- 04/19/2011, 12:22PM ET
[?] said 04/19, 12:22 PM
I trust that you will not cheat in our throwdown or run away like the pretenders that are currently on the leaderboard. I remember you being a solid throwdowner so here I offer you a topic. I got this idea from another throwdown where somebody dropped so ancient has been on me and all of a sudden, my choice was irrelevant.
Baseball didn't allow people of race to play back then. The alos didn't have night games and there weren't as many teams or players. The game was also not international. Plus, human beings evolve as time moves forward and naturally become better at physical things. I'm tired of reading every top whatever list in sports and it always being cluttered with players that old folk talk about as if they were the greatest thing ever, but the truth is Lou Gehrig couldn't wear Pujols' jersey.
I would love the hear your viewpoint because I respect your opinion.
[The] Coach said 04/20, 08:00 AM
If you want to make a case that today's players are better athletes it would be hard to argue that point. With all of the science and advances in nutrition, training methods and medicine available to the modern athlete the scales tip heavily in their favor. You are grossly mistaken to say that modern athletes are better "baseball players." Today's players aren't nearly as fundamentally sound as their predecessors. There are several reasons that this is so and they can be seen at your local little league park.
The level of play for young players has significantly fallen since even my day. The reason is quite simple, kids don't play the game nearly as much. We played baseball every single warm day. We'd get off the bus and rush home at a dead run to change our "school clothes" in order to make it to the park in time to get on a team. Today's kids play video games and have a myriad of other sports to choose from.
Baseball is a game of fine mechanics. Repetition is key and young pro ball players haven't spent nearly the time playing baseball that the players of yore spent honing their craft.
The Gehrig/Pujols comment is going to cost you BTW
[The] Coach said 04/21, 09:29 AM
Why would you call me out and then forfeit your turn?
I'm going to use your Gehrig/Pujols comment to make a case for the Pre-1950 era players.
Gehrig played 2130 consecutive games without modern medicine, cortisone, steroids, HGH, etc.
He played in larger ball parks not designed for the home run and used a smaller glove. He traveled to away games via train not chartered jets and dressed in nasty clubhouses without AC. Pujols enjoys modern nutrition, medicine, science, trainers, transportation and accommodations so we should expect his numbers to be amazingly better right? Let's take a look.
Season averages (based on 162 games):
597 AB, 197 Hits, 123 Runs, 42 HR, 128 RBI, .330 AVG, .424 OBP, .622 SLG%, 1.047 OPS, 171 OPS+
599 AB, 204 Hits, 141 Runs, 37 HR, 149 RBI, .340 AVG, .447 OBP, .632 SLG%, 1.080 OPS,
Gehrig leads Pujols in every category accept HRs which in and of themselves are not as important as Runs, and RBI. Consider the fact that Gehrig hit "BEHIND" the most prolific power hitter of his or any time and his numbers are even more incredible. How many RBI did Ruth leave on the table and Ruth wasn't batting Lou in for those runs.
[The] Coach said 04/22, 09:00 PM
I am putting up something in my third argument simply to get this thing taken off the board and moved to completed. Too bad, the topic was good and their was plenty to debate if my opponent was willing to take the time.
I can't see any reason to waste my time putting together an argument so I'll just let my first two ride on their own merit!
Sorry folks, this will be out of your hair in 24 hours!
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia