Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever"
-
@chestnuts20_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@hegone44_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@dewrock_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@go4stros25_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Lol yankee fans "but but babe Ruth, but but but in 1920...."
Babe Ruth played 20 years before Jackie Robison broke the color barrier. The talent in the league today is unreal. Might be baseball blasphemy, but I wouldn't be shocked if babe Ruth was just a run of the mill DH in today's game.
Athletes in every sport have gotten bigger, stronger, and faster since we started tracking these things. Why would mlb pitchers be any different? I know there were probably a few guys back them that could probably hit the low 90s, but call me crazy. I just don't think the average pitcher, Whitey Willabe McGroover, fresh off the farm was bringing a 97+ to the plate like the majority of pitchers are today.
Ruth was the best of his time. He has left behind one of, if not the biggest, legacies in professional sports. That's his place. Can't compare players 100 years apart
And yet we have stats that do just that.
Yeah, but where the flaw lies in comparing across eras is that WAR uses stats compiled by an individual player and then weighs them across numerous factors. It cannot take into account the players who are missing. Nobody can argue that the 1920's weren't significantly inferior to the 1940's and 1950's let alone today. WAR actually does a very poor job comparing across eras, that's what things like ERA+ and OPS+ are for...but even those stats cannot take into account the overall quality of a league.
You don't understand WAR... WAR greatly benefits players that played in the past. The fact that Babe was the BEST of his time by far should hint that his WAR would be dramatically increased.
Actually I do understand it pretty well thank you, and this article made my point precisely. Before 1950, the league was nothing compared to its post-1950 counterpart. You cannot use WAR to compare across eras very well, because in the end it uses a player's statistics to come up with that number. And if those statistics are compiled against inferior competition there's no way to accurately account for that.
-
@hegone44_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@chestnuts20_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@hegone44_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@dewrock_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@go4stros25_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Lol yankee fans "but but babe Ruth, but but but in 1920...."
Babe Ruth played 20 years before Jackie Robison broke the color barrier. The talent in the league today is unreal. Might be baseball blasphemy, but I wouldn't be shocked if babe Ruth was just a run of the mill DH in today's game.
Athletes in every sport have gotten bigger, stronger, and faster since we started tracking these things. Why would mlb pitchers be any different? I know there were probably a few guys back them that could probably hit the low 90s, but call me crazy. I just don't think the average pitcher, Whitey Willabe McGroover, fresh off the farm was bringing a 97+ to the plate like the majority of pitchers are today.
Ruth was the best of his time. He has left behind one of, if not the biggest, legacies in professional sports. That's his place. Can't compare players 100 years apart
And yet we have stats that do just that.
Yeah, but where the flaw lies in comparing across eras is that WAR uses stats compiled by an individual player and then weighs them across numerous factors. It cannot take into account the players who are missing. Nobody can argue that the 1920's weren't significantly inferior to the 1940's and 1950's let alone today. WAR actually does a very poor job comparing across eras, that's what things like ERA+ and OPS+ are for...but even those stats cannot take into account the overall quality of a league.
You don't understand WAR... WAR greatly benefits players that played in the past. The fact that Babe was the BEST of his time by far should hint that his WAR would be dramatically increased.
Actually I do understand it pretty well thank you, and this article made my point precisely. Before 1950, the league was nothing compared to its post-1950 counterpart. You cannot use WAR to compare across eras very well, because in the end it uses a player's statistics to come up with that number. And if those statistics are compiled against inferior competition there's no way to accurately account for that.
If you don’t like WAR look at other stats then, Babe Ruth’s Average, SLG, OPS, literally everything is significantly better on offense, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to tell me which is more impressive. Ruth was hitting more home runs during the entire AL during his seasons.
-
Babe was the greatest of his generation, where the talent level is 100% for a fact worse. Nothing he can do about that, but it’s true.
I hate the argument that the players of yesteryear are better than today. Sure the stats might be better, but you can’t tell me for a second that after 100 years of improved technology, strength and conditioning, and overall technique of playing the game that these freaks of nature of today aren’t better than their white, northeastern farmers of 1920
-
Let’s not forget that when Ruth put up those offensive numbers home runs were only considered fair if they LANDED fair (not where they crossed the field of play) AND the smallest center field Ruth played in was 450 feet (with corresponding gaps).
-
@gradekthebard said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Let’s not forget that when Ruth put up those offensive numbers home runs were only considered fair if they LANDED fair (not where they crossed the field of play) AND the smallest center field Ruth played in was 450 feet (with corresponding gaps).
