Best Cubs Hitter ever?

[wvcbxl]

You guys think baseball players were just as good 50-100 years ago as they are today, and I disagree.

 

So do I - I think those guys were intrinsically better than the ones that play today.

But my guess is a good - or as wild - as yours on this matter. :wink:

[hardcorecubfan]

Yes I'm sure the great hitters of past eras would totally not take advantage of modern advances in sports medicine and workout routines if they happened to be born a few decades later. :scratch:

 

Though Ty Cobb would still be an idiot but would have been suspended for assault and battery to a fan , then an ump and then arrested for dui manslaughter, If he could stay clean he would have been a great with today's training techniques

[SouthSideRyan]

It's like hardcore thought: OMC hasn't posted enough in this thread.

[OleMissCub]

Yes I'm sure the great hitters of past eras would totally not take advantage of modern advances in sports medicine and workout routines if they happened to be born a few decades later. :scratch:

 

Though Ty Cobb would still be an idiot but would have been suspended for assault and battery to a fan , then an ump and then arrested for dui manslaughter

 

Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about concerning DUI manslaughter. I'm the uber-Cobb homer around here and I can tell you right now that you're thinking of someone else.

 

You can apply that standard to alot of baseball legends for acts committed on the field. Cobb would probably be suspended for the whole season for going into the stands today. Ted Williams spit into the stands at fans several times and once threw his bat into the stands on purpose after striking out and it bashed an old lady in the head. Babe Ruth also went up into the stands after a fan once and in two different instances physically attacked umpires. Cobb never hit an ump on the field but did fight with one in a mutual fist fight on their own time ala "see you outside after the game".

 

I think all those instances listed above would have caused 50 game or even year long suspensions. Imagine Pujols assaulting an umpire like Ruth or running up into the stands to attack a fan (a handicapped one at that) like Cobb.

 

If he could stay clean he would have been a great with today's training techniques

 

Williams and Cobb are the two legends that I think would most benefit and take advantage of modern film. Both were regarded in their times as the most intelligent and scientific hitters in the game and both possessed an almost eery mental database concerning pitchers and their specific pitches. They would have gone to town with modern technology.

[OleMissCub]

It's like hardcore thought: OMC hasn't posted enough in this thread.

 

he certainly put up the OMC-bat signal.

[Guest]

My team of 9 Sammy Sosa's will beat your team of 9 Ichiro's every day of the week

pfft...Ichiro could outpitch Sammy any day. I'd take my chances with him at SS before Sammy, too.

[UK1679666180]

So all you guys are disagreeing with my statement that Sosa was not a great hitter? That's what's wrong with my post?

 

I just mean that I always saw him as more of a slugger, and not such a great pure hitter. He did strike out quite a bit.

 

EDIT: I was just looking back at some of his SLG and OPS numbers from back in his prime... WOW.

 

WTH is a "pure" hitter?

 

It is the ability to hit for avg.

 

What's pure about it?

 

The ability to have bat speed, maintain a level bat thru the swing, great hand-eye coord., and a solid line drive approach.

 

It isn't different than trying to figure out what is a power hitter.

[Coach C]

Since we're talking about pitchers (somewhat), I would imagine that the pitcher's mound was a little bit higher during Walter's time, than it is today?

[OleMissCub]

Since we're talking about pitchers (somewhat), I would imagine that the pitcher's mound was a little bit higher during Walter's time, than it is today?

 

It depended on the ballpark, but in general yes it was higher. In 1904 they standardized the ruling to where it had to be 15 inches above the baseline.

[Three Finger]

I would have to go with Billy Williams myself, as a couple of you all ready have. He was the complete package, as far as hitters go. Its hard to argue anyone but Ernie Banks as far as power hitters for the Cubs go, but Billy was the absolute package in every aspect.

[Three Finger]

Since we're talking about pitchers (somewhat), I would imagine that the pitcher's mound was a little bit higher during Walter's time, than it is today?

