collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB
-
@guccigangchuck said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Jeter, love or hate him would be a huge selling point for next years title. Couple that with the bird killing flame thrower Johnson. You got two huge 90’s legends that I think would really get folks excited.
I don’t think MLB wants Bonds likeness in any capacity gracing a licensed title. He got cancelled before it was cool.
It’s almost taboo to say Bonds was the best baseball player of all time. FYI he is. I hate saying that
Well you see, there was a man named Babe that is the actual best player of all time. Bonds comes in at 2nd place.
I’m not try to start a full on debate. And if you think Ruth is the best ever then I’d say you’re right. Because I think you could make a compelling argument for both. I feel they’d cancel themselves out if we did a full on versus between Bonds and Ruth.
https://www.fueledbysports.com/babe-ruth-vs-barry-bonds-comparison/
Check that out for a side by side comparison. Very quick reference
It’s obviously close, but Ruth putting up more fWAR in 2000 less PA and also having a wRC+ that’s over 20 points higher is all I need to know.
Ruth wouldnt hit the pitching bonds faced. Ruth's lack of competition makes me not really look at him as the Goat, its unfair to RIth cause its the hand he was dealt but, those uys in the early 1900s they really have never impressed me.
That’s why we have league-adjusted stats like wRC+ to compare players from different eras. Ruth was a baseball god among his peers, just like bonds basically was among his peers. If Ruth was facing nothing but relatively garbage competition, then there would’ve been other players that could compare to him during that time. There wasn’t/isn’t, which means he was just that much more talented than his peers as evidenced by his career 197 wRC+. The same premise applies to fWAR. Ruth was overall better than a replacement level player in his era than Bonds was in his era. That’s the only way to truly determine who was better.
-
why isnt jeter in the game
-
Ok, so curveball -- why don't we have Negro League players in the game? (I know: licensing.) The coolest Collection card ever would be Josh Gibson. Imagine THAT.
As to all the different takes in this thread, which I'm enjoying -- kinda nod along with all of them. Jeter, Unit, and Bonds would be a goldmine for SDS and add some buzz for sure.
-
Give me a Roy Halladay and I’ll pre order
-
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@guccigangchuck said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Jeter, love or hate him would be a huge selling point for next years title. Couple that with the bird killing flame thrower Johnson. You got two huge 90’s legends that I think would really get folks excited.
I don’t think MLB wants Bonds likeness in any capacity gracing a licensed title. He got cancelled before it was cool.
It’s almost taboo to say Bonds was the best baseball player of all time. FYI he is. I hate saying that
Well you see, there was a man named Babe that is the actual best player of all time. Bonds comes in at 2nd place.
I’m not try to start a full on debate. And if you think Ruth is the best ever then I’d say you’re right. Because I think you could make a compelling argument for both. I feel they’d cancel themselves out if we did a full on versus between Bonds and Ruth.
https://www.fueledbysports.com/babe-ruth-vs-barry-bonds-comparison/
Check that out for a side by side comparison. Very quick reference
It’s obviously close, but Ruth putting up more fWAR in 2000 less PA and also having a wRC+ that’s over 20 points higher is all I need to know.
Ruth wouldnt hit the pitching bonds faced. Ruth's lack of competition makes me not really look at him as the Goat, its unfair to RIth cause its the hand he was dealt but, those uys in the early 1900s they really have never impressed me.
That’s why we have league-adjusted stats like wRC+ to compare players from different eras. Ruth was a baseball god among his peers, just like bonds basically was among his peers. If Ruth was facing nothing but relatively garbage competition, then there would’ve been other players that could compare to him during that time. There wasn’t/isn’t, which means he was just that much more talented than his peers as evidenced by his career 197 wRC+. The same premise applies to fWAR. Ruth was overall better than a replacement level player in his era than Bonds was in his era. That’s the only way to truly determine who was better.