Exactly
-
@kdclemson_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@raesone_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@kdclemson_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
I guess it’s somehow Babe Ruth’s fault he was born in the era he was. If it was so easy back then, why was Ruth the only player on that level. It’s a bad take whenever it’s used, guys don’t control the era they play in so to punish them for it is dumb, you compare them to their peers and whoever is statistically the best against their peers is the greatest. Not to mention if Ruth had grown up in the late 20th century with the technology, medicine, science, and training of today you have no way of knowing he wouldn’t be just as dominant.
Devaluing the competition is a bad take only used to try and overvalue newer players in sports. Happens most prevalently in baseball and basketball.
In basketball? Lmao. The general perception is that MJ is and always will be the GOAT and his prime was 25 years ago.
Babe Ruth was good at what he did. But he was also an obese smoking alcoholic, who faced janitors that threw 240 pitches on 1 night rest.
The fact that LeBron even has a debate proves that point, the fact that guys like Wilt who was getting almost 30 RPG in seasons doesn’t get mention in the convo, or Bird.
LeBron doesn't have a debate. And I'm a big time LeBron fan, not joking or lying. It's a created narrative to influence younger generations with the intention of them being more favorable towards LeBron's brand. If you'd ask any, and I say ANY, current or former NBA player straight up with no cameras around and a non-disclosure about the conversation, who the better player is between the two, 99 out 100 would say MJ and the single guy who'd say LeBron, would be LeBron.
Not even gonna go in detail about Wilt and Larry because literally no one mentions them in the GOAT debate, despite them being great in their own way.
-
You're comparing stats for 2 completely different games.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@dbarmonstar_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@bearsfan217_xbl said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@kdclemson_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Articles are being posted every day about Ohtani having the "Greatest Season Ever". Ohtani is about to hit the impressive 9 WAR in a season club, this is an elite club that certainly gives credit to this argument, right.
Ohtani's season is on track to be 130th all-time in WAR. For my non-sabermetrics guys, that basically means it isn't the greatest season ever, it isn't even close.
But who has the greatest season ever? Babe Ruth in 1923, the man who Ohtani is often compared to, with a 14.2 WAR season, more WAR than Ohtani has amassed in his MLB career.
How about the 2nd greatest season ever? That goes to a man by the name of Babe Ruth, who in 1921 posted a 12.9 WAR season.
How about the 3rd greatest season ever? That title goes to little-known former superstar by the name of George, George Herman, or as you may know him... Babe Ruth, with 12.6 WAR in 1927.
As a matter of fact, 5 of the 10 greatest seasons ever, and 6 of the top 11, belong to Babe Ruth.
So Shohei Ohtani, "The Next Babe Ruth" is on pace to have the 130th best season ever, whereas Ruth has half of the top 10 best seasons ever, including the top 3.
Ruth had 16 years where he played at least 100 games. This Ohtani season people are calling maybe the best in MLB history, would only be Ruth's 11th best season, and a down year for him.
Let's end with some stats simpler:
Ohtani 2021 OPS: .986
Ruth career OPS: 1.164
Ruth 1919-1924 OPS: 1.262Ohtani 2021 ERA: 3.31
Babe Ruth career ERA: 2.28Let's stop comparing a .260 hitter to a dude who hit over .370 for half a dozen seasons, to a dude who hit more home runs than the entire American League in seasons, and to a dude who beats him in almost any stat. And before the argument that Ruth played in an easier time: (1) Ruth didn't chose his era and if it was so much easier, why was he vastly better than ever other player?
Come on now. You gonna compare eras? Lets be real, the level of competition in 1923 vs todays players is night and day. Hell, baseball wouldnt allow African Americans to even play or anyone that wasn't white for that matter. Ruth in todays game wouldnt be the same player.
Just forget him as a pitcher, he wouldnt make a roster spot based of his pitching so forget that idea.
As a hitter, he would of struggled. Babe was hitting slow pitch softball in 1923 compared to todays game of 100mph fastballs. Also, dont forget him being a fat and slow out of shape.
He would have been brought up on the game the way it is played today, you are comparing him from his time as if he would be that same person or player as if he would know nothing of how it is played today. stop guessing what type of player he would be today.
I mean unless he changed his personal habits he wouldn't be a player today. Not many raging alcoholics in the league these days
No there is not but you can not assume he would be the same person,
-
@gradekthebard said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Let’s not forget that when Ruth put up those offensive numbers home runs were only considered fair if they LANDED fair (not where they crossed the field of play) AND the smallest center field Ruth played in was 450 feet (with corresponding gaps).
