NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-10-2019, 05:04 PM
Robbie's Avatar
Robbie Robbie is offline
Rob Sl@+kin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 157
Default What if they used today's baseballs?

I was watching the All-Star Game's Home Run (and pop-up) Hitting Contest and thinking about all the home runs hit this year, including the broken bat opposite field home runs hit by skinny, injured, triple A players... and it got me thinking about how I would have liked to have seen certain players from the past in the home run contest... and how certain match-ups or scenarios from the past would have been really interesting to see using today's "super ball."

I would love to see...
Jimmie Foxx connect perfectly on a Bob Feller fastball
Josh Gibson get it all on Satchel Paige's "Bee Ball." (First 800+ foot HR?)

I am sad to say though, that Willie would not have made "The Catch" if they used this ball, because it would have been a home run!

Anyway, I want to hear from you about match-ups, scenarios, things you would like to see, or how this ball would have dramatically altered a specific play. (We know it would have changed the whole history of the sport... so for fun, let's keep it to singular games or series).
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-11-2019, 05:58 AM
glynparson's Avatar
glynparson glynparson is offline
Glyn Parson
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blandon PA
Posts: 2,184
Default

I have to laugh when some
Seem to think vintage players were better than the modern stars. Sure in every sport they got better except baseball. It’s undebatable in track, and other sports that compete against a clock or a measurable distance we have improved tremendously. Yet baseball fans still cling to the notion thy somehow the vintage players were better than those of today. Honestly it is a laughable notion. Now I prefer vintage cards but I would never believe any vintage star is truly a better athlete or player than the modern stars. . Trout would have crushed even Ruth’s numbers if they were playing in the same era.

Last edited by glynparson; 07-11-2019 at 06:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-11-2019, 06:20 AM
71buc's Avatar
71buc 71buc is offline
Mikeknapp
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Great NW
Posts: 2,658
Default

I completely agree with you.
__________________
1971 Pirates Ticket Quest:
96 of 153 regular season stubs (63%), 14 of 14 1971 ALCS, NLCS , and World Series stubs (100%)

If you have any 1971 Pirate regular season game stubs (home or away games) please let me know what have!

1971 Pirates Game used bats Collection 18/18 (100%)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-11-2019, 06:37 AM
darwinbulldog's Avatar
darwinbulldog darwinbulldog is offline
Glenn
Glen.n Sch.ey-d
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: South Florida
Posts: 3,231
Default

That's a separate issue. It was customary for people to win the Home Run Derby with 3 or 4 homers just one generation ago. Now the winners (and more than a few of the losers) are hitting 1000-2000% as many. I realize they've tweaked the format, but not by an order of magnitude.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-11-2019, 07:41 AM
asphaltman's Avatar
asphaltman asphaltman is offline
Dave Fa*st
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,305
Default

I agree that for the most part, early baseball stars would have a hard time fitting in with today's game. Ty Cobb wouldn't hit .400 today. Babe Ruth wouldn't be leading the league in home runs. I think Cobb would still likely be one of the better ball players because I think he could hit. But I think he'd be much closer to something like Chipper Jones type stats. I don't know what Babe Ruth would be if he played today besides one of the most out of shape players in the league. You also had pitchers back then throwing 300+ innings and having 25-30 complete games. That certainly contributed to the higher batting averages from the hitters as I can only imagine the pitchers would wear themselves out.

It would be interesting if you could have had a radar gun on the pitchers back then and seen exit velocity off the bats. Do we really think Walter Johnson who was thought of as one of the stronger arms was throwing anything over 90?
__________________
Dave
davidfaust904@gmail.com

Last edited by asphaltman; 07-11-2019 at 07:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-11-2019, 08:50 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 8,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asphaltman View Post
I agree that for the most part, early baseball stars would have a hard time fitting in with today's game. Ty Cobb wouldn't hit .400 today. Babe Ruth wouldn't be leading the league in home runs. I think Cobb would still likely be one of the better ball players because I think he could hit. But I think he'd be much closer to something like Chipper Jones type stats. I don't know what Babe Ruth would be if he played today besides one of the most out of shape players in the league. You also had pitchers back then throwing 300+ innings and having 25-30 complete games. That certainly contributed to the higher batting averages from the hitters as I can only imagine the pitchers would wear themselves out.

