “Off the Kuff: Barry vs the Babe”:
“Someone on ESPN.com (it might have been Rob Neyer, I can’t find it any more) once determined that if every season had been as homer-happy as 1998 and Ruth had hit them at the same relative rate to the rest of the league, he’d have wound up with over 2000 for his career. He really was a giant among Lilliputians in his time.”

Nobody has had the impact of Babe Ruth in comparison to the era they played. Ruth homered in 8.5% of his at bats, which was such a ridiculous number back than. Only one man holds a higher percentage, Mark McGwire, and look how many years passed between Ruth and Mac. What Mac accomplished was amazing, albeit now tarnished, but even before the steroids controversy, he was not obliterating his era the same as Ruth.

In conclusion, Baseball players have never been as athletic or great at playing the game as they are today, but this should not tarnish the legacy of Legends past. History should be analyzed and compared very carefully with the best judge of greatness to judge those against their peers of the time.

by BillMoresi on Nov 21, 2008 2:00 PM PST   0 recs

Sigh, not only does PT get credit for my point but a fun discussion between me and Scotbass makes someone mad

If you reject my premise, fine (because there is no such thing as time travel). I find flaws with your premise too. Certainly, no one will ever out-homer entire teams again; it doesn’t automatically follow that Ruth is the best slugger there will ever be/has ever been. He was just the first (which, of course, is worth something).

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson

by nevermoor on Nov 21, 2008 2:33 PM PST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Official Giambi Press Release
Small
Is It Just Me Or Am I The Only One Who Still Wants An Apology?
Dsc00171_small
DLD 1/05/09: Giambi Preparation Edition
Oakland_20athletics_20mouse_20pad_small
Giambi Returns to A's: Open Thread
Johnjaha_small
Rays to Get Burrell at 2 yrs/16 mil?

Recent FanPosts

Small
Why I Don't Want To Change What We Have Now.
Small
Why Billy should trade Holliday
Depaulbluedemons_small
AN Community Prospect List - #49
Small
A's Rumors: Abreu, Cabrera, Barton
Bubsanddinks_small
MLB Network: A Review (so far)
Oakland_20athletics_20mouse_20pad_small
Tony D returns to the Sacramento River Cats
Small
Rosterbation: Can't hit lefties
Angus_mckay_small
Simon and Garfunkel on the A's winter moves
Small
Eric Chavez in 2009

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Managers

Oakland_small Blez

Banana_album_041907_small monkeyball

08-_the_author_small 67MARQUEZ

Baseball_small baseballgirl

Goat_small Nico

As_kings_cal_small louismg

Editors

Countdown_small Taj Adib

Recent_family_ones_july__07_091_small notsellingjeans

Authors

The_baby_small salb918

Super_grover_small grover