He hit 9 home runs at Fenway in 2 years and 29 the next year when he was traded and started playing at polo grounds (279 to left and 258 to right)
-
@kdclemson_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@raesone_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@kdclemson_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
I guess it’s somehow Babe Ruth’s fault he was born in the era he was. If it was so easy back then, why was Ruth the only player on that level. It’s a bad take whenever it’s used, guys don’t control the era they play in so to punish them for it is dumb, you compare them to their peers and whoever is statistically the best against their peers is the greatest. Not to mention if Ruth had grown up in the late 20th century with the technology, medicine, science, and training of today you have no way of knowing he wouldn’t be just as dominant.
Devaluing the competition is a bad take only used to try and overvalue newer players in sports. Happens most prevalently in baseball and basketball.
In basketball? Lmao. The general perception is that MJ is and always will be the GOAT and his prime was 25 years ago.
Babe Ruth was good at what he did. But he was also an obese smoking alcoholic, who faced janitors that threw 240 pitches on 1 night rest.
The fact that LeBron even has a debate proves that point, the fact that guys like Wilt who was getting almost 30 RPG in seasons doesn’t get mention in the convo, or Bird.
Ever heard of Kareem, Yeah go compare the numbers. some of you might be shocked.
-
@exotic_combs_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@gradekthebard said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Let’s not forget that when Ruth put up those offensive numbers home runs were only considered fair if they LANDED fair (not where they crossed the field of play) AND the smallest center field Ruth played in was 450 feet (with corresponding gaps).
He hit 9 home runs at Fenway in 2 years and 29 the next year when he was traded and started playing at polo grounds (279 to left and 258 to right)
For reference, Alex verdugo (another lefty so I don’t get the monster argument) has 6 at Fenway this year alone, against pitchers who would dominate babes era
-
@exotic_combs_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Babe was the greatest of his generation, where the talent level is 100% for a fact worse. Nothing he can do about that, but it’s true.
I hate the argument that the players of yesteryear are better than today. Sure the stats might be better, but you can’t tell me for a second that after 100 years of improved technology, strength and conditioning, and overall technique of playing the game that these freaks of nature of today aren’t better than their white, northeastern farmers of 1920
Not all of them, Imagine how much better those players in 1920 would be if everything today's players have, Imagine how bad maybe today's players would be, How many of today's players left to fight in a World War and then come back and pick up where they left off Ted Williams, Survive the War came back and was still one of the best ever. Is today's overall talent really that much better, I believe today overall talent is watered down, how good would today's players be if they were only facing the best in the league, in 1920 only 24 teams and not all the teams played the same amount of games. How good would Ohtani be pitching every game or every other game. Pitching 9 or more innings each time out. That is what pitchers did. in 1921 the Yankees top pitcher threw 336 innings with a 38 and 10 record.
Since we are comparing Ruth to now, Ohtani would have only last 1 year in 1920 because players did not come back from injuries like they do today.
-
@kdclemson_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Articles are being posted every day about Ohtani having the "Greatest Season Ever". Ohtani is about to hit the impressive 9 WAR in a season club, this is an elite club that certainly gives credit to this argument, right.
Ohtani's season is on track to be 130th all-time in WAR. For my non-sabermetrics guys, that basically means it isn't the greatest season ever, it isn't even close.
But who has the greatest season ever? Babe Ruth in 1923, the man who Ohtani is often compared to, with a 14.2 WAR season, more WAR than Ohtani has amassed in his MLB career.
How about the 2nd greatest season ever? That goes to a man by the name of Babe Ruth, who in 1921 posted a 12.9 WAR season.
How about the 3rd greatest season ever? That title goes to little-known former superstar by the name of George, George Herman, or as you may know him... Babe Ruth, with 12.6 WAR in 1927.
As a matter of fact, 5 of the 10 greatest seasons ever, and 6 of the top 11, belong to Babe Ruth.
So Shohei Ohtani, "The Next Babe Ruth" is on pace to have the 130th best season ever, whereas Ruth has half of the top 10 best seasons ever, including the top 3.
Ruth had 16 years where he played at least 100 games. This Ohtani season people are calling maybe the best in MLB history, would only be Ruth's 11th best season, and a down year for him.
Let's end with some stats simpler:
Ohtani 2021 OPS: .986
Ruth career OPS: 1.164
Ruth 1919-1924 OPS: 1.262Ohtani 2021 ERA: 3.31
Babe Ruth career ERA: 2.28Let's stop comparing a .260 hitter to a dude who hit over .370 for half a dozen seasons, to a dude who hit more home runs than the entire American League in seasons, and to a dude who beats him in almost any stat. And before the argument that Ruth played in an easier time: (1) Ruth didn't chose his era and if it was so much easier, why was he vastly better than ever other player?
