[ About ]
[ Batspeed Research ]
[ Swing Mechanics ]
[ Truisms and Fallacies ]
[ Discussion Board ]
[ Video ]
[ Other Resources ]
[ Contact Us ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hitters of the past.


Posted by: Graylon (g_dunc@hotmail.com) on Sat Sep 6 16:51:57 2008


> > Greetings again Tim:
> >
> > You said in one of your postings that we should forget about steroids since both pitchers and hitters used them so they cancelled out each other. How does one aging pitcher's use cancel out the performances of probably dozens of every day players who were taking performance
> > enhancing drugs. More to the point how does it cancel out those incredible home run figures (and other stats) that have been oohed and ahaed over, major league baseball having once promoted the impression that today's players are the super players you have portrayed. On July 27, 07, under the Mickey Mantle topic posting I dealt with this issue, by referring to an article in the Sports Illustrated that I referred you to. You should look it up ad read it.
> >
> > When Williams passed, an elderly sports writer wrote that Williams was the greatest hitter 40 years ago, and 40 years from now will still be the greatest hitter who ever lived. (Sports writers do not refer to Williams as you have, "If Ted Williams is the greatest hitter of the past...") Even if a hitter in the future came along who was better than Williams how would we know? Baseball has been bent so far out of shape by money hungry owners and players that cheating the public has beome so commonplace that the federal government has had to step in. Football with its parity has replaced baseball as America's top sport. It is no exaggeration to say that ballparks are juiced (made smaller), balls are juiced (one old timer maintained they have to be juiced, otherwise how could small players hit such long home runs to the opposite field), the bats are juiced (small whippy breakaway bats), and the players are juiced (no explanation necessary). I would add that players wallets are juiced. Many of today's players are multi-millionaires with guarantee contracts. They can afford to take chances finding and using undectable performance enhancing drugs. They are also juiced with a present day powerful corrupt union that continually places roadblocks to keep players from being exposed as users and lawbreakers. They are also jucied with a foot dragging publicity seeking government agency.
> >
> > You can't compare players of the past with present day players for all of the reasons above. What comes close as a valid comparison is comparing cotemparies. Besides, no one in this thread has stated how far back the past is. I would like to draw a line at 1990 and call everything after that: the drug era. (A strong cse could be made for the strike year 1994) What would be wrong with that? There is a precedent. 1900 has been called the modern era and previous records were ignored.
> >
> > I think it is widely known that Mays is the godfather of Bonds and would be very reluctant to say anything that would minimize Bond's baseball accomplishments. (Has anyone asked him whether he thought those accomplishments were the result of drug usage?)
> >
> > If anyone is looking for an old timer who doesn't share Tim's view of today's players look no further than Mike Schmidt. A few years ago Schmidt made the observation that if he played under present day conditions that he could have hit 70 home runs (presumably without juicing up).
> >
> > Then there is a pitcher who played with Roger Maris who said: they made the ball parks smaller and no one could break Roger's home run record until steroids came along.
> >
> > Tim seemed to be preoccupied with the physical aspects of hitting. What about the mental part? Williams said that half of hitting is above the neck. I'm sure he meant that applied to pitching as well as hitting. (Williams was known as pointing out how dumb pitchers were.) At this point I am closing down temporarily, and leaving this thought: compared to Tim's super players of the present how do players of the past stack up mentally? That of course leaves a lot of room for speculation.
>
> Roger Clemens wasn't the only pitcher on the Mitchel Report. In fact steriod use is believed to be much more prevalent among pitchers than hitters. Pitchers get injured more frequently and remeber that steriod are used mainly to heal from injuries and recover more quickly from workouts. Anyway it wasn't just one aging pitcher.
>
> "When Williams passed, an elderly sports writer wrote that Williams was the greatest hitter 40 years ago, and 40 years from now will still be the greatest hitter who ever lived. (Sports writers do not refer to Williams as you have, "If Ted Williams is the greatest hitter of the past...")"
>
> Yeah an elderly sports writer over romanticizing the past just like you guys are doing on this disscussion board. Ted Williams is the greatest hitter of the past not of all time. Again I'd take Pujols and his mechanically much more quiet and efficient swing than Williams struggling just to swing the bat. And 50 years from now their is going to be a hitter better than Pujols and I'll accept that.
>
> "I would add that players wallets are juiced. Many of today's players are multi-millionaires with guarantee contracts."
>
> Yeah guys today don't have to take second jobs to support their families like they did back in the day. So how can you honestly believe that guys who might have taken a light batting practice right before the game, be better than guys who spend three to four hours (the good players anyway) in preparation. With all the film study and scouting reports.
>
> That leads me to your point about the mental aspect. How could guys in the past, with no decent film, limited (if any) scouting reports, somehow have been better mentally than the players of today who have all sorts of information before they even get to the ballpark?
>
> Ballparks are juiced? Ebbets Field was 297ft down the right field line. If Justin Morneau got to play in a ballpark like that he'd hit 60 HRs a year.
>
> The Bats are Juiced? Guys today are smart enough to realize that they don't need to carry 44oz tree trunks to the plate to hit the ball 297ft.
>
> Schmidt said he could easily have hit 70hr a year in today's game? Yeah sure, despite the fact that he was a career .267 hitter and usually struck out 100 times a year and had only 3 seasons of 40+ HR in his career.
>
> "Then there is a pitcher who played with Roger Maris who said: they made the ball parks smaller and no one could break Roger's home run record until steroids came along."
>
> Yeah of course a contemporary of Maris would say that. Old guys love to romanticize the past. It's reasonable to assume that Ryan Howard is clean. Once he quiet downs that backswing of his he'll break Maris's record and Maris broke that record when he was a Yankee, hitting left handed, and having the short porch in right field.
>
> As far as I'm concerned you guys are just a bunch of old white guys expressing deep seeded racist sentiments. Angry by the fact that today's elite hitters (Pujols, A-Rod, Manny, Guerrero) are all from the Dominican Republic (i.e. not white).
>
>
> Williams pointed out how dumb pitchers were? Apparently he was even dumber because he didn't exactly hit over 0.500 in his career.


Tim,

Settle down and don't let your huggies get in a bunch. I don't care what nationality a player is, if he can hit , he can hit. I personally think Bonds is probably the best hitter of this era. But what you fail to realize is that most of todays hitters emulate hitters of the past, just like my kid tries to emulate hitters of today. Hopefully you can improve a little with each generation.

To say that Ted Williams didn't exactly hit .500 is a stupid statement. Along with your racially motivated statements.

Graylon


Followups:

Post a followup:
Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Text:

Anti-Spambot Question:
Three strikes is an _____________?
   Homerun
   Out
   Stolen base
   Touchdown

   
[   SiteMap   ]