 

It depended on the ballpark, but in general yes it was higher. In 1904 they standardized the ruling to where it had to be 15 inches above the baseline.

 

Wasn't it lowered slightly following Bob Gibson's ridiculous season with the 1.12 ERA?

[Cubbie Swagger]

My team of 9 Sammy Sosa's will beat your team of 9 Ichiro's every day of the week

That would be true. Which is why I never said otherwise. I never said Ichiro was better than Sosa. I was simply asked for an example of what people call a "pure" hitter, and I gave one.

[Cubbie Swagger]

I really don't think you have a clue of what you are talking about.

Considering very few of us were actually alive (or old enough to follow baseball) during the period in question, I would argue that none of us really know.

 

The ability to have bat speed, maintain a level bat thru the swing, great hand-eye coord., and a solid line drive approach.

 

It isn't different than trying to figure out what is a power hitter.

Well said.

[OleMissCub]

Considering very few of us were actually alive (or old enough to follow baseball) during the period in question, I would argue that none of us really know.

 

Yeah, nice cop out.

 

This is taken from Baseball-Fever.com:

 

1. There is no physiological reason to support the assumption that pitchers are throwing faster now than they were 20/50/100 years ago.

 

One that is pointed out is the increased physical stature in players over the last several generations. While it is true that, in general, pitchers (and players) have gotten increasingly taller with each generation, this means little since the model fireball pitcher over the past 100+ years and even today has been, with few exceptions, a rather mid-sized fellow—6’-6’4”: Cy Young (6’2”), Amos Rusie (6’1”), Rube Waddell (6’2”), Ed Walsh (6’1”), Walter Johnson (6’2”), Dazzy Vance (6’2”), Lefty Grove (6’3”), Dizzy Dean (6’2”), Bob Feller (6’), Johnny Vander Meer (6’1”), Sandy Koufax (6’2”), Bob Gibson (6’1”), Tom Seaver (6’1”), Steve Carlton (6’4”), Nolan Ryan (6’2”), Dwight Gooden (6’2”), Roger Clemens (6’4”), David Cone (6’1”), Mark Wohlers (6’4”), Eric Gagne (6’2”), etc. Of course, exceptions on the tall side exist—Don Drysdale (6’5”), Sam McDowell (6’5”), J.R. Richard (6’8”), Randy Johnson (6’10”), Kerry Wood (6’5”)—but then so do shorter examples—Kid Nichols (5’10”), Smoky Joe Wood (5’10”), Ron Guidry (5’11”), Pedro Martinez (5’9”), Billy Wagner (5’8”)—the most recent examples of which display a height well within the stature of even the smallest starting pitchers 100 years ago, and a dominance of today’s much taller ML product which puts paid to the idea that pitchers of more modest stature cannot challenge the gun achievements of their more generously-statured peers.

 

Another oft-cited rebuttal is the claim that today’s weight training programs have given today’s moundsmen pitching arms of a strength superior to their predecessors. The problem with this claim is that there exists no evidence whatsoever that weight training increases pitching velocity. While I’m sure than many, if not most, recognize the importance of weight training in helping their pitchers build endurance, there’s not a pitching coach in the majors today who believes that it can do anything to help their charges’ fastballs. Most weight training is designed to build your maximum strength—the maximum amount of weight that you can lift—not absolute strength—the maximum amount you can lift at the maximum amount of speed; a.k.a., explosive strength—or muscle elasticity, which are the type of strength components that go into pitching velocity. Leo Mazzone, perhaps MLB’s most respected pitching coach, has gone on record regarding building velocity by saying that there is “simply no replacement for picking up a ball and throwing it.” To reiterate, there has not been one iota of evidence produced which shows that weight training increases pitching velocity.

