• Welcome Guest
Chicago White Sox

Welcome to the Chicago White Sox.
Before posting, please review our Message Board Guidelines

    • Peavy is ready to go.
  • 3/3/12
  • Stat_Boy

Yeah I mean baseball is probably the only major US sport that has a decent translation from the past to present.

You can't compare football or basketball eras.

Regardless though, people have to accept that some of these players that "dominated" the game were not only playing with weaker competition, but were the beneficiary of years and years of fabricated stories abou them.

Have you heard the laundry list of Wilt Chamberlains accomplishments?

  • Reply to this Message
  • 3/5/12
  • ceb48

Your examples, with the exception of Ramirez,Vlad, Martinez, Ortiz, and Cano,are garbage compared to Mays, Aaron, Clemente, Rose,Stargell, Parker, Frank Robinson, Koufax, Drysdale, Horlen, John, Tony Perez, Bench,and so many more.

People playing in the parks and streets as kids in America, basically the 50's through the '70's, produced the best baseball players due to constant repetition. Today's kids have "PLAYDATES". Y-e-e-c-h! I don't think much of the solid fundamentals of Latin ballplayers today. Basically, they're freeswingers who have to be taught the game instead of being anywhere near ready for the bigs.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 3/5/12
  • baines03

your posts get more and more ridiculous by the minute. thank-you.

and way to completely ignore the fact that your "right way" statistics that you seem to follow don't even back up your own argument.


Edited 3/5/12   by  baines03
  • Reply to this Message
  • 3/5/12
  • ceb48

Everything mentioned is the truth. We like to think that athletes get better with every decade, but such is not the case. They are stronger, but such does not necessarily help in baseball or basketball if the rules on fundamentals are enforced. I do grant that football players have an advantage today over years past. However, I think the '70's Steelers and early '90's Cowboys with Smith, Aikman, and those lines would have an easy time of it today.

I'll give Peavy 8-11 wins, around as many losses, and a 4.5-4.75 ERA. $18M down the crapper instead of feeding the farm system for the future.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 3/5/12
  • ceb48

You can't think that today's star players are even in the same class as those from the 60's-80's! I'll grant that shortstops and second basemen were pretty much banjo hitters back then. However, the best teams from those eras, even the ones that didn't make it to a WS, would be shooins for a title today. Every ground ball and pop fly is an adventure nowadays. A 425 foot HR is considered a tape measure shot, whereas Mantle, Dimaggio (50's), Stargell, Mays, and so many more would have flies caught at the 440-460' marks. Even during HR Derbies today, balls rarely travel that far...and don't tell me that the pitchers lobbed them up there because of the spacious gaps. I know that it hurts to realize that the quality of MLB play has deteriorated, but it has.

Peavy is a lock for 8-11 wins, about as many losses, and a 4.5-4.75 ERA. Not bad for $18M, huh?

  • Reply to this Message
  • 3/5/12
  • baines03

"Peavy is a lock for 8-11 wins, about as many losses, and a 4.5-4.75 ERA. Not bad for $18M, huh?"
--
first off, what the f are you even talking about? when did i mention peavy and his contract?

"You can't think that today's star players are even in the same class as those from the 60's-80's!"
---
every generation has its stars. don't glamorize the era you grew up watching, it's short-sided. you're telling me stars of the 80s would be able to handle Pedro Martinez's 95 mph fastball followed by his 85 mph changeup? or 70s stars would easily handle greg maddux' pin point control? no.

"However, the best teams from those eras, even the ones that didn't make it to a WS, would be shooins for a title today."
-----
first off, there were less teams & free agency wasn't even allowed. thus, there was a more concentration of talent.

also, instead of having to face a LOOGY, mcovey got to face the starter for the 4th time. or instead of having to face mariano rivera, mantle got to face early winn for the 200th time of his career. why make declarative statements like that? it's comparing apples to oranges.

it is a proven fact that athletes are bigger, stronger, and faster today. no one is arguing the star-power and athleticism of past athletes. there will always be freakish outliers like gherig, mantle, mays, kofax, etc for every generation. this generation has guys like pujols & a-rod. previous had bonds & griffey. the previous to that had henderson & george brett & mike schmidt, etc.


Edited 3/5/12   by  baines03
  • Reply to this Message
Powered by Mzinga