Legends vs. Modern Players - Page 2 - Baseball Forum - MLB Forum - Fantasy & College Baseball Forums
View Poll Results: Who wins?
Legends 6 40.00%
Modern Players 9 60.00%
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-13-2009, 12:45 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,339
                     
And we pitch just as good and hit even better than they did.
The Guru is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-13-2009, 12:57 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,097
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schizophrenic View Post
Hmmmmmm....I thought that I read differently. However, there is still fact about the bigger field and changes to the game.
Moving the mound back was the last change to the dimensions of the diamond itself.

Ballparks have been about the same in size from the 1950s forward. In fact, before that, ballparks were either incredibly big or incredibly small... and, in reality, they haven't changed all that much at all.
Domenic is offline  
post #13 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-13-2009, 01:01 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,339
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schizophrenic View Post
Hmmmmmm....I thought that I read differently. However, there is still fact about the bigger field and changes to the game.
Fields were the same size, just had different dimensions or were shaped oddly
The Guru is offline  
 
post #14 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-14-2009, 12:55 PM
Little Leaguer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Meaford ON Canada
Posts: 29
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guru View Post
And we pitch just as good and hit even better than they did.
Do the basic math. You can't have it both ways. If "we pitch just as good", we CAN'T "hit even better".
If league-wide average pitching is just as good,
then league-wide average hitting stats can only be
equal to the past as well.
If today's hitting is better, then today's pitching
isn't as good.
It ain't rocket surgery.
robmik43 is offline  
post #15 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-14-2009, 01:40 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,339
                     
We have at least 5-10 players who hit 40+ HR, and at least 5-10 players who hit .330+ which makes us just as good if not better. Back then each team had one good hitter(unless your the Yankees) now we have 2-4 on every team. You put Roger Clemens up against the old players and he will dominate enough for us to win.
The Guru is offline  
post #16 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-14-2009, 02:20 PM
Little Leaguer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Meaford ON Canada
Posts: 29
                     
Your "arguments" are abject nonsense. The old teams only had one good hitter except for the Yankees ? Get real.
There were many, many old Dodger, Reds, Red Sox, Giants, Athletics and so many other teams that had awesome hitters up and down the lineup.

You have pretty much no knowledge of baseball today, or the history of baseball, and your incessantly uneducated responses make this forum a complete waste of time.
robmik43 is offline  
post #17 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-14-2009, 02:47 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,339
                     
We are talking 1880-1940 vs 1941-Present.

Most of those teams were good more recently.

The major players in the early were Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle. All Yankees. There were others but not as many huge stars as we have now.
The Guru is offline  
post #18 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-14-2009, 02:53 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,097
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by robmik43 View Post
Do the basic math. You can't have it both ways. If "we pitch just as good", we CAN'T "hit even better".
If league-wide average pitching is just as good,
then league-wide average hitting stats can only be
equal to the past as well.
If today's hitting is better, then today's pitching
isn't as good.
It ain't rocket surgery.
In a team format, this can certainly work out, and, to me, that is the topic at-hand.

The best pitchers in the game today may be better than the top pitcher in the game in, say, 1968. Due to expansion and what-not, the league-wide talent pool may be thinner - but that would have no impact whatsoever on the best of the best, beyond, perhaps, artificially inflating their numbers a bit.

Athletes today have huge advantages in nutrition and weight-training, as well as surgery and the like. If we somehow transplanted a line-up into a neutral era, with players in their primes, the modern day players would undoubtedly be more "athletic" than the legends.

If this is a debate about an all-time team (1880 through 1980) against a modern team (1981 to present), than the all-time team would probably win. If we created an "era by era" league of teams, I believe the modern players would have huge advantages that could put them over.
Domenic is offline  
post #19 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-14-2009, 03:34 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,339
                     
Yeah we are a lot healthier. I mean the one of the best players in the past, Babe Ruth, was most of the least conditioned athletes ever.
The Guru is offline  
post #20 of 41 (permalink) Old 04-14-2009, 03:35 PM
Little Leaguer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Meaford ON Canada
Posts: 29
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guru View Post
We are talking 1880-1940 vs 1941-Present.
Most of those teams were good more recently.
The major players in the early were Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle. All Yankees. There were others but not as many huge stars as we have now.
What are you talking about ?
When did you make the decision we are talking about 1880-1940
vs. 1941-present ?
You have Gehrig and Ruth from the 20's and 30's lumped in with Mantle from the 50's and 60's..these are your players from what you call "the early ?"
Again you need some knowledge of baseball history to discuss baseball history.
The 50's Dodgers had Snider, Hodges, Campanella, Robinson and Furillo in the lineup at the same time.
The Big Red Machine of the 70's had Rose, Bench, Morgan and Perez, and a couple of others like Foster and Griffey Sr.
The Giants of the early 60's had Mays, McCovey and Cepeda at the same time. The Braves of the late 50's had Aaron, Mathews and Adcock at the same time.
Early 40's Red Sox : Jimmie Foxx, Joe Cronin, Bobby Doerr, and Ted Williams.
Athletics '29 : Foxx, Al Simmons, Mule Haas, Sammy Hale-they beat the "Murderers'Row" Yankees of Ruth,Gehrig, Muesel, Combs etc. by 18 games.

No team today puts up 3 or 4 hitters like these examples.
The list could go on and on with dozens of examples of three or more top-notch hitters on the better teams. The last truly "modern" team to have three guys all hit for big averages was the '93 Jays.
robmik43 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Baseball Forum - MLB Forum - Fantasy & College Baseball Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may 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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome