Perception of pre war baseball players vs other sports

[RCMcKenzie]

In a playoff post-game show, Frank Thomas laughed about having never heard of Home Run Baker, and they all laughed with him.

I think the only people that know about Hans Lobert, Eddie Collins and Old Eagle Eye are the people that read this board.

People know Aaron Judge and Kris Bryant and Altuve and those guys, just like the other sports.

[Snowman]

I was just thinking about this exact topic yesterday. I think the disparity in large part can be explained by how likely it is that collectors believe athletes from that era would fare in today's game in each of their respective sports.

Baseball is quite different from other mainstream sports in that you don't really have to be a great athlete to be a great player. That is to say you don't have to be able to run fast, jump high, have a quick first step, etc. Although it certainly helps. You have to be a good athlete to be a good center fielder, shortstop, or second baseman, but you certainly don't have to be an athlete to be a great pitcher or hitter. Babe Ruth wasn't going to win any foot races, and Bartolo Colon isn't going to be dunking any basketballs anytime soon. Baseball is more about timing, hand-eye coordination, and game theory.

I think this allows us to envision players of the past still performing at least somewhat well in today's game (fairly or unfairly). Whereas with basketball, there isn't a single player from that era who would even start on a 4A high school squad in Los Angeles today. Even George Mikan wouldn't make the NBA today. The game has just changed so much. Basketball requires by far the most athleticism of any of the major sports, and the players from that era simply weren't athletes. Not in comparison to today's players. Anything from before the Wilt & Russell era just feels like an entirely different sport. The same is true with football before black athletes were allowed to play. Particularly with the skill positions. Obviously, for offensive linemen, it doesn't really matter, but the hobby doesn't care about them anyhow.

[jingram058]

The perception by most people is that most of the truly great baseball players were in that earlier era. Perception is reality, factually or otherwise.

[packs]

Nearly every American born male was playing baseball in the pre-war era. Whereas George Mikan was the best in his era, he was only the best of the people who actually played basketball. For you to have earned even the last spot on the last place team in the worst year of the pre-war era you would have had to beat out nearly every other American male in the country for it.

Big difference in skill level relative to era.

[SAllen2556]

I would suggest golf and boxing as counter-examples to your theory. Those sports were way more popular in 1930 than football, basketball, or hockey.

Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Gene Tunney in boxing - just to name a few, would still be considered among the all-time greats.

Ben Hogan, Bobby Jones, Walter Hagen in golf.

The popularity of the sport has more to do with it than anything.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Baseball has done a great job of glorifying its past. Where football is concerned, if it didn't happen before the dawn of the Super Bowl era, it largely doesn't exist for many fans.

[Hankphenom]

As others have said, baseball was in full flower then, football and basketball just getting started. Still, I'd say most football fans have heard of Red Grange, Bronco Nagurski, Jim Thorpe, Knute Rockne, perhaps a few others. Boxing was also in its prime, so I think the names Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Rocky Marciano, and Sugar Ray Robinson would be recognized by most sports fans today. But I couldn't name you a heavyweight or any other champion from the last 20 years. How many golfers wouldn't know Bobby Jones, Sam Snead, Ben Hogan, Babe Didrikson, Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer as greats from the past? As for Home Run Baker, that's not a good example. I'd guess Frank Thomas and the other guys could tell you that Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Ty Cobb, Honus Wagner, Jackie Robinson, Ted Williams, Joe Dimaggio, and many others were all-time baseball legends.

[raulus]

Certainly the historical popularity of the sport has a lot to do with it.

I also wonder whether rule changes have an impact, in that they fundamentally change the nature of the game. The idea being that sports with fewer changes enjoy more stability, and history seems more relatable.

Certainly changes like adding the 3-point line and the forward pass come to mind in basketball and football that fundamentally altered the game itself.

While baseball has its share of dramatic rule changes, many of them happened a loooooooong time ago, like being able to peg a runner with the ball, or a foul ball not counting as a strike.

It could be that the stasis of the game is not as important as its historical popularity. But I'm inclined to think that it could be a factor that comes into play.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by SAllen2556

I would suggest golf and boxing as counter-examples to your theory. Those sports were way more popular in 1930 than football, basketball, or hockey.

Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Gene Tunney in boxing - just to name a few, would still be considered among the all-time greats.

Ben Hogan, Bobby Jones, Walter Hagen in golf.

The popularity of the sport has more to do with it than anything.

Ben Hogan was 1950s, but you make an interesting point.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by SAllen2556

I would suggest golf and boxing as counter-examples to your theory. Those sports were way more popular in 1930 than football, basketball, or hockey.

Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Gene Tunney in boxing - just to name a few, would still be considered among the all-time greats.

Ben Hogan, Bobby Jones, Walter Hagen in golf.

The popularity of the sport has more to do with it than anything.

This is pretty much the answer. Baseball was the #1 team sport in America for a long time (America's Sport), even if nobody really cared about it anywhere else.

Way more entrenched and way more advanced (comparatively to the modern era) compared the the other burgeoning "team" sports beginning to entertain the country.

College Football was #2, but those guys basically had 2-4 year careers and were promptly forgotten about. The Coaches were more well known then most of the players at that point.