The flaw with that is how evolved the game is now. The average player in Ruth’s era is from a small pool of players. So you get a lot of guys that might be somewhat serviceable but not really a good player. Now with scouting, expansion, a higher focus on bringing in the best of the best. We have thousands of minor leaguers, thousands of international players.
The game has evolved and been accepted by more cultures. So now of days your average player is better than the average player in Ruth’s era.
Again I’m not going to go into a full on debate. If you told me Bonds was the best I’d agree. If you told me Ruth was I’d agree.
Personally, and this is my personal opinion. Bonds dominance in the era he played in was slightly more impressive to me than Ruth’s dominance in his era. Strictly by the evolving talent Bonds faced.
-
@suntlacrimae50_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Ok, so curveball -- why don't we have Negro League players in the game? (I know: licensing.) The coolest Collection card ever would be Josh Gibson. Imagine THAT.
As to all the different takes in this thread, which I'm enjoying -- kinda nod along with all of them. Jeter, Unit, and Bonds would be a goldmine for SDS and add some buzz for sure.
Plus, paying the $ for Negro League rights would be a huge PR win for SDS. Man, I'd love to dig in to that history -- players, unis, fields...
-
@suntlacrimae50_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@suntlacrimae50_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Ok, so curveball -- why don't we have Negro League players in the game? (I know: licensing.) The coolest Collection card ever would be Josh Gibson. Imagine THAT.
As to all the different takes in this thread, which I'm enjoying -- kinda nod along with all of them. Jeter, Unit, and Bonds would be a goldmine for SDS and add some buzz for sure.
Plus, paying the $ for Negro League rights would be a huge PR win for SDS. Man, I'd love to dig in to that history -- players, unis, fields...
Fun fact. The Negro League allowed women to play. Surprised this isn’t brought up more. You guys can do some digging but there are some females that had decently long careers in the Negro league.
-
Switch the teams that Paul Molitor and Derek Jeter played for and you would think very different of both of them because their career regular season stats are almost identical. The were both great hitters, and both deserving of a spot in the hall of fame, but Paul Molitor just doesn't get the hype that Jeter does because he didn't play in New York
-
@the_dragon1912 said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Switch the teams that Paul Molitor and Derek Jeter played for and you would think very different of both of them because their career regular season stats are almost identical. The were both great hitters, and both deserving of a spot in the hall of fame, but Paul Molitor just doesn't get the hype that Jeter does because he didn't play in New York
While I originally pointed out that comparison, there is one additional factor that provides Jeter his legendary status. His ability to come up clutch in situations weighs more in peoples minds. Molitor of course won a WS MVP but Jeter is more remembered due to his late inning hits and HRs, as well as certain defensive plays.
Long story short, it's the highlights that help push Jeter above Molitor as much as the teams they were on.
-
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Jeter, love or hate him would be a huge selling point for next years title. Couple that with the bird killing flame thrower Johnson. You got two huge 90’s legends that I think would really get folks excited.
I don’t think MLB wants Bonds likeness in any capacity gracing a licensed title. He got cancelled before it was cool.
It’s almost taboo to say Bonds was the best baseball player of all time. FYI he is. I hate saying that
I think greatest hitter for sure but IF one includes defense then I don't think he is the greatest player.
-
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@guccigangchuck said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Jeter, love or hate him would be a huge selling point for next years title. Couple that with the bird killing flame thrower Johnson. You got two huge 90’s legends that I think would really get folks excited.
I don’t think MLB wants Bonds likeness in any capacity gracing a licensed title. He got cancelled before it was cool.
It’s almost taboo to say Bonds was the best baseball player of all time. FYI he is. I hate saying that
Well you see, there was a man named Babe that is the actual best player of all time. Bonds comes in at 2nd place.
I’m not try to start a full on debate. And if you think Ruth is the best ever then I’d say you’re right. Because I think you could make a compelling argument for both. I feel they’d cancel themselves out if we did a full on versus between Bonds and Ruth.
https://www.fueledbysports.com/babe-ruth-vs-barry-bonds-comparison/
Check that out for a side by side comparison. Very quick reference
It’s obviously close, but Ruth putting up more fWAR in 2000 less PA and also having a wRC+ that’s over 20 points higher is all I need to know.
