Posted By:
John Kalafarski I was born in 1945 and when I was a kid the standard answer to who was the greatest ballplayer of all time was Ty Cobb. I think most of us are aware of the famous quote by Cobb about what he thought about Ruth (I think at the time of his death). The gist of it was that he was a great guy ("the most unaffected man I ever met") but he didn't approve of the style of play he brought to the game: the game should be played inside the fences with more nuance Cobb felt.
If is one of the favorite words used by fans of all sports. I'd like to come to the Mick's defense here. If Joe D hadn't called him of that flyball and Mick hadn't veered off and run into the sprinkler or drain or whatever it was that didn't belong there, who knows what he would have done. Of course, hanging out with Billy Martin didn't help.
Another if I'd like to bring up are the five lost years of Ted Williams. What would his boxscore look like. Also, how many homers would he have with that short right field in Yankee Stadium to shoot at for half of every season? Or if he was a Tiger (he loved hitting in that field).
Lastly, I'd like to say a few words about Roger Clemens. He is simply not as good as Koufax or Pedro, no matter how many years he can go on winning games. Talent and longevity are two different things. We know from reading about the days of Cy Young that he was not as good as Walter, Matty, or Alex to name three. I would compare Roger and Cy in that they were both blessed with a very long career and were able to accumulate wonderful statistics (like Rose or Aaron?). But does that make them the guy you pick first after you choose up sides in the field of dreams?