It would be interesting if you could have had a radar gun on the pitchers back then and seen exit velocity off the bats. Do we really think Walter Johnson who was thought of as one of the stronger arms was throwing anything over 90?
Since part of the energy to hit a home run comes from the pitch, doesn't that make the HR hitters like Ruth all the more impressive?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-11-2019, 02:40 PM
perezfan's Avatar
perezfan perezfan is offline
M@RK ST€!NBERG
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asphaltman View Post
I agree that for the most part, early baseball stars would have a hard time fitting in with today's game. Ty Cobb wouldn't hit .400 today. Babe Ruth wouldn't be leading the league in home runs. I think Cobb would still likely be one of the better ball players because I think he could hit. But I think he'd be much closer to something like Chipper Jones type stats. I don't know what Babe Ruth would be if he played today besides one of the most out of shape players in the league. You also had pitchers back then throwing 300+ innings and having 25-30 complete games. That certainly contributed to the higher batting averages from the hitters as I can only imagine the pitchers would wear themselves out.

It would be interesting if you could have had a radar gun on the pitchers back then and seen exit velocity off the bats. Do we really think Walter Johnson who was thought of as one of the stronger arms was throwing anything over 90?
Bob Feller was actually clocked throwing over 100 MPH. Perhaps radar guns and clocking methods have changed over the years... but regardless, he could bring it.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-12-2019, 02:39 PM
ruth_rookie's Avatar
ruth_rookie ruth_rookie is offline
“the bambino”
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Texas
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asphaltman View Post
Babe Ruth wouldn't be leading the league in home runs.

I don't know what Babe Ruth would be if he played today besides one of the most out of shape players in the league.
Heresy!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-11-2019, 09:09 AM
timn1 timn1 is offline
Tim Newcomb
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,036
Default Absolutely +1

Totally agree


Quote:
Originally Posted by glynparson View Post
I have to laugh when some
Seem to think vintage players were better than the modern stars. Sure in every sport they got better except baseball. It’s undebatable in track, and other sports that compete against a clock or a measurable distance we have improved tremendously. Yet baseball fans still cling to the notion thy somehow the vintage players were better than those of today. Honestly it is a laughable notion. Now I prefer vintage cards but I would never believe any vintage star is truly a better athlete or player than the modern stars. . Trout would have crushed even Ruth’s numbers if they were playing in the same era.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-11-2019, 09:17 AM
PolarBear's Avatar
PolarBear PolarBear is offline
Don
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glynparson View Post
I have to laugh when some
Seem to think vintage players were better than the modern stars. Sure in every sport they got better except baseball. It’s undebatable in track, and other sports that compete against a clock or a measurable distance we have improved tremendously. Yet baseball fans still cling to the notion thy somehow the vintage players were better than those of today. Honestly it is a laughable notion. Now I prefer vintage cards but I would never believe any vintage star is truly a better athlete or player than the modern stars. . Trout would have crushed even Ruth’s numbers if they were playing in the same era.

By the same token, modern players would collapse in the vintage era without modern medicine, training, nutrition, transportation, and off season rest.

There will never be an honest apples to apples comparison because the variables can't be controlled from era to era.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-11-2019, 09:33 AM
asphaltman's Avatar
asphaltman asphaltman is offline
Dave Fa*st
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,305
Default

Modern players would collapse if they had to resort to late night saloons and two packs of cigarettes a day? I'm failing to understand the perspective of how you could even remotely say you can't compare today's athletes to yesterdays?
__________________
Dave
davidfaust904@gmail.com
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-11-2019, 10:51 AM
PolarBear's Avatar
PolarBear PolarBear is offline
Don
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asphaltman View Post
Modern players would collapse if they had to resort to late night saloons and two packs of cigarettes a day? I'm failing to understand the perspective of how you could even remotely say you can't compare today's athletes to yesterdays?
I'm pretty sure all the vintage era players didn't booze it up and smoke two packs a day. Even if true, that kind of undermines your point. Imagine how much better vintage era players would be if they didn't smoke two packs a day.

