[BobC]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Nate Colbert hit 5 home runs in a double header. Clearly better than Ruth...

Scott,

I don't know if you are joking or being sarcastic. I never said Ruth or Cobb was better than the other. Simply stating factual information and getting crap for it from mostly pro-Ruth people who obviously don't like any information that doesn't completely agree with their thinking. For all the crap I've gotten, I'm still waiting for an honest and logical response from at least one of the pro-Ruth people regarding the all-time best player rankings of the various managers polled in 1931. Cobb was the clear victor, with Wagner just edging out Ruth. The only response that posting got was something about it being biased and showing favoritism, like how all the not so deserving players were being put into the HOF. And yes, you were the poster that said all that.

If my memory serves me correctly, Frisch was considered the original ringleader in getting friends inducted into the HOF, and understand about LaRussa, but neither of them were included in that poll. So to make the blanket statement like you did seems a little out there, don't you think? The only potential bias I could see in that group was of McCarthy voting for Ruth as #1, and being his then current manager. And I'm still waiting to see how someone could disparage Walter Johnson's opinion of Cobb, Ruth, and Jackson, all being better players than Ruth.

Maybe they were thinking more in terms of an overall best all-around player, like what is referred to as a five-tool player today. Which could make some sense. So if the five-tools are as follows, here's how they may go:



SPEED

Cobb had 897 stolen bases over his career, which I believe still has him at #4 all-time today, to only 123 for Ruth. Cobb led the Majors in stolen bases 6 times, but also led the majors in getting caught stealing 3 times, which was a function of how often he'd try to steal. This is an easy one. - COBB



ARM STRENGTH

Hard to determine. With Ruth being a pitcher you would expect him to be able to throw well with great arm strength. That being said, I think the attribute really has more to do with making throws in the field, at which Cobb excelled. Over his career Cobb had 392 assists, putting him at #2 all-time in that category I believe. And in viewing online sites looking for the best OF arms in baseball, Cobb and Ruth both can be ranked in the Top 20 lists of all-time. In comparison, Ruth only had 204 career assists, but that is also a function of him having played a few years as a pitcher and thus having fewer opportunities to make such plays. On the the surface, based on the Assist stat alone, many might say Cobb. But because of the disparity of chances between the two, and Ruth's obvious strength as a pitcher, I think this is more of a push. - TIE



FIELDING ABILITY

Another tough one, with Ruth a very slight edge over Cobb in fielding percentage career-wise of .968 to .961. However, Cobb did play the bulk of his career in CF, normally a more defensively demanding position, whereas Ruth was mostly in RF or LF, along with being a pitcher his first few years with Boston. On a gross basis, Cobb had 271 OF errors (278 overall), which puts him about 14th on the all-time list for errors made, and not necessaarily good. Ruth meanwhile made 155 OF errors (179 overall) during his career. However, with Cobb's speed and aggression playing CF, it can expected Cobb tried to make plays on a lot more hit balls than Ruth would have, and thus a few more errors. This is borne out by the fact that Cobb had 7,195 fielding chances to only 5,535 for Ruth during their careers. And despite the big difference in total gross number of errors, their career fielding percentages were stilll only .007 apart. I can easily see Cobb making up that slight difference on the increased difficulty factor he likely had on many more plays than Ruth due to his aggressive nature, speed, and style of play. Too close otherwise, i'd call this a push also. - TIE



HITTING FOR AVERAGE

Cobb all-time highest ever career batting average of .366 and Ruth a little down the list at .342, which isn't shabby. Meanwhile, Cobb led the Majors in BA 12 times overall (and 9 times in a row at one point), and batted over .400 three times, all still major league records. Ruth only led the Majors in BA once. Cobb also finished with 4,189 hits in his career (still #2 all-time behind Rose) to 2,873 hits for Ruth. However, Ruth also had 2,062 walks in his career, leading the majors in that category in 11 different seasons. Cobb meanwhile had 1,249 walks in his career, but never once led the majors in that category. And to cover the negative side of things, Ruth had 1,330 trikeouts in his career, leading the majors in that category 5 times, while Cobb struck out only 680 times in his career, never leading the majors once. The next level is to look at their OBPs as opposed to just straight batting averages. In this case Ruth had a career OBP of .474, leading the majors in that category 10 times. Cobb's OBP was actually lower at only .433 for his career, but still having led the majors 7 times in that category. Despite Ruth having a higher OBP, the tool is called HITTING FOR AVERAGE, so I'd have to follow that and end up going with the highest batting average. - COBB