Ruth wouldnt hit the pitching bonds faced. Ruth's lack of competition makes me not really look at him as the Goat, its unfair to RIth cause its the hand he was dealt but, those uys in the early 1900s they really have never impressed me.
That’s why we have league-adjusted stats like wRC+ to compare players from different eras. Ruth was a baseball god among his peers, just like bonds basically was among his peers. If Ruth was facing nothing but relatively garbage competition, then there would’ve been other players that could compare to him during that time. There wasn’t/isn’t, which means he was just that much more talented than his peers as evidenced by his career 197 wRC+. The same premise applies to fWAR. Ruth was overall better than a replacement level player in his era than Bonds was in his era. That’s the only way to truly determine who was better.
And again, everyone seems to disregard that Ruth pitched... and was pretty [censored] good at that too.
-
@poksey_mlbts said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@the_dragon1912 said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Switch the teams that Paul Molitor and Derek Jeter played for and you would think very different of both of them because their career regular season stats are almost identical. The were both great hitters, and both deserving of a spot in the hall of fame, but Paul Molitor just doesn't get the hype that Jeter does because he didn't play in New York
While I originally pointed out that comparison, there is one additional factor that provides Jeter his legendary status. His ability to come up clutch in situations weighs more in peoples minds. Molitor of course won a WS MVP but Jeter is more remembered due to his late inning hits and HRs, as well as certain defensive plays.
Long story short, it's the highlights that help push Jeter above Molitor as much as the teams they were on.
I agree with you completely, but realistically an MLB the show card for Jeter would look almost exactly the same as Molitor, perhaps with a tad more speed. Everyone hates Molitor cards(I don't but I'm speaking for most of the community here), and Jeter would not have attributes that translate well in game. He just wouldn't
-
@the_dragon1912 said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@poksey_mlbts said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@the_dragon1912 said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Switch the teams that Paul Molitor and Derek Jeter played for and you would think very different of both of them because their career regular season stats are almost identical. The were both great hitters, and both deserving of a spot in the hall of fame, but Paul Molitor just doesn't get the hype that Jeter does because he didn't play in New York
While I originally pointed out that comparison, there is one additional factor that provides Jeter his legendary status. His ability to come up clutch in situations weighs more in peoples minds. Molitor of course won a WS MVP but Jeter is more remembered due to his late inning hits and HRs, as well as certain defensive plays.
Long story short, it's the highlights that help push Jeter above Molitor as much as the teams they were on.
I agree with you completely, but realistically an MLB the show card for Jeter would look almost exactly the same as Molitor, perhaps with a tad more speed. Everyone hates Molitor cards(I don't but I'm speaking for most of the community here), and Jeter would not have attributes that translate well in game. He just wouldn't
I agree with you there, but I'm sure they would juice the attributes because they can. His swing animation may be problematic though, as it would also be similar to Molitor.
-
For 2022 Collection
MLB Ruth = very late release still waiting in 2021
AL Griffey Jr= Very late release still waiting in 2021
NL Musial -
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@guccigangchuck said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Jeter, love or hate him would be a huge selling point for next years title. Couple that with the bird killing flame thrower Johnson. You got two huge 90’s legends that I think would really get folks excited.
I don’t think MLB wants Bonds likeness in any capacity gracing a licensed title. He got cancelled before it was cool.
It’s almost taboo to say Bonds was the best baseball player of all time. FYI he is. I hate saying that
Well you see, there was a man named Babe that is the actual best player of all time. Bonds comes in at 2nd place.
I’m not try to start a full on debate. And if you think Ruth is the best ever then I’d say you’re right. Because I think you could make a compelling argument for both. I feel they’d cancel themselves out if we did a full on versus between Bonds and Ruth.
https://www.fueledbysports.com/babe-ruth-vs-barry-bonds-comparison/
Check that out for a side by side comparison. Very quick reference
It’s obviously close, but Ruth putting up more fWAR in 2000 less PA and also having a wRC+ that’s over 20 points higher is all I need to know.
Ruth wouldnt hit the pitching bonds faced. Ruth's lack of competition makes me not really look at him as the Goat, its unfair to RIth cause its the hand he was dealt but, those uys in the early 1900s they really have never impressed me.
That’s why we have league-adjusted stats like wRC+ to compare players from different eras. Ruth was a baseball god among his peers, just like bonds basically was among his peers. If Ruth was facing nothing but relatively garbage competition, then there would’ve been other players that could compare to him during that time. There wasn’t/isn’t, which means he was just that much more talented than his peers as evidenced by his career 197 wRC+. The same premise applies to fWAR. Ruth was overall better than a replacement level player in his era than Bonds was in his era. That’s the only way to truly determine who was better.
The flaw with that is how evolved the game is now. The average player in Ruth’s era is from a small pool of players. So you get a lot of guys that might be somewhat serviceable but not really a good player. Now with scouting, expansion, a higher focus on bringing in the best of the best. We have thousands of minor leaguers, thousands of international players.
The game has evolved and been accepted by more cultures. So now of days your average player is better than the average player in Ruth’s era.
Again I’m not going to go into a full on debate. If you told me Bonds was the best I’d agree. If you told me Ruth was I’d agree.
Personally, and this is my personal opinion. Bonds dominance in the era he played in was slightly more impressive to me than Ruth’s dominance in his era. Strictly by the evolving talent Bonds faced.
Bonds post season was not very good, when he faced the best he did not perform under pressure you can not say the same about Ruth.
-
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@guccigangchuck said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Jeter, love or hate him would be a huge selling point for next years title. Couple that with the bird killing flame thrower Johnson. You got two huge 90’s legends that I think would really get folks excited.
I don’t think MLB wants Bonds likeness in any capacity gracing a licensed title. He got cancelled before it was cool.
It’s almost taboo to say Bonds was the best baseball player of all time. FYI he is. I hate saying that
Well you see, there was a man named Babe that is the actual best player of all time. Bonds comes in at 2nd place.
I’m not try to start a full on debate. And if you think Ruth is the best ever then I’d say you’re right. Because I think you could make a compelling argument for both. I feel they’d cancel themselves out if we did a full on versus between Bonds and Ruth.
https://www.fueledbysports.com/babe-ruth-vs-barry-bonds-comparison/
Check that out for a side by side comparison. Very quick reference
It’s obviously close, but Ruth putting up more fWAR in 2000 less PA and also having a wRC+ that’s over 20 points higher is all I need to know.
Ruth wouldnt hit the pitching bonds faced. Ruth's lack of competition makes me not really look at him as the Goat, its unfair to RIth cause its the hand he was dealt but, those uys in the early 1900s they really have never impressed me.
That’s why we have league-adjusted stats like wRC+ to compare players from different eras. Ruth was a baseball god among his peers, just like bonds basically was among his peers. If Ruth was facing nothing but relatively garbage competition, then there would’ve been other players that could compare to him during that time. There wasn’t/isn’t, which means he was just that much more talented than his peers as evidenced by his career 197 wRC+. The same premise applies to fWAR. Ruth was overall better than a replacement level player in his era than Bonds was in his era. That’s the only way to truly determine who was better.
The flaw with that is how evolved the game is now. The average player in Ruth’s era is from a small pool of players. So you get a lot of guys that might be somewhat serviceable but not really a good player. Now with scouting, expansion, a higher focus on bringing in the best of the best. We have thousands of minor leaguers, thousands of international players.
The game has evolved and been accepted by more cultures. So now of days your average player is better than the average player in Ruth’s era.
Again I’m not going to go into a full on debate. If you told me Bonds was the best I’d agree. If you told me Ruth was I’d agree.
