OK... I'm obviously in the minority here!
I had a feeling I would be in the minority, but I didn't think I'd be the only one who felt the old-timers couldn't compete in today's game!
I have an open mind here .. So let me ask these questions:
Why is baseball the only sport where guys from 100 years ago could compete today? All Olympic Sports: No way, Football: No way, Basketball: No way, etc. etc. but Baseball, yes??
Let's say Walter Johnson did throw around 100mph. I don't know of any star pitchers with just a fastball. Why would it be different for him? Yes, he could develop another pitch, but that wasn't the question. We would be taking him from 1910 with what he had then and insert him into the 2011 season.
The old-timers didn't grow up playing organized baseball from the 6 years old. They didn't play 100 games in a single little league season (or even play little league), they didn't play year round in high school and college, they were much smaller and weaker than today's players, they didn't face competition from all over the world, there wasn't anywhere near the financial incentive there is today to become a great player, the hitters didn't have to face relief specialists starting from the 6th inning, the hitters never saw a slider, etc. etc.
I believe some of the pitchers could have done OK, and of course some could have been stars (Feller, Ruth, Grove, Hubbell, etc.) but not many of the hitters.
I believe Babe Ruth probably could have been a great pitcher, but I still believe he would have batted .250 in today's game.
I'm trying to rationalize what I'm missing here!
Dan
|