Would the Legendary Babe Ruth Still Be a Star if He Played Today?

[JeremyW]

For baseball, I believe hand-eye coordination is the key. Even though athletes have gotten bigger, stronger & faster, there's no getting by the hand-eye coordination factor. If Babe Ruth was born in 1990, he'd be 27 years old & dominating.

[wondo]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

For baseball, I believe hand-eye coordination is the key. Even though athletes have gotten bigger, stronger & faster, there's no getting by the hand-eye coordination factor. If Babe Ruth was born in 1990, he'd be 27 years old & dominating.

And that is the argument that is often made; heck, I make it all the time, too. Except when steroids made Barry Bonds so much better.................

Has human hand / eye coordination not improved in the past century? Has it been constant for the the past 100, 200, 1000 years?

Hey, Ruth was the most dominant player in baseball history - that is a fact. I just don't believe that he would have the same impact now as when he did play.

[JeremyW]

My only response is, can you imagine Ruth on steroids instead of all the performance-de-enhancing things he's so famous for?

[JeremyW]

To answer your other question, yes, I think hand-eye is a gift that hasn't improved.

[packs]

Taking steroids made Bonds better because he could swing the bat faster, which generates more power behind the swing. If he wasn't taking the PEDs many of the home runs he hit may not have been home runs. I could take all the PEDs in the world, guess how much good it would do me? None, because I lack the necessary skills to hit a 100 MPH fastball, PEDs or not.

[Snapolit1]

I have no doubt he would be good. Very good. But Ruth was so much better than anyone else. He hit more homeruns in two seasons than any other team did. That certainly would not be the case today. Wasn't even remotely close with Bonds or anyone else. He was the equivalent of Secretariat with Ron Turcotte looking over his shoulder in the distance for any competition. Could never see that happening.

[packs]

I believe if Ruth were playing today you would see a player who challenged the 400 mark year after year, could be counted on to hit 40 homers a year, and Mike Trout would be a name they only knew in Anaheim.

[JeremyW]

Steroids made Bonds better, but he had amazing hand-eye coordination before that.

[wondo]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

To answer your other question, yes, I think hand-eye is a gift that hasn't improved.

I wonder if there is some real data on that?

[JeremyW]

John- I'm guessing that there's no research on that. It is what it is. Trout has it, Miggy Cabrera has it, all of the great ones have it. Ruth had it. Ted Wiliams had it.

[Snapolit1]

Funny, I would say anyone who makes it to AAA has amazing, one in a million, hand eye coordination. I've often though what separates the good from the truly great is more a matter of mental disposition and temperament.

[wondo]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

John- I'm guessing that there's no research on that. It is what it is. Trout has it, Miggy Cabrera has it, all of the great ones have it. Ruth had it.

I agree. I ain't got it. You could get me out with a 55 mph curve. I was watching a special on Connor Mac Gregor and all sort of reaction stats were being quoted. Again I don't deny Ruth was a near god in his time. I just am looking for some empirical argument beside, "today's players are wimps" and "players of old were so much more fundamentally sound". Always fun. I'll keep looking

[tedzan]

Too, too many stories about the Babe not taking care of his physique. Not really true. In 1925 Ruth was out of shape, his weight peaked up to 245 lbs,
and his "less than Ruthian" performance that year reflected this.

The Babe was determined to get back into shape. So, during the Winter of 1925 he started a rigorous physical training regime at a New York City gym.
And, every Winter there-after, Ruth continued this fitness program. By the start of the 1926 season, Ruth's weight was down to 205 lbs; and, in 1926
his fitness program paid him dividends.

Do the research, and you'll be amazed when you compare Ruth's performance from 1926 - 1932 with his performance during his younger years.

George Herman Ruth was the best there was circa 1915 - 1934. And, would be the best there is if he were playing the game today.






TED Z
.