1919 Ruth vs 2021 Ohtani

[robw1959]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I can't love this more Frank.

I agree, we can't mince facts and romanticize that eras are compatable in any direction. While I can easily surmise that Ruth would likely be average or possibly below in todays world with the skills he had at his peak. Who knows what he would be if the same person were born on 1994 and lived a life used to today's speeds and training?

We can guess that Trout could have been a god with his current abilities in 1928, who would he have been afforded the same training and health regimen of Ruth?

Same for all sports, if I place Gretzky in the checking of the 50's can he weather to score? Could Lebron handle the violence of the 80's defense? It can be argued that Jordan could not as he could not win a championship until the officiating changed.

Era's cannot be compared front or back, so it seems like a waste to try but it happens every night in sports bars around the country as the night goes on.

We should enjoy each for what they were and be able to appreciate the past and the present as each is incomparable.

Isn't 500 feet the same today as it was back in Ruth's time? Tell me something - how is it that given today's larger talent pool and better training, diet science, etc., and a more aerodynamically designed baseball to boot, how is it that 500+ foot big league game homers are still exceedingly rare, but in 1921 Ruth hit one in every American League park his played? For anyone to say Ruth was anything even close to an average ballplayer of ANY era is to close one's mind to all evidence and deny the truth . . . that he was an absolute freak!

[molenick]

Originally Posted by robw1959

Isn't 500 feet the same today as it was back in Ruth's time? Tell me something - how is it that given today's larger talent pool and better training, diet science, etc., and a more aerodynamically designed baseball to boot, how is it that 500+ foot big league game homers are still exceedingly rare, but in 1921 Ruth hit one in every American League park his played? For anyone to say Ruth was anything even close to an average ballplayer of ANY era is to close one's mind to all evidence and deny the truth . . . that he was an absolute freak!

I don't think anyone has said that 500 feet has changed or that Ruth was an average ballplayer. I think some of us (well, maybe just me) are questioning whether Ruth actually hit as many 500+ foot home runs as has been claimed. I don't think bigger ball parks is the answer because, yes, there were some crazy long distances to center field, but some were way shorter down the lines and to the power alleys (many having been built specifically to fit into a city block).

I guess if someone was able to determine to what field he hit each home run that year, and what row each one landed in, they could work something like that out...and maybe someone has.

And I am not saying that Ruth wasn't the greatest player ever. Just that perhaps some of the quoted home run distances need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I agree with you that that despite today's larger talent pool and better training, diet science, etc., and a more aerodynamically designed baseball to boot, 500+ foot big league game homers are exceedingly rare.

That just makes me question how so many could have been hit 100 years go under worse conditions.

But if anyone could hit 500+ foot home runs in every AL park in a year, it would have been Ruth. I certainly can't say for a fact that he didn't.

[robw1959]

Originally Posted by molenick

I don't think anyone has said that 500 feet has changed or that Ruth was an average ballplayer. I think some of us (well, maybe just me) are questioning whether Ruth actually hit as many 500+ foot home runs as has been claimed. I don't think bigger ball parks is the answer because, yes, there were some crazy long distances to center field, but some were way shorter down the lines and to the power alleys (many having been built specifically to fit into a city block).

I guess if someone was able to determine to what field he hit each home run that year, and what row each one landed in, they could work something like that out...and maybe someone has.

And I am not saying that Ruth wasn't the greatest player ever. Just that perhaps some of the quoted home run distances need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I agree with you that that despite today's larger talent pool and better training, diet science, etc., and a more aerodynamically designed baseball to boot, 500+ foot big league game homers are exceedingly rare.

That just makes me question how so many could have been hit 100 years go under worse conditions.

But if anyone could hit 500+ foot home runs in every AL park in a year, it would have been Ruth. I certainly can't say for a fact that he didn't.

I have read that the original video footage still exists and that it is good enough for us to validate those 500+ foot home runs Ruth hit.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by robw1959

I have read that the original video footage still exists and that it is good enough for us to validate those 500+ foot home runs Ruth hit.

That certainly settles things then, hahahaha.

[molenick]

I would love to see video footage of Babe Ruth hitting 500+ foot home runs in every AL park in 1921 and look forward to any links or other information as to how one can view this footage.

[packs]

I think this is the book being referenced: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ye..._104_Home_Runs

The book is written by a guy associated with SABR.

[Jim65]

Home runs in 1921 and 2021 are completely different animals. In 1921 Babe Ruth hit 59 home runs, Bob Meusel and Ken Williams were tied for 2nd with 24.

Thats dominance.

[molenick]

Okay, I guess I'll stop now. I don't have the book or know the methodology used, but if this is correct, it appears that Babe Ruth was able to hit multiple home runs longer than people can hit today, even with lob pitching in Coors field.

I still feel a little skeptical that someone was able to "list every home run hit by Ruth during his career, along with estimated distances that the ball flew in each case" without relying on possibly unreliable witnesses. I don't think the newspapers of 1918 were giving the exact details of every Ruth home run and I am pretty sure no one was filming every game he played. I know if someone showed me a tree off in the distance and asked me how far away it was I would be lucky to come within 100 feet with my guess.

But, again, I can't say the book is inaccurate.

By the way, I am also a member of SABR, although I have not written any books, and I will now go back to the threads where I post cards..

And I am sorry to say, this is my only Ruth card (or 1/4 of a Ruth card).