Great Analysis!
Whenever anyone says Ruth played in an easier era, i remind them, medical care consisted of "bleeding" you for angry trolls in your stomach. They both have their advantages and disadvantages -- but since its all intangible, its moot for the sake of this argument. If there is a stat to measure them both, then thats how you compare them. Everything else is opinion. -
@hegone44_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@chestnuts20_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@hegone44_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@dewrock_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@go4stros25_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Lol yankee fans "but but babe Ruth, but but but in 1920...."
Babe Ruth played 20 years before Jackie Robison broke the color barrier. The talent in the league today is unreal. Might be baseball blasphemy, but I wouldn't be shocked if babe Ruth was just a run of the mill DH in today's game.
Athletes in every sport have gotten bigger, stronger, and faster since we started tracking these things. Why would mlb pitchers be any different? I know there were probably a few guys back them that could probably hit the low 90s, but call me crazy. I just don't think the average pitcher, Whitey Willabe McGroover, fresh off the farm was bringing a 97+ to the plate like the majority of pitchers are today.
Ruth was the best of his time. He has left behind one of, if not the biggest, legacies in professional sports. That's his place. Can't compare players 100 years apart
And yet we have stats that do just that.
Yeah, but where the flaw lies in comparing across eras is that WAR uses stats compiled by an individual player and then weighs them across numerous factors. It cannot take into account the players who are missing. Nobody can argue that the 1920's weren't significantly inferior to the 1940's and 1950's let alone today. WAR actually does a very poor job comparing across eras, that's what things like ERA+ and OPS+ are for...but even those stats cannot take into account the overall quality of a league.
You don't understand WAR... WAR greatly benefits players that played in the past. The fact that Babe was the BEST of his time by far should hint that his WAR would be dramatically increased.
Actually I do understand it pretty well thank you, and this article made my point precisely. Before 1950, the league was nothing compared to its post-1950 counterpart. You cannot use WAR to compare across eras very well, because in the end it uses a player's statistics to come up with that number. And if those statistics are compiled against inferior competition there's no way to accurately account for that.
My bad, I quoted the wrong post. I was agreeing with you. Said essentially the same thing as this. "WAR greatly benefits players that played in the past. The fact that Babe was the BEST of his time by far should hint that his WAR would be dramatically increased." It was intended for @KDClemson_PSN
-
How much better would would the players in the old days be with what the players have now, Could the players now be as good using the equipment the players had to use in the 1920, How good would Ohtani be pitching in wool uniform or any of the player;s today playing in those heavy wool uniforms. How fast would the players be today having to run in wool. Better equipment, Cletes, Uniforms, makes things easier to play in today's game. The one thing Ruth did not have to do is play vs the best, He did not have to face any of the negro league players. I think he still would have been great.
-
@exotic_combs_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Babe was the greatest of his generation, where the talent level is 100% for a fact worse. Nothing he can do about that, but it’s true.
I hate the argument that the players of yesteryear are better than today. Sure the stats might be better, but you can’t tell me for a second that after 100 years of improved technology, strength and conditioning, and overall technique of playing the game that these freaks of nature of today aren’t better than their white, northeastern farmers of 1920
I don't think you'll find anyone disputing this. The problem is with people making sweeping proclamations that it was "far inferior" or that people talented in that era wouldn't have been talented in the modern era. Obviously the pool of talent in sports is greater but I haven't seen anyone qualify that it was far inferior. People saying things like Ruth's era was just a bunch of hicks off the farm playing is hyperbole. As if there were no baseball players of that time that looked like Mike Trout or Aaron Judge or any other muscle bound player.
If people, and I don't mean people on this board, want to come up with a better stat that shows how much past era stats should be weighted against modern era stats, then I'll be all for that. Right now the argument seems to be more along the lines of "Trust us".
Either way, any stats you want to look at for Ruth (or his contemporaries), Ohtani (no matter how well he has done this year and how impressive his two way feats are) has a long way to go.
-
-
@exotic_combs_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@exotic_combs_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@gradekthebard said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Let’s not forget that when Ruth put up those offensive numbers home runs were only considered fair if they LANDED fair (not where they crossed the field of play) AND the smallest center field Ruth played in was 450 feet (with corresponding gaps).
He hit 9 home runs at Fenway in 2 years and 29 the next year when he was traded and started playing at polo grounds (279 to left and 258 to right)
For reference, Alex verdugo (another lefty so I don’t get the monster argument) has 6 at Fenway this year alone, against pitchers who would dominate babes era
And how many of those pitchers from today would even be pitching in the 20s? It seems almost everyone who throws that hard has had or will have surgery (that didn’t exist back then). Perhaps guys threw 100 back in the 20s too, but most had very short careers.
-
@x-alec_j-x_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@kdclemson_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Articles are being posted every day about Ohtani having the "Greatest Season Ever". Ohtani is about to hit the impressive 9 WAR in a season club, this is an elite club that certainly gives credit to this argument, right.
Ohtani's season is on track to be 130th all-time in WAR. For my non-sabermetrics guys, that basically means it isn't the greatest season ever, it isn't even close.
But who has the greatest season ever? Babe Ruth in 1923, the man who Ohtani is often compared to, with a 14.2 WAR season, more WAR than Ohtani has amassed in his MLB career.
How about the 2nd greatest season ever? That goes to a man by the name of Babe Ruth, who in 1921 posted a 12.9 WAR season.
How about the 3rd greatest season ever? That title goes to little-known former superstar by the name of George, George Herman, or as you may know him... Babe Ruth, with 12.6 WAR in 1927.
As a matter of fact, 5 of the 10 greatest seasons ever, and 6 of the top 11, belong to Babe Ruth.
So Shohei Ohtani, "The Next Babe Ruth" is on pace to have the 130th best season ever, whereas Ruth has half of the top 10 best seasons ever, including the top 3.
Ruth had 16 years where he played at least 100 games. This Ohtani season people are calling maybe the best in MLB history, would only be Ruth's 11th best season, and a down year for him.
Let's end with some stats simpler:
Ohtani 2021 OPS: .986
Ruth career OPS: 1.164
Ruth 1919-1924 OPS: 1.262Ohtani 2021 ERA: 3.31
Babe Ruth career ERA: 2.28Let's stop comparing a .260 hitter to a dude who hit over .370 for half a dozen seasons, to a dude who hit more home runs than the entire American League in seasons, and to a dude who beats him in almost any stat. And before the argument that Ruth played in an easier time: (1) Ruth didn't chose his era and if it was so much easier, why was he vastly better than ever other player?
Great Analysis!
Whenever anyone says Ruth played in an easier era, i remind them, medical care consisted of "bleeding" you for angry trolls in your stomach. They both have their advantages and disadvantages -- but since its all intangible, its moot for the sake of this argument. If there is a stat to measure them both, then thats how you compare them. Everything else is opinion.Thanks
-
@dewrock_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@exotic_combs_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Babe was the greatest of his generation, where the talent level is 100% for a fact worse. Nothing he can do about that, but it’s true.
I hate the argument that the players of yesteryear are better than today. Sure the stats might be better, but you can’t tell me for a second that after 100 years of improved technology, strength and conditioning, and overall technique of playing the game that these freaks of nature of today aren’t better than their white, northeastern farmers of 1920
I don't think you'll find anyone disputing this. The problem is with people making sweeping proclamations that it was "far inferior" or that people talented in that era wouldn't have been talented in the modern era. Obviously the pool of talent in sports is greater but I haven't seen anyone qualify that it was far inferior. People saying things like Ruth's era was just a bunch of hicks off the farm playing is hyperbole. As if there were no baseball players of that time that looked like Mike Trout or Aaron Judge or any other muscle bound player.
If people, and I don't mean people on this board, want to come up with a better stat that shows how much past era stats should be weighted against modern era stats, then I'll be all for that. Right now the argument seems to be more along the lines of "Trust us".
Either way, any stats you want to look at for Ruth (or his contemporaries), Ohtani (no matter how well he has done this year and how impressive his two way feats are) has a long way to go.
I don’t know for sure, but If you could find a guy who was 6’2 235lbs and played centerfield and ran like trout that played pre 1990, I would be very surprised. At the same time the game was just different. Pitchers didn’t throw with max effort every pitch so that they could throw 300+ innings a year. And when they did throw max effort, due to lack of strength training and overall technique, many didn’t top above 85.
I’m not hating at all on the great Babe. And obviously if today’s players were born around the same time you would see a lot of the same results and vice versa. The only thing in my opinion that you can’t dispute is that the game gets better every year. People figure out how to get better and over 100+ years, the difference is astounding. And 50 years from now we’ll be having the same argument about how much better the new guys are compared to the players we are watching right now.
