ESPN Top 100

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by BobC

No, I would expect someone with intelligence, an open mind willing to listen to actual facts and logical arguments, and who can comprehend and digest differing theories and concepts in making informed decisions, to follow what I'm saying. I only go into the long "diatribes", as you call them, when faced with people that apparently can't comprehend what I'm trying to say and convey, so I try to expand things in the hope that they finally get it. Sadly, they often still don't it.

For those who don't want to read what I'm saying, that is fine with me. I usually write my posts in direct response or rebuttal to another particular poster. I didn't necessarily write my "diatribes" for everyone. But as I've pointed out, it appears the only response to my point in this particular thread is that I'm somehow wrong because of anecdotal, reasoned speculation. I'm still awaiting some factual, intelligent response from that corner in rebuttal, but doubt that's ever going to happen.

There are some members on here who operate with very small, closed minds, have pre-formed ideas that they will never sway from or think about and/or listen to logical arguments that could prove their ideas may not be as accurate or true as they think. They tend to ignore facts and logical, informed discussions, and usually conduct any debates they get into by essentially just repeating over and over how they are right, and everyone else is wrong, with no facts, data, or logical arguments ever really given to back them up. Those are the people I expect to most likely not read one of my "diatribes". For others, if nothing else, I hope they at least get some entertainment out of them, if not some information or different ways to maybe view and think about things, as well.

If you would like to read my response, you can see what I already posted on the subject 5 years ago on this thread in posts 30-37.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

If you would like to read my response, you can see what I already posted on the subject 5 years ago on this thread in posts 30-37.

Thanks Glenn. That was an informative, logically thought out, and well explained back and forth between you and some others. And you seem to go along with what I've been trying to say. Looking at the number of black versus white HOFers is another measure to potentially help determine how many Negro League players really were deserving off MLB status recognition.

In an attempt by MLB to make amends to Negro League players and elevate them to MLB status, they obviously couldn't just cherry pick the star players like Gibson and Charleston, and only grant such status to some. MLB would never have lived that down given the way things are today. But in doing so, they obviously have created way more MLB players during that 29 year period than would have been recognized otherwise, and that just means the overall MLB talent level was diluted down. And because the leagues were unfortunately segregated, the much larger number of Negro League players making the major league ranks back then makes it look like more of them would not have been of true MLB caliber as opposed to their white counterparts, thus making the Negro Leagues way more watered down.

I'm just trying to explain in looking at players on this All-Time Greatest list how the stats for some of them may need to be viewed with a big grain of salt. Instead, I feel I'm sort of being accused of saying none of these Negro League players belong in the majors at all. That is the furthest thing from the truth. Beginning to feel like Whoopi Goldberg. LOL

[BobC]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

If you would like to read my response, you can see what I already posted on the subject 5 years ago on this thread in posts 30-37.

Thanks Glenn. That was an informative, logically thought out, and well explained back and forth between you and some others. And you seem to go along with what I've been trying to say. Looking at the number of black versus white HOFers is another measure to potentially help determine how many Negro League players really were deserving off MLB status recognition.

In an attempt by MLB to make amends to Negro League players and elevate them to MLB status, they obviously couldn't just cherry pick the star players like Gibson and Charleston, and only grant such status to some. MLB would never have lived that down given the way things are today. But in doing so, they obviously have created way more MLB players during that 29 year period than would have been recognized otherwise, and that just means the overall MLB talent level was diluted down. And because the leagues were unfortunately segregated, the much larger number of Negro League players making the major league ranks back then makes it look like more of them would not have been of true MLB caliber as opposed to their white counterparts, thus making the Negro Leagues way more watered down.

I'm just trying to explain in looking at players on this All-Time Greatest list how the stats for some of them may need to be viewed with a big grain of salt. Instead, I feel I'm sort of being accused of saying none of these Negro League players belong in the majors at all. That is the furthest thing from the truth.