Could Gehrig have handled the pressure?

[billyb]

This thread will be all speculation, but one that may have crossed everyone's mind at some point.
Could Gehrig have handle the pressure if there was no Ruth?
We all know Gehrig was more layed back, and seemed to be okay with Ruth grabbing all the attention. Ruth relished that role and even created the frenzy that surrounded him.
That seemed to allow Gehrig to go about with his career without all the spotlight he may have gotten without Ruth around.
So that raised my question. Without Ruth, would it have affected Gehrig's career, with more reporters, fans and recognition surrounding Gehrig on a daily basis?
You would say Gehrig did fine when Ruth was out of the lineup, yes, but Ruth was still on the minds of many, even when he was out of the lineup.
Now, I am not bashing Gehrig or trying to lessen his accomplishments. He was a great player. That is why this is all speculation. Gehrig's personality would not have created the same frenzy, but his spotlight would have been much brighter.
Soooo, would the humble, unassuming Gehrig, been able to handle, being on that Yankee pedestal, for his entire career??

My quick answer is yes. It would have affected his career. How much so???
What do you think?

[packs]

I doubt it. Derek Jeter wasn't exactly a flashy guy or outrageous personality and he was just fine, even today in an age where there is no privacy for most celebrities and people have instant access to almost anyone via social media.

[billyb]

Packs,
Hard to compare today ballplayer to the 30's. With television, it is a way to connect with the ball player, but in the 30's, fans hung around the ball parks more, just to get a glimpse of a ball players. That was how they interacted with them back then.
If you look at Gehrig's first year without Ruth, 1935, Gehrig's numbers dropped. In 1936, he came back, but did it take a year for Gehrig to adjust?

[packs]

I agree it's hard to compare but for different reasons. Today it is almost impossible to do what Jeter did. No controversy, no episodes, no accusations. But Jeter was still able to handle himself the way he did in the age of information and intrusion.

If he were alive today I'd imagine we would have seen an equally quiet man who played without controversy, establishing himself as a legend while looking comfortable the entire time.

In my opinion, Ruth had no bearing on the greatness of Gehrig.

[billyb]

Packs,
I agree with you, Gehrig would have been great without Ruth around. As I said, I am not bashing Gehrig at all.
I was waiting before I post this, but I feel without Ruth, Gehrig's peak years may have been higher, but in his lesser seasons (which were good for anybody else), I think they would have declined even further. Probably balancing out his career as it is today.

[1963Topps Set]

I have wondered if Gehrig would of put up his numbers on a team like the Cubs or Senators. Remember, with Ruth out of the line up pitchers would not have pitched to Gehrig like they did with Ruth in there. Regardless, if he still was able to put up the numbers without Ruth, he would of been just fine!

[rats60]

Originally Posted by billyb

Packs,
Hard to compare today ballplayer to the 30's. With television, it is a way to connect with the ball player, but in the 30's, fans hung around the ball parks more, just to get a glimpse of a ball players. That was how they interacted with them back then.
If you look at Gehrig's first year without Ruth, 1935, Gehrig's numbers dropped. In 1936, he came back, but did it take a year for Gehrig to adjust?

His numbers in 1935 were about the same as 1933 though. 1934 he had an OPS+ of 206, 2nd highest of his career. I don't think it would have hurt his numbers outside of RBIs.

[CMIZ5290]

Could similar comparisons be made between Maris and Mantle?

[1963Topps Set]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

Could similar comparisons be made between Maris and Mantle?

No.. We know Maris could not handle the spotlight.. Mantle could.. Sort of...

[clydepepper]

His Home/ Away splits say that he suffered without someone else in the spotlight:

1934 - Home - .414 ; Away- .311
1935 - Home - .281 ; Away- .372
1936- Home - .352 ; Away- .356

Perhaps the pitchers had more energy when he came up to bat in 1935- facing Ruth or DiMaggio then Gehrig was a daunting task.

Interesting how much it effected him at home.

In 1961, Maris hit .281 in 520 ABs batting third (assuming Mantle batted fourth in all these)
.186 in 70 ABs anywhere else in the order.

[the 'stache]

If you've ever watched the movie 61*, Raymond, you'd remember that the reporters were asking Maris before the start of the 1961 season if he was going after Babe Ruth's single season home run record. He was, of course, the MVP in 1960, but Maris had slumped terribly after the All Star Break.

Through July 10, 1960 (72 games), Maris hit .320 with 27 home runs and 69 RBI in 269 ABs. His OPS pre-break was 1.101. That's where he won the MVP.

The All Star Game was on July 11th.

The second half of the '60 season, July 15th to October 2nd, 64 games, Maris hit .239 with 12 home runs and 43 RBI. His OPS was .777.

I would assume that new Yankee Manager Ralph Houk put Maris lower in the lineup to start the '61 season in order to ease him into it, and try to take some of the pressure off of him, knowing full well the terrible slump he experienced in the second half of the 1960 season.

It didn't work. Though the stress would visibly take a toll on him, Maris performed best on the field when the pressure was on him.

