Greatness Among Us!

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by CJinPA

I agree - over the long haul let Ohtani stand on his own. That said, these can understandably be seen as cherrypicked, but comparing the first 674 and 455 and seeing the similarities is interesting, no? When I saw it, I thought so. And Ruth stopped being a pitcher around his mid-20's I believe (save a few starts here and there later in his career).

I started watching MLB baseball in the late 70's so from then to now is my frame of reference. I'm not aware of anyone comparing the two-way playing abilities of Ruth with anyone. Have there been really good hitting pitchers, sure... the most impressive in my life was Ankiel and what he was able to do but that was more him becoming a position player after the yips on the mound - so not really a comparison there.

As a hitter, I can only imagine Barry Bonds as even coming close to Ruth in his ability to change a game from the offensive side (in the mid-latter part of his career while 'enhanced').... that's another conversation altogether and not worth getting into here.

btw - I love Ruth, was lucky enough to play on the same ballfields in Trenton, NJ that he did while barnstorming. So awesome those days had to be for the common baseball fan!

https://www.trentondaily.com/babe-ru...ambers-street/

Great stuff and well said.

[packs]

Lefty O'Doul was a pitcher turned hitter and so was Joe Wood, but no one ever says things like "Ohtani is today's Joe Wood". Why not?

[akleinb611]

Because O'Doul was a mediocre pitcher, and Wood was, at best, an adequate hitter. Neither was outstanding at both skills.

Alan Kleinberger

[packs]

Originally Posted by akleinb611

Because O'Doul was a mediocre pitcher, and Wood was, at best, an adequate hitter. Neither was outstanding at both skills.

Alan Kleinberger

True, but Ohtani has won 38 games and may not pitch again after he signs his next contract.

I was only throwing Wood and O'Doul out there because people often forget about their own unique careers. Both players had to completely reinvent themselves and despite being an adequate hitter, Wood still battled his way back into the league and won a World Series in the field while he was at it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

True, but Ohtani has won 38 games and may not pitch again after he signs his next contract.

I was only throwing Wood and O'Doul out there because people often forget about their own unique careers. Both players had to completely reinvent themselves and despite being an adequate hitter, Wood still battled his way back into the league and won a World Series in the field while he was at it.

I could see a team wanting to protect a long term investment in him by not pitching him and maximizing his lifespan. He's not THAT great a pitcher -- right now 27th per Fangraphs -- and the benefit of having him likely to last longer as a day to day hitter may outweigh his value as a pitcher.

[Exhibitman]

I am with Greg on this one: let's enjoy Ohtani's great play and leave the comparisons to the HOF debate after he retires. I do have a few takes on what I'd read here.

Ruth might've kept pitching if there had been a DH at the time. From what I've read, he really enjoyed it. Playing a field position and pitching was too much. I doubt Ohtani would last more than a few seasons if he had to play two ways without the DH, unless his intensity was ratcheted way down, but that is definitely not his style (and we love his play for it). Even as a DH and pitcher, he is wearing down this year.

The old-time ballplayers had to cope with horrible conditions that today's players cannot dream of. No HVAC on the trains or the hotels, no planes, no handlers or team staff to handle luggage (Tom Seaver once reminded a young pitcher not to lug his suitcase with his pitching arm), no sports medicine to speak of, crazy training methods (no water in heat, no weights), etc. And don't forget double-headers, terrible pay, rudimentary facilities, and rotten coaching.

As far as the impact of apartheid in MLB, that is a difficult question, but it did not represent a 50% dilution of talent as has been suggested. America's Black population in 1920 was about 10% of the total population, so I doubt that populace would make MLBers at 5x the rate of other populations. The other apples to oranges issue with race is that MLB was 16 teams located in the Northeast and Midwest versus thirty teams now. The number of player slots has gone up by 87.5%. Nor do I think that Ruth or Cobb would have been relegated to the minors with an integrated game. What we would have seen most likely is what we see now: a multi-racial, multi-ethnic panorama of great players.

Pitching is the other great debate. Yes, there are a lot more pitching changes and relievers, and we see lots of heat, but I do not believe that we have evolved as a species in the last 100 years to account for the arm speed. We don't have good measures of earlier pitchers due to the tech. I watched that Nolan Ryan documentary and his 100.9 was more like 108 based on models correcting the tech. Again, I don't think the standouts of the past would have had any problems adapting to the conditions of the present, but I am not sure the 100 pitches max starters and relievers today would adapt to a more robust regime.

[jayshum]

More teams now means more pitchers who wouldn't be in the majors when there are half as many teams like when Ruth played so while Ruth generally didn't face as many different pitchers in a game, the pitchers he did face were probably generally better than the average pitcher today even if they weren't all throwing 100 back then.

It really is tough to compare raw numbers from different eras with so many variables. That's what the advanced stats try to adjust for. One example.

OPS+
Ruth 206
Ohtani 148

[DocScoot]

I could not be a bigger Ohtani fan, but one more point in defense of Ruth. Think of what pitchers were able to get away with back then when they might only use a few balls per game. The dirt, grime, scuffs, etc. that got onto those balls must have given those pitchers so many extra tricks that Ruth had to deal with. For so many reasons like that it's borderline impossible to compare players across different eras. Sure is fun to try though!

[jingram058]

Trying to debate pitching between the eras is total nonsense, no matter what "facts" or "data" or "metrics" you try to justify your arguments with. The pitching was good back then. We know it just was. The pitching is good now. It just is. What is different, and why there aren't and won't be any more .400 hitters, is starters, short relief, middle relief, long relief, situational relief, and closers. That makes it virtually impossible. Very, very unlikely at best. The OP nails it. It is stunning. In this day and age, Ohtani is an enigma. He'll never be Babe Ruth, but it doesn't matter. He's Ohtani in an era of incredibly wealthy, robotic ballplayers. Very popular and yes, a household name.

[vansaad]

I'd love to see Ohtani win the Triple Crown and a Cy Young in the same year. Would have to be considered the greatest season of all-time. And it's not as far fetched as it might seem. Ohtani is currently top 3 in each Triple Crown category and the fifth lowest odds to win the Cy Young.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by jayshum

More teams now means more pitchers who wouldn't be in the majors when there are half as many teams like when Ruth played

There are 87.5% more teams now than in 1920. And rosters are bigger. However, the US population is roughly 220% greater, the game is integrated, and players come from places other than the US.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

As far as the impact of apartheid in MLB, that is a difficult question, but it did not represent a 50% dilution of talent as has been suggested. America's Black population in 1920 was about 10% of the total population, so I doubt that populace would make MLBers at 5x the rate of other populations. The other apples to oranges issue with race is that MLB was 16 teams located in the Northeast and Midwest versus thirty teams now. The number of player slots has gone up by 87.5%. Nor do I think that Ruth or Cobb would have been relegated to the minors with an integrated game. What we would have seen most likely is what we see now: a multi-racial, multi-ethnic panorama of great players.

Not trying to pick a fight, but what % would you use? My "half" was intended to be a very, very generic representation.

[timber63401]

Originally Posted by packs

Lefty O'Doul was a pitcher turned hitter and so was Joe Wood, but no one ever says things like "Ohtani is today's Joe Wood". Why not?

Ohtani is closer to Ruth the Joe Wood. Now don't get me wrong he's no Babe Ruth and never will be, but what he's doing is pretty awesome.