As far as not being able to accurately compare modern day and vintage era athletes, I already explained it. If you don't understand, I can't help you any further.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-11-2019, 03:44 PM
packs packs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asphaltman View Post
Modern players would collapse if they had to resort to late night saloons and two packs of cigarettes a day? I'm failing to understand the perspective of how you could even remotely say you can't compare today's athletes to yesterdays?
Think about the relief pitcher of today. He would never have a roster spot on a team from the 30s. His career would never materialize because his services would have been considered useless.

Even the best starters in today's game would see their employment prospects drop when it was revealed they couldn't throw more than 100 pitches in a game. And how would they handle having to face a line up like the 27 Yankees for a third time in the same game?

Joe Wood probably tore his shoulder in half while he was pitching, so what did he do? He became an outfielder who hit close to 300 instead. How many pitchers today could do something like that? Or would even attempt to?

Last edited by packs; 07-11-2019 at 03:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-11-2019, 03:55 PM
asphaltman's Avatar
asphaltman asphaltman is offline
Dave Fa*st
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,305
Default

Picking the 27 Yankees as the bar to which today’s pitchers would fare is an obvious swayed argument. Of course most pitchers today would be run from the game pretty quickly. But that’s picking one of the best hitting teams of all time, at least statistically. But how would a Jacob Degrom handle them? I’d say at least better. How many pitchers did the 27 Yankees face that threw a mid 90s slider? How would the Yankees have handled a Randy Johnson in his prime?

We can pick whoever we want. A typical fifth starter today I would think could have 7 quality starts out of 10 pitching against the 1907 Boston Doves.
__________________
Dave
davidfaust904@gmail.com
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-11-2019, 09:55 AM
Robbie's Avatar
Robbie Robbie is offline
Rob Sl@+kin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glynparson View Post
I have to laugh when some
Seem to think vintage players were better than the modern stars. Sure in every sport they got better except baseball. It’s undebatable in track, and other sports that compete against a clock or a measurable distance we have improved tremendously. Yet baseball fans still cling to the notion thy somehow the vintage players were better than those of today. Honestly it is a laughable notion. Now I prefer vintage cards but I would never believe any vintage star is truly a better athlete or player than the modern stars. . Trout would have crushed even Ruth’s numbers if they were playing in the same era.
Hmmm... Did I say that yesterday's players were better than today's players? Is that really what my original post is about?

It's really about the BALL... and how different match-ups, scenarios, series, etc. might have looked if that ball was used.

That is why I mentioned Jimmie Foxx vs Bob Feller instead of Home Run Baker vs Justin Verlander. However, I did mention past players participating in home run hitting contests against 60 mph pitches. So, I'm sorry if it was unclear

Hey... Don't you think Mantle would have enjoyed an extra home run or 200 using this ball? Maybe hit a 700 foot Home Run?

I saw my man, Willie Stargell hit a baseball completely out of Dodger Stadium back when he was the only player to have ever done it (and he did it twice!). I would love to see him hit this ball!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-11-2019, 10:39 AM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
David Ru.dd Cycl.eback
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,466
Default

Though, to play in today's game, Cobb and Ruth would have to be living in today's world.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-11-2019, 10:47 AM
darwinbulldog's Avatar
darwinbulldog darwinbulldog is offline
Glenn
Glen.n Sch.ey-d
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: South Florida
Posts: 3,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drcy View Post
Though, to play in today's game, Cobb and Ruth would have to be living in today's world.
That's deep, man.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-11-2019, 01:15 PM
Vintageclout Vintageclout is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 516
Default Vintage Players vs. Modern