 

 

2. Simple physics and Babe Ruth

 

In Robert K. Adair’s famous tome, The Physics of Baseball, we learn that the faster the pitch coming in, the greater energy it contains. Therefore, the heavier the bat needed to “reverse” the power of the pitch and send in rocketing toward the outfield fence. Conversely, the slower the pitch (batting practice), the less energy it contains; and therefore, the lighter the bat needed to provide the extra energy needed to drive the ball for distance (look at fungo-hitting, for instance). This simple physics lesson provides us with a lot of insight into the batter-pitcher paradigm, and allows us to draw several conclusions which seem to be very much in line with those subscribed to by today’s batters. After all, they typically bring their lightest bat to batting-practice, and consequently hit their farthest drives during this pre-game exercise.

 

And yet, if one believes in-game fastballs of, say, 80 years ago were the equivalent of today’s batting-practice pitches, how does one account for Ruth? During his prime years of the 1920’s, Ruth used bats between 54-42 oz. in-game—far heavier than anything seen in today’s game, much less batting-practice. And yet, research of the most painstaking type by home run expert Bill Jenkinson has established that Ruth was the greatest (furthest and most consistent) distance hitter of all-time. In 1921, for instance, it is an established fact that Ruth hit at least one 500-ft. home run in each of the eight American League parks. During this season, Ruth was typically employing 50-54 oz. war clubs. If the simple physics lesson above teaches us anything, it is that no one should be able to hit the ball as far with much heavier bats as other similarly-powered sluggers do with conversely lighter bats against pitches of relatively equal, low velocity; for one cannot swing the heavy bat with as much velocity as the light bat. And yet, if one subscribes to the theory that in-game fastballs of 80 years ago were the equivalent of today’s batting-practice pitches, then one must accept that Ruth could literally defy physics. The rejoinder, “Imagine how far he might have hit him had he used the same weight of bat that today’s sluggers use!” would be missing the point; for, according to the physics model above, it should have already been impossible for Ruth to have hit them as far as he did with the hefty bats he used. According to the model above, he would have had to have already been using much lighter bats to have been able to remain such a prodigious and consistent distance hitter in this would-be era of batting-practice pitches.

 

Of course, a more logical conclusion to this seeming-conundrum would be that the in-game pitches Ruth was hitting were traveling much faster than batting-practice velocity. In fact, the faster one assumes the pitches were traveling, the more credible Ruth’s distance achievements become; as it would accord with the demonstrated physics model Adair outlines in The Physics of Baseball, and the one which experience has taught us. For instance, concluding that Ruth’s May 7, 1921, 500+-ft. blast off Walter Johnson, which sailed over Griffith Stadium’s 457-ft. centerfield wall high into the trees behind, was hit off of a 95+-mph. fastball makes immensely more logical sense according to the demonstrated physics models than believing Johnson’s victimized pitch was little more than ~80-mph. At this lower speed, Ruth would have had to have provided the lion’s share of the energy himself—something he just would not have been able to do swinging his 50+ oz. war club (unless, again, we are willing to accept that Ruth had far greater bat velocity than any hitter in history; a model I’m less willing to accept as logical). Indeed, as mentioned above, the faster we assume Johnson’s pitch was, the less “superhuman” Ruth becomes. As for me, I’m more willing to believe that Ruth’s distance hitting was the beneficiary of some realistically fast, “energy-loaded” pitching over the superstitious conclusion that Ruth was simply “superhuman” (amazing, yes; superhuman, no).

In conclusion, respect of the very science involved in these paradigms demands a conclusion in line with the one scientifically laid out; and, therefore, the common sensical one.