Personally, and this is my personal opinion. Bonds dominance in the era he played in was slightly more impressive to me than Ruth’s dominance in his era. Strictly by the evolving talent Bonds faced.
here is a cool little article what Maddux said about Bonds as a hitter
https://www.knbr.com/2018/01/02/greg-maddux-on-barry-bonds-he-was-like-the-easiest-guy-in-the-world-to-pitch-to/ -
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@guccigangchuck said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@jogger171717_psn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
@quinnymcquinn said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Jeter, love or hate him would be a huge selling point for next years title. Couple that with the bird killing flame thrower Johnson. You got two huge 90’s legends that I think would really get folks excited.
I don’t think MLB wants Bonds likeness in any capacity gracing a licensed title. He got cancelled before it was cool.
It’s almost taboo to say Bonds was the best baseball player of all time. FYI he is. I hate saying that
Well you see, there was a man named Babe that is the actual best player of all time. Bonds comes in at 2nd place.
I’m not try to start a full on debate. And if you think Ruth is the best ever then I’d say you’re right. Because I think you could make a compelling argument for both. I feel they’d cancel themselves out if we did a full on versus between Bonds and Ruth.
https://www.fueledbysports.com/babe-ruth-vs-barry-bonds-comparison/
Check that out for a side by side comparison. Very quick reference
It’s obviously close, but Ruth putting up more fWAR in 2000 less PA and also having a wRC+ that’s over 20 points higher is all I need to know.
Ruth wouldnt hit the pitching bonds faced. Ruth's lack of competition makes me not really look at him as the Goat, its unfair to RIth cause its the hand he was dealt but, those uys in the early 1900s they really have never impressed me.
That’s why we have league-adjusted stats like wRC+ to compare players from different eras. Ruth was a baseball god among his peers, just like bonds basically was among his peers. If Ruth was facing nothing but relatively garbage competition, then there would’ve been other players that could compare to him during that time. There wasn’t/isn’t, which means he was just that much more talented than his peers as evidenced by his career 197 wRC+. The same premise applies to fWAR. Ruth was overall better than a replacement level player in his era than Bonds was in his era. That’s the only way to truly determine who was better.
The flaw with that is how evolved the game is now. The average player in Ruth’s era is from a small pool of players. So you get a lot of guys that might be somewhat serviceable but not really a good player. Now with scouting, expansion, a higher focus on bringing in the best of the best. We have thousands of minor leaguers, thousands of international players.
The game has evolved and been accepted by more cultures. So now of days your average player is better than the average player in Ruth’s era.
Again I’m not going to go into a full on debate. If you told me Bonds was the best I’d agree. If you told me Ruth was I’d agree.
Personally, and this is my personal opinion. Bonds dominance in the era he played in was slightly more impressive to me than Ruth’s dominance in his era. Strictly by the evolving talent Bonds faced.
You’re missing the point though. Obviously there were less players in Ruth’s time, but that doesn’t discount what he did at all. Like I said, if pitchers were so bad then, why wasn’t anyone else able to do what Ruth did? How good the average player during his time was is irrelevant. The whole point is that he was a better player in his era than bonds was in his. If bonds was truly the best, he would’ve been better in his time than Ruth was in his.
-
Bonds is a NEVER
Any player involved in the Steroids scandals when it became a real pandemic will NEVER be used in MLBTS. These are players like Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Conseco, Palmiero, Clemens, ETC.
They are Black Listed just the same with Rose, Beltran, Alomar, Felipe Vasquez, Dykstra, Backman, A-Rod & K-Rod. -
I want Babe Ruth and Bo Jackson.
-
@tonythetiger2k16 said in collection rewards next year AL, NL, and MLB:
Bonds is a NEVER
Any player involved in the Steroids scandals when it became a real pandemic will NEVER be used in MLBTS. These are players like Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Conseco, Palmiero, Clemens, ETC.
They are Black Listed just the same with Rose, Beltran, Alomar, Felipe Vasquez, Dykstra, Backman, A-Rod & K-Rod.Gagne, Sheffield, Giambi and Papi tested positive for steroids among others and we use their cards.