Quote:
Originally Posted by glynparson View Post
I have to laugh when some
Seem to think vintage players were better than the modern stars. Sure in every sport they got better except baseball. It’s undebatable in track, and other sports that compete against a clock or a measurable distance we have improved tremendously. Yet baseball fans still cling to the notion thy somehow the vintage players were better than those of today. Honestly it is a laughable notion. Now I prefer vintage cards but I would never believe any vintage star is truly a better athlete or player than the modern stars. . Trout would have crushed even Ruth’s numbers if they were playing in the same era.
Maybe so but make no mistake about the fact that NO PLAYER EVER could hit a baseball as far as Mickey Mantle! He hit 10 documented 500+ feet Homer’s and that doesn’t include the 2 balls he hit off of Yankee Stadium’s facade. Geometrical/Calculus formulas indicate BOTH those mammoth blasts would have achieved 650-700 feet had they not hit the facade (based on distance, height, a conservative estimated exit velocity of 110 mph and the fact that BOTH batted balls were still RISING when they hit the facade)!!! This all accomplished without any sophisticated conditioning programs, PEDs, tightly wound baseball’s, lighter bats which produce enhanced bat speed, 95-100mph velocity pitchers that result in higher exit velocity off of solid contact, etc. Mike Trout would have to bat from 2nd base to hit some balls as far as Mickey hit them!!!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-11-2019, 06:53 PM
JustinD's Avatar
JustinD JustinD is offline
Ju$tin D@v3n.por+
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Birmingham, Mi
Posts: 2,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vintageclout View Post
Maybe so but make no mistake about the fact that NO PLAYER EVER could hit a baseball as far as Mickey Mantle! He hit 10 documented 500+ feet Homer’s and that doesn’t include the 2 balls he hit off of Yankee Stadium’s facade. Geometrical/Calculus formulas indicate BOTH those mammoth blasts would have achieved 650-700 feet had they not hit the facade (based on distance, height, a conservative estimated exit velocity of 110 mph and the fact that BOTH batted balls were still RISING when they hit the facade)!!! This all accomplished without any sophisticated conditioning programs, PEDs, tightly wound baseball’s, lighter bats which produce enhanced bat speed, 95-100mph velocity pitchers that result in higher exit velocity off of solid contact, etc. Mike Trout would have to bat from 2nd base to hit some balls as far as Mickey hit them!!!

Sorry, Mantle clean? Any Max Jacobson client was given his "muscle regeneration shots". The steroid era is a myth. The story that he received that 61' abscess from just "one" shot and it was only meth is about as believable as a North Korean press release.
__________________
- Justin D.


Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander.

Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-11-2019, 07:05 PM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is offline
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 9,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinD View Post
Sorry, Mantle clean? Any Max Jacobson client was given his "muscle regeneration shots". The steroid era is a myth. The story that he received that 61' abscess from just "one" shot and it was only meth is about as believable as a North Korean press release.
Sir, how dare you. Next i bet you are going to say he also used a corked bat.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-11-2019, 07:18 PM
JustinD's Avatar
JustinD JustinD is offline
Ju$tin D@v3n.por+
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Birmingham, Mi
Posts: 2,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth View Post
Sir, how dare you. Next i bet you are going to say he also used a corked bat.
Lol
__________________
- Justin D.


Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander.

Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-12-2019, 04:31 PM
CMIZ5290 CMIZ5290 is offline
KEVIN MIZE
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: VALDOSTA, GA.
Posts: 6,301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth View Post
Sir, how dare you. Next i bet you are going to say he also used a corked bat.
what a crock of shit that you actually believe this....
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-12-2019, 10:23 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 8,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vintageclout View Post
Maybe so but make no mistake about the fact that NO PLAYER EVER could hit a baseball as far as Mickey Mantle! He hit 10 documented 500+ feet Homer’s and that doesn’t include the 2 balls he hit off of Yankee Stadium’s facade. Geometrical/Calculus formulas indicate BOTH those mammoth blasts would have achieved 650-700 feet had they not hit the facade (based on distance, height, a conservative estimated exit velocity of 110 mph and the fact that BOTH batted balls were still RISING when they hit the facade)!!! This all accomplished without any sophisticated conditioning programs, PEDs, tightly wound baseball’s, lighter bats which produce enhanced bat speed, 95-100mph velocity pitchers that result in higher exit velocity off of solid contact, etc. Mike Trout would have to bat from 2nd base to hit some balls as far as Mickey hit them!!!
Foxx hit a ball that broke a seat in the next to last row of the upper deck in left.
Gibson hit one that probably cleared the corner of the upper deck but landed in the bleachers.