Through May 17th, 29 games into the 1961 season, with Maris having batted 3rd, 5th and 7th in the lineup at different times, he was hitting a paltry .218 with 4 home runs and 13 RBI. He had a .703 OPS. When you combine that cold stretch with the end of his 1960 season, as of May 17th, his prior 93 games, a total of 331 at bats, Maris hit .233 with 16 home runs and 56 RBI. Hardly MVP-like.

But consider then what he did going forward. On May 19th, Roger Maris hit a home run in the first of three consecutive games. It was the start of what I consider the greatest power display in baseball history.

In his final 131 games, Roger Maris would be walked 74 times. He would hit .280. He would hit 14 doubles. Good numbers.

In 489 at bats from May 19th until the end of the 1961 season, Roger Maris would hit 57 home runs, and drive in 128 runs!

128 RBI in 132 games. And a home run every 8.58 at bats.

In 1927, when Babe Ruth hit 60 home runs, he did it in 540 at bats. That's a home run every 9 at bats. Maris beat that rate by nearly a half at bat.

But the most impressive statistic, if you ask me, about his entire 1961 season, is his strikeout rate. He struck out 67 times the entire season, against 61 home runs. But during "the run" I just mentioned, Maris hit 58 home runs, and only struck out 55 times.

Another remarkable statistic is his home run splits. He hit 30 home runs at Yankee Stadium in 1961. He hit 31 on the road.
His OPS at home was 1.001.
His road OPS was .986.
He struck out 31 times in 280 at bats at home.
He struck out 36 times in 319 at bats on the road.

Maris was consistent no matter where he played. He could hit the ball out of any park in the Majors, and he did.

[clydepepper]

Yes, I did see 61* and love it! I'm a Maris fan - especially after McGwire 'lied' to the family.

As much has Mantle suffered that year, one would think that he missed more than the 6 games he did.

In the six games with Mantle hitting behind him, Maris was 3-for-24 with 2 solo shots...not really enough games to say anything definitively - a much more telling statistic is that Maris had zero intentional walks in 1961 - which was no doubt due to Mantle hitting behind him. Ruth no doubt benefited greatly by having Gehrig following him.

That being said, Maris endured a lot more pressure in his time than Gehrig ever did. IMHO

[billyb]

This thread leads me two a second question, which may have caused a little more pressure in the era of BEFORE TV.
Before TV, my question is:
Was there more of a frenzied fan atmosphere, around the players?

The only visual contact the fans had with the players, was actually going to the games. Yes there was newspapers and magazine photos, and they could get some description and personal habits of the players through radio play by play and interviews. But without that visual, to go along with the radio information the fans received from the announcers, these images may have been built up, in their own minds, at a higher level.
We get to see the players on TV nowadays, so when we go to the games, seeing the stars in action, is sort of expected. Still admired, but nothing we have not seen before.
Before TV, going to the games, many fans were getting their first glimpse of their heroes in action. And it may have taken going to several games before they got to see their favorite player, hit that home run, or go 3 for 4 and drive in several runs.
I just think, before TV, the fans were more excited, especially, when coming in contact with some of the players. That is my opinion, what is yours?

[martingale]

Interesting topics Billy.

About Gehrig - He was undoubtedly a superstar. If there was no Ruth, I don't think he would have felt any more pressure or that his play would have been affected. Why? Because in Ruth's absence the media would have focused on somebody other than Gehrig who could fill that "celebrity" role, playing the part by providing interesting quotes and giving the reporters juicy stories to tell. For example, after Ruth left the Yankees, the media focused on DiMaggio, a rookie from San Francisco, not on Gehrig. Day after day, the papers tended to highlight DiMaggio's performance over Gehrig's.

About the era before TV - Agree with you that there was more of a frenzied fan atmosphere. I think back then, the lack of TV and the relative lack of comparable audiovisual entertainment options magnified the thrill experienced by the average fan at a baseball game. Did this translate into more pressure for the players? Hard to say, but I'm inclined to say no.

[vintagesportscollector]

RE Gehrig, I would also add that without Ruth the Yankees of that era may not have been the "Yankees" that won so many titles and garnered the attention. It still would have been New York, but quite possibly less attention, less pressure and a lower pedestal. Maybe they don't go on to have all that success and Gehrig goes on to play his career with less pressure as attention shifts/spreads to other teams. What if the Yanks didn't win any titles in the 20s and 30s? Would the pressures be a fraction of what was created from their success?

[billyb]

VintagenSports,

Not so sure there would have been less pressure on Gehrig if the Yanks were not winning as often. The fans, as I mentioned, were probably more on the frenzied side, and probably more impatient. The "bums" terminology may have been used more. The players hear that, and press to have the fans ease up on them.
I do believe the fans of the before TV era, created a bit more pressure on the players, back then, they do now. We will never know, even with all those Yankee wins, regarding the teams who finished just behind them, what kind of pressure they may have gotten from their fans, just to finish ahead of the Yanks. The Yanks probably created pressure on those teams as well as the fans of those teams.
Interesting thoughts guys.

[Runscott]

I'm not seeing anywhere in the Gehrig-era Yankees line-up where pitching around anyone was an option.

[Enfuego]

I think Lou would have performed well under any pressure. Gehrig did not come off as loud a personality as
Babe so I think any attention that came his way would have had zero effect on him and his career


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk