kcohen,
"In the Rizzuto v Conception debate, I find the contention that the latter played against superior competition to be highly questionable."
Really? I will ask you then, who do you think was a better Short Stop, Phil Rizzuto or Ernie Banks?
Most people would say Banks.
But, even if a guy like Banks were available to play from 1941 until 1947, he wouldn't have been allowed to because of the color of his skin. Also not likely to have been playing during those years were Latin players like Luis Aparicio, Dave Concepcion and Omar Vizquel.
Furthermore, in the five to 10 years after WW II, competition for MLB jobs was thinned because so many young, able bodied guys were in the War and were either injured or killed, thus thinning the herd as far as competition goes.
On top of that, those soldiers who did come back from the War healthy had a choice to make; become a pro baseball player and have a slight chance to make the Majors OR take advantage of the GI Bill and go to college for little to no cost. Which option do you think a lot of those guys chose?
Finally, as another person posted, the Yankees had a ban on Black players until 1955. This means they HAD a chance to sign Ernie Banks but didn't. Who do you think would have won the competition for the Short Stop job between Banks and Rizzuto?
Banks. And if that had happened then guess what would have happened to Rizzuto? He would have either been relegated to being a back up player for the Yankees, traded to another (probably lesser) team or he would have retired.
Either way, without the competition, Rizzuto was a starter for a team he probably otherwise wouldn't have been and won rings he probably otherwise wouldn't have won and gets rewared with an HOF induction because of it.
David
|