In every generation there's a few players that can hit for impressive distance, but what seems to be the limit is somewhere just over 500ft.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/feats/art_hr.shtml
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-12-2019, 11:10 AM
BabyRuth's Avatar
BabyRuth BabyRuth is online now
Jim B.
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: MA
Posts: 728
Default

Seems like our old Sultan of Swat would fair quite well in any era:

"At one time Tampa had a downtown sports stadium named Plant Field, which would host Spring Training baseball games. It was here, on April 4, 1919, in a game between the Boston Red Sox and the New York Giants, that Babe Ruth hit his longest home run ever -- 587 feet."
www.RoadsideAmerica.com

Ruth came to the Wyoming Valley on October 12, to take part in an exhibition game between Hughestown and Larksville. After challenging Larksville pitcher Ernie Corkran to throw his fastest pitch over the plate, Ruth cracked what is now deemed to be the longest ball in baseball history.
The day after the exhibition game, the Associated Press gave a descriptive account of the Bambino's blast.

"The ball cleared the right field fence 400 feet from the plate by more than 40 feet and was still ascending. The ball landed on the far side of the running track of a high school athletic field in Kirby Park. Officials estimated the length at 650 feet."

According to Jenkinson, who hails from the Philadelphia area, it was the only time in Ruth's baseball career that he asked for one of his home runs to be measured. Ruth also claimed that it was the farthest ball he ever hit.

"I've personally researched more than 1,000 home runs hit by Babe Ruth and this is the only time he asked someone to measure how far it went. Immediately after he hit it, he declared it to be the farthest home run he had ever hit."
http://www.wilkes.edu/about-wilkes/c...t-homerun.aspx
__________________
Always buying Babe Ruth Cards!!!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-12-2019, 11:38 AM
Bpm0014's Avatar
Bpm0014 Bpm0014 is offline
Brendan Mullen
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,847
Default

...and for the most part, the fences were still 325 375 400 375 325 (or greater) back then.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-12-2019, 11:22 AM
samosa4u's Avatar
samosa4u samosa4u is offline
Ran-jodh Dh.ill0n
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glynparson View Post
Trout would have crushed even Ruth’s numbers if they were playing in the same era.
A lot of folks have called Trout the greatest they've ever seen, so I'm not trying to knock him here. But just remember that this guy probably eats like a king - big breakfast, then breakfast #2, protein shakes, vitamin pills, lunch, lunch #2, dinner, snacks, etc. He hurts his toe and he'll have a specialist check it out for him. He has pain in his neck, then he'll get sent to a different specialist. He starts having mental issues, then he gets sent somewhere else.

Now let's look back at Mantle's era: they ate bread, coffee (with ten packs of sugar added), hot dogs, cigarettes, beer, whiskey, more bread, etc. They didn't know what concussions or mental problems were back then. If you complained, then it was like "shut the hell up and play - are you a man or what?" Heck, even if your leg was broken, you still had to get out there and play or risk getting booted from the club.

If guys like Mantle played today - WOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
__________________
Successful transactions on Net54: Peter_Spaeth, rustywilly, esehombre, scooter729, NiceDocter, Mishu2nite, wolf441, jdeptula, mckinneyj and more!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-12-2019, 11:26 AM
packs packs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,321
Default

I guess the most surprising thing about this thread is how much people are discounting Babe Ruth's abilities. He outhit the ENTIRE LEAGUE while using the same equipment they did. Why would his skills diminish today? I would think his stats would have only skyrocketed beyond what they already were.