Even the Red Granges and Bronko Nagurski's were more hailed for their college careers then their pro careers. Nagurski was probably more well known during his time as a pro-wrestler, rather then an NFL player.

[puckpaul]

To me, baseball just hasnt changed that much, so the comparisons are still valid.

I know hockey pretty well, and hockey in the first twenty years was a very different sport. There was no forward passing allowed for a long time. No curved sticks. No goalie masks (not needed, with no forward passes and that equipment, pucks not raised much). But since it was popular and continuously played as the NHL since the 20’s, there is great respect for the “best” of those days as being relevant. And there is a continuous linkage over time from early superstars overlapping with subsequent generations (morenz and shore take you to Dit Clapper then to Richard and Howe and Howe gets to Gretzky!). Baseball has a similar lineage.

Football and Basketball do not have that, so those are really treated with a huge emphasis on modern.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by puckpaul

And there is a continuous linkage over time from early superstars overlapping with subsequent generations (morenz and shore take you to Dit Clapper then to Richard and Howe and Howe gets to Gretzky!). Baseball has a similar lineage.

This is it for me - "passing of the torch." Let's focus on the NYY: Babe Ruth, and then Lou Gehrig, followed by Joe D, takes you to Mickey Mantle, and then Thurmon Munson, Bucky Dent and Reggie Jackson, and then Bernie Williams and Derek Jeter & Mo.

And there are villains and good guys. I follow the Reds, and I sure know who I can't stand on the Cubs and Cardinals.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by puckpaul

To me, baseball just hasnt changed that much, so the comparisons are still valid.

I know hockey pretty well, and hockey in the first twenty years was a very different sport. There was no forward passing allowed at first for a long time! No curved sticks. No goalie masks (not needed, with no forward passes and that equipment, pucks not raised much). But since it was popular and continuously played as the NHL since the 20’s, their is great respect for the “best” of those days as being relevant. And there is a continuous linkage over time from early superstars overlapping with subsequent generations (morenz and shore take you to Dit Clapper then to Richard and Howe and Howe gets to Gretzky!). Baseball has a similar lineage.

Football and Basketball do not have that, so those are really treated with a huge emphasis on modern.

Trivia question: who was the last goalie allowed to not wear a mask in the NHL?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by jingram058

The perception by most people is that most of the truly great baseball players were in that earlier era. Perception is reality, factually or otherwise.

I don't think this is true, broadly speaking. It may be true with respect to this forum and the tendencies here to romanticize that era, but I don't think the rest of the sports world has fallen prey to those same delusions. Perhaps most will agree that Ruth is the GOAT, but I don't think you'll find that extended to pretty much anyone else. Maaaaybe Cobb, but certainly not with guys like Wagner, Hornsby, or Gehrig.

[refz]

I don’t think there’s to much more to cover here, most of which was already said. Baseball was earlier and more developed as a sport yes, and what also keeps old legends alive is trivia. Makes people possibly wonder and look up the player.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't think this is true, broadly speaking. It may be true with respect to this forum and the tendencies here to romanticize that era, but I don't think the rest of the sports world has fallen prey to those same delusions. Perhaps most will agree that Ruth is the GOAT, but I don't think you'll find that extended to pretty much anyone else. Maaaaybe Cobb, but certainly not with guys like Wagner, Hornsby, or Gehrig.

I don't think that is true. Bill James has Honus Wagner ranked #2 all time ahead of Willie Mays. Those 4 are all top 10 players all time. However, I don't think there is any doubt that the best era for baseball was 1947-1979. Williams, Musial, Jackie Robinson, Mays, Mantle, Aaron, Clemente, Koufax, Gibson, Seaver, Bench, Schmidt, etc. No other era had that depth of great players.

In the 70s you had football take over as the #1 sport with the Super Bowl, Monday Night Football and great teams in Miami, Pittsburgh, Oakland and Dallas. Then in the 80s, basketball took off with Magic, Bird and Jordan. By the strike in 1994, baseball was clearly the #3 sport after being the national pastime for so long.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by rats60

However, I don't think there is any doubt that the best era for baseball was 1947-1979. Williams, Musial, Jackie Robinson, Mays, Mantle, Aaron, Clemente, Koufax, Gibson, Seaver, Bench, Schmidt, etc. No other era had that depth of great players.

I have to beg to differ. You can take any 30 year period between, say, 1900-79, rattle off a list of contemporaneous greats and say the same thing. A lot happens in thirty years, and many legends in every era.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

I have to beg to differ. You can take any 30 year period between, say, 1900-79, rattle off a list of contemporaneous greats and say the same thing. A lot happens in thirty years, and many legends in every era.

This. For exzmple 1905-1934. Cobb Speaker Wagner Ruth Jackson Lajoie Collins Sisler Hornsby Gehrig Young Mathewson Johnson Alexander Grove shall I continue? That can't rival 47-79?

[jakebeckleyoldeagleeye]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

In a playoff post-game show, Frank Thomas laughed about having never heard of Home Run Baker, and they all laughed with him.

I think the only people that know about Hans Lobert, Eddie Collins and Old Eagle Eye are the people that read this board.

People know Aaron Judge and Kris Bryant and Altuve and those guys, just like the other sports.

He's to busy worrying about those useless supplements he push's on TV.