hopefully pigs will grow wings and be able to fly

Posted by wylie715 on 2/4/2016 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 1/21/2016 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/20/2016 7:02:00 AM (view original):
Sez the dude who just put Babe Ruth 2nd at his position. 

That invalidates any opinion you have. 

Aaron > Ruth. that's why.

really? what have you been smoking? Nothing against Aaron, he was very good for a very long time, but Ruth was great for a long time.

Ruth was horrible defensively. Aaron was quite good. And the difference in hitting just isn't that great.

Posted by d_rock97 on 2/4/2016 5:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 2/4/2016 7:02:00 AM (view original):
Looking at the Tigers projected roster, I see an 87 win team. At best. They ain't going anywhere.

Right now, they are an 87 win team but they got a lot of ifs.
Can Verlander pitch like he did in the second half?
Can Anibal Sanchez stay healthy?
Can Kinsler repeat last season?
Will Castellanos continue to improve?
Can McCann hit righties?
Will Jordan Zimmerman stay healthy (most innings pitched last 5 seasons I believe)?
Will J.D. Continue to be a top 5 hitting RF?
Will Justin Upton finally reach his potential?
Will Anthony Goss take the next step?
Can K-Rod remain an elite closer despite his fastball continuing to lose velocity?
Can Ausmus manage?
It's a good squad but there are too many questions.
Hopefully Shane Greene recovers fully and can pitch like he did last April.

In other words KC ain't worried.

What do you know about Ruth's defense?  Honestly?

And seriously, you need to come up with a new definition of the phrase "isn't that great."

Ruth led the league in OPS 13 times.  Aaron did it 3 times.  Aaron's best OPS+ was 194 in 1971.  Ruth topped that 11 times.  And in 9 of those 11 seasons, he played more games than Aaron did in 1971, in spite of the fact that the schedule was 8 games shorter.  In fact, Ruth's career OPS+ of 206 is substantially better than Aaron's best season.

So explain to me what you mean by "isn't that great."  It's definitely not the same thing I assume people mean when they say that.  You realize great means large, not small, right?

Posted by sjpoker on 2/4/2016 7:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/4/2016 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 1/21/2016 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/20/2016 7:02:00 AM (view original):
Sez the dude who just put Babe Ruth 2nd at his position. 

That invalidates any opinion you have. 

Aaron > Ruth. that's why.

really? what have you been smoking? Nothing against Aaron, he was very good for a very long time, but Ruth was great for a long time.

Ruth was horrible defensively. Aaron was quite good. And the difference in hitting just isn't that great.

Did I call you a retard back on 1/21?    If not, I apologize for my tardiness.    You're a retard.

Ruth changed the game.   He was light years ahead of everyone else.     Aaron hit a bunch of homers. 

Ruth was also a great pitcher before becoming a hitter. People sometimes forget that. 

Aaron sucked as a pitcher

Posted by dahsdebater on 2/4/2016 8:19:00 PM (view original):
What do you know about Ruth's defense?  Honestly?

And seriously, you need to come up with a new definition of the phrase "isn't that great."

Ruth led the league in OPS 13 times.  Aaron did it 3 times.  Aaron's best OPS+ was 194 in 1971.  Ruth topped that 11 times.  And in 9 of those 11 seasons, he played more games than Aaron did in 1971, in spite of the fact that the schedule was 8 games shorter.  In fact, Ruth's career OPS+ of 206 is substantially better than Aaron's best season.

So explain to me what you mean by "isn't that great."  It's definitely not the same thing I assume people mean when they say that.  You realize great means large, not small, right?

I'm pretty sure if you adjust for the era's they played in, Aaron isn't that far off. Aaron faced better pitching for one. If Ruth had played in Aaron's era, I'm fairly certain he would - not - have put up the numbers he did.

As for Ruth's defense? Read some books about his defense when he played. He was a fantastic athlete the first few years he played, but gradually degenerated.

Do you understand how OPS+ works?

Posted by wylie715 on 2/5/2016 1:04:00 PM (view original):
Aaron sucked as a pitcher

Put the crackpipe down. In the 4-5 seasons he pitched a majority of his game appearances, he was a top 5 pitcher. Perhaps the best lefty in the AL.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/5/2016 1:14:00 PM (view original):
Do you understand how OPS+ works?

Lets face it Mike. You only hate on Aaron because you are Mexican and he is Black.

Posted by sjpoker on 2/5/2016 1:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/5/2016 1:04:00 PM (view original):
Aaron sucked as a pitcher

Put the crackpipe down. In the 4-5 seasons he pitched a majority of his game appearances, he was a top 5 pitcher. Perhaps the best lefty in the AL.

LOL.

Ruth was the greatest of all time - end of discussion.

Looking at players and the era they played in - then think back to the "Deadball" days of the early 1900's and how the rules and baseball in general favored the pitchers, it makes you realize just how freakin' good Honus Wagner, Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker were. They were putting up "Hall of Fame" statistics in a time that the overall league batting average was barely above the Mendoza Line.

It minorities had played during that era, those stats would have been way down. And we all know it.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/5/2016 1:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 2/5/2016 1:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/5/2016 1:04:00 PM (view original):
Aaron sucked as a pitcher

Put the crackpipe down. In the 4-5 seasons he pitched a majority of his game appearances, he was a top 5 pitcher. Perhaps the best lefty in the AL.

LOL.

Wow. I  probably should be the one to put the crackpipe down.