Last edited by packs; 07-12-2019 at 11:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-14-2019, 11:57 PM
robw1959 robw1959 is offline
Rob
Rob.ert We.ekes
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glynparson View Post
I have to laugh when some
Seem to think vintage players were better than the modern stars. Sure in every sport they got better except baseball. It’s undebatable in track, and other sports that compete against a clock or a measurable distance we have improved tremendously. Yet baseball fans still cling to the notion thy somehow the vintage players were better than those of today. Honestly it is a laughable notion. Now I prefer vintage cards but I would never believe any vintage star is truly a better athlete or player than the modern stars. . Trout would have crushed even Ruth’s numbers if they were playing in the same era.
The Babe Ruth, Mike Trout comparison is total malarkey, my friend! How many 500-foot home runs has Trout ever hit? Zero. In 1921, Babe Ruth hit at least one 500+ foot homer in every single ballpark he played in - all eight American League cities. If he didn't lose five prime years to pitching for Boston, Ruth's career home run totals would have been well over 800, despite playing out seasons of only about 154 games each instead of 162.

Now the rest of your argument has merit. Today's athletes are generally better than the vintage era athletes for two primary reasons: 1) Modern resources have allowed today's athletes to exercise more effectively and efficiently, and 2) Modern worldwide recruiting has dramatically increased the size and scope of the talent pool available to perform professionally.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-11-2019, 05:08 PM
CMIZ5290 CMIZ5290 is offline
KEVIN MIZE
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: VALDOSTA, GA.
Posts: 6,301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie View Post
I was watching the All-Star Game's Home Run (and pop-up) Hitting Contest and thinking about all the home runs hit this year, including the broken bat opposite field home runs hit by skinny, injured, triple A players... and it got me thinking about how I would have liked to have seen certain players from the past in the home run contest... and how certain match-ups or scenarios from the past would have been really interesting to see using today's "super ball."

I would love to see...
Jimmie Foxx connect perfectly on a Bob Feller fastball
Josh Gibson get it all on Satchel Paige's "Bee Ball." (First 800+ foot HR?)

I am sad to say though, that Willie would not have made "The Catch" if they used this ball, because it would have been a home run!

Anyway, I want to hear from you about match-ups, scenarios, things you would like to see, or how this ball would have dramatically altered a specific play. (We know it would have changed the whole history of the sport... so for fun, let's keep it to singular games or series).
Mantle would have easily hit 700+ home runs despite all of his injuries...

Last edited by CMIZ5290; 07-11-2019 at 05:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-11-2019, 06:25 PM
DeanH3's Avatar
DeanH3 DeanH3 is offline
D/e/@/n H/@/c/k/e/t/t
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,941
Default

Imagine how good Ruth/Gehrig/Mantle etc could be with all the modern advances today. I imagine, if Ruth played today, he'd have all the advantages that modern players enjoy. Same with modern players. If they played in Ruth's day. Would they be as good without all the modern day training techniques?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 07-11-2019, 06:35 PM
chalupacollects chalupacollects is offline
T!.m H.
Tim Hu,nt
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,345
Default

I think a interesting comparison would be to see today's hitters hit in yesterday's canyonesque ballparks and yesterday's hitters hit in todays relatively small ballparks... Polo Grounds, old Yankee Stadium, Forbes etc...
__________________
Successful B/S/T deals with asoriano, obcbobd, x2dRich2000, eyecollectvintage, RepublicaninMass, Kwikford, Oneofthree67, jfkheat, scottglevy, whitehse, GoldenAge50s, Peter Spaeth, Northviewcats, megalimey, BenitoMcNamara, Edwolf1963, mightyq, sidepocket, darwinbulldog, jasonc, jessejames, sb1, rjackson44, bobbyw8469, quinnsryche, Carter08, philliesfan and ALBB, Buythatcard and JimmyC so far.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-15-2019, 08:01 AM
eliteco3 eliteco3 is offline
member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 7
Default

Not really sure why we are comparing the eras here. Yes the baseballs are juiced now but pitching back then was nowhere near what we have now. Night and Day for sure
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
baseballs home runs



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone win the lot of 5 baseballs in PA today yanks12025 Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 29 10-23-2014 08:04 PM
Old Baseballs eastonfalcon19 Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 2 04-14-2014 07:27 PM
Anyone know about red baseballs???? Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 3 06-15-2004 11:57 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:32 AM.


ebay GSB