HiTTING FOR POWER

Here's where Ruth will shine. HRs all-time, 714, leading the majors in that category 12 times overall (6 in a row at one point), and came in/tied for 2nd 3 more times. That puts him at #3 on the all-time career HR total list, but still at #1 for the number of seasons leading the majors. Cobb meanwhile had only 117 HRs in his career, but still did manage to lead the Majors in that category the one year he won the Triple Crown, and surprisingly came in/tied for 2nd in another 4 seasons. In SLG and OPS Ruth shines again, with career totals of .690 and 1.164 respectively, which are both #1 all-time for MLB. Cobb has career SLG and OPS numbers of .512 and .944 respectively, which has him down around 85th and 28th on those respective all time lists after including Negro League players. Not surprisingly, Ruth also led the Majors in both SLG and OPS over 13 different seasons, which is also #1 all-time in MLB for both categories.. But not to be completely outdone, Cobb surpringly led the Majors in SLG 8 times during his career, and led in OPS 10 times, including 1925 when he broke Ruth's string of OPS titles. Cobb actually had more career Total Bases than Ruth, with 5,845 versus 5,793, but took way more ABs to do it, 11,440 versus 8,399.

Though he still wouldn't get close to Ruth, I would point out during his career Cobb had 897 steals and was caught stealing only 212 times, for a net positive steals number of 685. If you consider this the same as if 685 times he had hit a double or triple, instead of just a single or double, that would considerably improve his SLG and OPS numbers in relation to Ruth's. Even though Ruth stole 123 bases during his career, he was also caught 117 times, resulting in a net positive steals number of only 6, versus Cobb's 685 total. You might also consider adding the net positive steals numbers to their career Total Bases amounts as well for a better comparison.

And though not generally POWER type stats, I'll throw RBIs and Runs Scored in this area as well. Over his career Ruth had 2,174 Runs Scored and 2,214 RBIs, putting him tied for #4 all-time on the Runs Scored list, and #2 on the all-time RBI list (he does have Pujols closing in on his RBI spot though). He then led the Majors in Runs Scored and RBIs for 8 and 5 years, respectively. Meanwhile, Cobb in his career had 2,245 Runs Scored and 1,944 RBIs, putting him at #2 and #9 on those all-time MLB lists, respectively. And Cobb then led the Majors in Runs Scored and RBIs for 5 and 4 years, respectively.

Ruth did a lot more damage in a lot fewer fewer ABs, though Cobb more than holds his own for the period and type of ball being played during the bulk of his career when it comes to his POWER numbers. Fairly clear who still gets this category though. - RUTH


Not necessarily an exact way to do this, but throw in that Cobb also managed teams whereas Ruth ended up never doing so, and you may begin to see how this may not be so cut and dried as many may think as to who was actually better. Throw in the further complicating fact that they both split their careers playing in both the dead and live ball eras, witn Cobb's prime in the deadball era and Ruth's prime in the live ball era, after other rule changes and changes to field dimensions among oher things.

The pro-Ruth people will obviously tout his slugging and home run hitting abilities and say that and his WAR trumps everythingg else. Others may look at some of these facts and statistics I and others have listed and surmise he isn't even a 5-tool player, or that he wasn't thought of as a good enough leader and ballplayer for anyone to really want to pick him as a manager, unless it was more of a publicity stunt to increase the gate for some owner. He does have the great outlier of starting out as a fabulous pitcher before becoming a slugging phenom, but never really did them both full-time for very long like Ohtani is trying to do, and look at all the health issues he's been having. Truth is, they're both great for the specific times and circumstances during and under which they played. And instead of just talking and arguing about a single greatest pre-war player, maybe we have to finally further break down the eras for a pre-war deadball era from 1900-1920, and a pre-war live ball era from 1921-1941. Nineteenth century would/could be considered as their own deadball era then I guess. Maybe then you'll stop all this nonsense and get back to all the more important things on this forum......complaining about TPGs, AHs, card doctors, Ebay, PWCC, Probstein, rising prices, shill bidding, the Registry, AI grading, all the crappy dealers/sellers you don't like, all the crappy buyers you don't like, and anything else I've missed.

Somebody post a card please, I don't have a scanner.........