Are there any player's autographs that you refuse to collect?

[Lordstan]

David,
I think you meant me?! If so, Thanks.
What I wouldn't give to hoist a cold one with the Babe.
That would be an unforgettable experience.

Mark

[Scott Garner]

Boy Mike and Mark,
Those were two huge posts! Excellent points that were defended beautifully.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Yes, it's getting boring because it's the same repetitive information over and over and over again. Again, you can quote this and alllllll the other times I have said so, this is my opinion. When did my opinion affect you so much? Am I hurting your feelings by saying Babe's not the best? Who do YOU think is? Hell, Pete Rose can be a solid answer, if you want to go by stats, most hits over, how isn't he.

Your whole basis towards your point is stats. Number, number and more numbers. While that makes sense, you're missing a huge key importance. ERA. When Ruth played, there were no scouting reports, there were not nearly as many team meetings for situational aspects, hell they didn't really have too many scouts. Pitchers didn't throw as hard, runners didn't run as fast, fielders didn't have as strong of an arm or range, mechanics weren't a focus as they were today.

In saying that, Bonds played in a tougher generation of players. He played with and against...better players. Were there extreme shifts to take advantage of this advanced scouting. Mound height was a difference. What does it tell you that Ruth has more inside the park home runs, simple, players weren't as good as they are now. In 8 season, Ruth had more triples than stolen bases, Ruth's highest single season total of triples is 16, which is ridiculous. Jose Reyes had 16 last year. Ruth has more triples than stolen bases, what does that tell you about the era? Ruth had twice as many triples in his career as Bonds.

Now, when you have advanced scouting reports, specific situations, extreme shifts, strike zone analysis, relief match-ups etc., you honestly cannot say now who had the more difficult time playing. Bonds played against better players, and it's not close. Half, if not more of players in that era wouldn't make it to AA ball. If Ruth were to play in modern times, he would not hit 500 home runs. No way, no how. The pitchers today would EMBARRASS him. Ruth would not hold his own, no chance. All of his hitting would be exploited, holes in his swing, where to pitch him, what to pitch him, what he chases. Bonds in Ruth's era, Bonds would obliterate and dwarf all his numbers. Player against a weaker competition, screw steroids, he wouldn't need them then, he didn't need them now. Bonds in his era, if you want to do adjusted numbers, I'm sure the numbers are there for ya, since that's what you go all about.

Have a good night, this is boring, waste of my time, because it's my opinion. All you had to say was, "well, I respect your opinion, but I feel you're wrong..." I totally respect yours, and other members' because I know what I said, people will not agree with it. I am not going to insult you or any other members on it, because they are your opinions, and you guys can say whatever you would like, that's your freedom. We both got our pieces in, and I respect all the time you spent on this, but my opinion stands, I may be wrong, and I don't care. But it has been fun, insightful, and educational looking deeper into everything...

See you on other posts.

[Scott Garner]

HOF,

You also have made some good points and I appreciate the fact that you have your own opinion (See, we can play nice) .

I mean no disrespect, but...

I'd like to make a few small points to make before you grab your ball and go home:

I forget who brought up the point, but I don't think that we can diminish the massive changes in the equipment of The Big Bam's era vs. now.

Babe's era = small, primitive gloves that really lent themselves to players making more errors than now. There can't be any debate that the substantial improvements made in modern glove design have given position players advantages over players from Babe's era. Babe played during part of the deadball era. It's no secret that the crappy balls of his era weren't designed to fly out of the park like the tightly wound rabbit balls of today.

Barry's era = Modern gloves, rabbit balls, lowering the mound height for opposing pitchers all helped Barry and the modern players. Perhaps a lesser point, but what about the alleged advantages of Barry's maple bats vs. the ash bats of Babe's era?

Just wondering if this is really a fair comparison at all... Both were excellent players of their own eras, no doubt.

Barry the superior player?? I'm not so sure about that...

Just my opinion...

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by Scott Garner

HOF,

You also have made some good points and I appreciate the fact that you have your own opinion (See, we can play nice) .

I mean no disrespect, but...

I'd like to make a few small points to make before you grab your ball and go home:

I forget who brought up the point, but I don't think that we can diminish the massive changes in the equipment of The Big Bam's era vs. now.

Babe's era = small, primitive gloves that really lent themselves to players making more errors than now. There can't be any debate that the substantial improvements made in modern glove design have given position players advantages over players from Babe's era. Babe played during part of the deadball era. It's no secret that the crappy balls of his era weren't designed to fly out of the park like the tightly wound rabbit balls of today.

Barry's era = Modern gloves, rabbit balls, lowering the mound height for opposing pitchers all helped Barry and the modern players. Perhaps a lesser point, but what about the alleged advantages of Barry's maple bats vs. the ash bats of Babe's era?

Just wondering if this is really a fair comparison at all... Both were excellent players of their own eras, no doubt.

Barry the superior player?? I'm not so sure about that...

Just my opinion...

Ruth and his eye-popping stats were also, to some extent, a product of the rule changes that came about in 1920.

There is the further fact that Ruth was NOT facing the best possible competition, for whatever small part that is worth in this debate.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

David,
I think you meant me?! If so, Thanks.
What I wouldn't give to hoist a cold one with the Babe.
That would be an unforgettable experience.

Mark

I certainly did mean you, Mark. Bit of a senior moment, there.

[slidekellyslide]

The Steroided Bonds was a lazy outfielder...I once saw him in a game watch a fly ball go over his head and hit off the fence and he didn't move because he thought it was a home run.

And speaking of overrated outfielders I thought Paul O'Neill and all those Gold Gloves was ridiculous...anyone can play errorless ball in the outfield if they never take chances. I can't say I watched every game he ever played, but it sure seemed that every time I did watch him play he let a lot of balls hit the ground that a good outfielder would have gotten to or tried to get to.

[J.McMurry]

Sylbry,

Your pic is a lot better than mine. nice shot!

[thenavarro]

Here's an OJ that even OJ haters might like. I made it a few minutes ago from an authentically signed OJ book.

[Mr. Zipper]

Lol

:d

[MacDice]

I have a major issue with Bryce Harper. I have coached several guys who have played against him and the stories they have told me about how he plays the game and the respect have gave opponents, I have no respect for the kid as a person. If he pulls that stuff in the show a lot of fastballs will be thrown at his head