Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabe
That's kinda like saying Mike Cameron was better than either one because he hit 4 in one game and had a 5th caught at the fence.
|
Where in my post did I say one was better than the other? I specifically quoted and responded to TedZ's post about Cobb's batting grip and how he didn't hit many home runs, yet there is recorded proof that at least once in his career he was somewhat prolific in hitting home runs, which begs the question of if he just chose not to swing for the fences all the time like Ruth. For a hitter as good as Cobb, I would argue that him suddenly putting on such a power hitting display was more than just a fluke. Also that fact that during the height of the deadball era he could get the Triple Crown shows he could hold his own against others in the league as far as hitting home runs.
If anything, I was merely pointing out how Cobb and Ruth, though contemporaries, were decidedly different as hitters. And a lot of that may have had to do with choice as opposed to straight-up hitting ability.
And what the heck does Cameron have to do with any of this? He isn't even a pre-war player, which is the era this question is about. You totally did not understand the gist and purpose of my post, and made a bad assumption.