 

 

3. Evidence in the form of batter injuries suffered at the hands of yesteryear’s fireballers.

 

Experience helps us to recognize that pitches thrown at batting-practice speed, the pedigree of velocity often and recklessly attributed to pitchers decades ago, cannot cause serious bodily injury to the batter 60’6” away. Yet, positively legion are the instances of serious bodily injury, and even compound fracture, caused by errant pitches thrown by yesteryear’s moundsmen. Amos Rusie caved in the skull of Orioles shortstop Hughie Jennings and left him in a brink-of-death coma for four days after connecting one of his legendary heaters with Jennings’ noggin in the year 1892. Though this particular injury was “achieved” with the pitcher’s throwing distance a little more than 50 feet away from the batter, the moving back of the pitcher’s proximity to the batter to 60’6” wasn’t enough to prevent the same thing from happening to a young major-leaguer named Artie Ball six years later, also a victim of a Rusie fastball to the skull. In Ball’s case, he never played another ML game. Perhaps just as frightening as a Rusie fast one inside was Walter Johnson’s “hisser,” as a rookie named Jack Martin could testify in 1912, when he narrowly missed certain death, taking a Johnson fastball to the jaw, shattering it in five places and losing several teeth. A year earlier, a Johnson fast one to the throwing arm of Chicago’s Lee Tannehill had ended the veteran third baseman’s career, shattering his wrist so badly that the injury permanently impaired his throwing ability.

 

In a game in 1915, an errant Johnson pitch struck the Tigers’ Ossie Vitt in the forehead and knocked him cold for ten minutes. Impressive (and scary), until one finds out that the pitch happened to be a curveball, in which case it becomes positively amazing and terrifying (fortunately, Vitt was OK). On May 25, 1937, player-manager and future-HOFer Mickey Cochrane had his skull fractured in three places by an errant Bump Hadley heater. Cochrane was to be in a coma for ten days, and would never play again. Though accounts of serious bodily injury occurring at the hands of yesterday’s fireballers are, as I said, legion, I believe the point has been made so I’ll leave it at that for now.

 

Lest we forget, the only death that has yet occurred on a ML diamond was at the hands of submarine fireballer Carl Mays, who crushed Ray Chapman’s skull with a high and inside fastball on August 16, 1920. A pitch thrown at so-called batting practice speed could not have caused such damage, in the case of Mays/Chapman, as in the case of the other instances of serious injury caused by a pitched ball.

 

4. Evidence in the form of yesteryear’s throwing contests

 

Finally, we have hard evidence that players of as much as 140+ years ago were throwing with velocities very comparable to today’s, in the form of throwing distance contests which were held by major-league teams in days gone by. These were commonly one of the attractions of what were known as Field Days, during which the best of two meeting teams (sometimes “All-Star” teams) would compete for top prizes in several field events testing baseball athleticism. Typically, there would be three primary events: 100-yard dash (or base circuit); distance fungo; and distance throw. As with the other two, records of the throwing contestants provides us today with some extremely valuable information regarding the physical skills of players from many decades ago—perhaps even in comparison to today’s—something which would be impossible to determine otherwise.

 

For instance, I recall something the Anaheim Angels did about a month back at their home ballpark. It wasn’t an official Field Day, simply the feat of lining up Vladimir Guerrero behind the third base bag and having him throw it over the right field fence. An impressive throw, no doubt (~350 ft.). Yet the muscular Vlad’s heave doesn’t compare to a throw made by Honus Wagner in a Field Day event held in Pittsburgh between the Louisville and Steel City ballclubs, October 16, 1898. Because records were kept, we know that Honus Wagner made what was considered a record-breaking throw of 403 ft., 8 in. in his (successful) attempt at gaining the day’s top throwing prizes.

 

My research has led me to so far uncover below’s recorded instances of similar distance throws. A couple, like the alleged Tony Mullane throw, I have not yet accepted as “official” because of lack of evidence. Two more, Foxx’s and Feller’s heaves, I have included simply because of the ages at which these respective feats were achieved. (BTW, because of health concerns, pitchers were almost always excluded from these throwing events.)

 

Name	         Date	         Distance	    Place
John Hatfield	?/?/?	        349 ft.	        ? 
John Hatfield	7/9/1868	396 ft.	        Cincinnati
John Hatfield	10/15/1872	400 ft., 7½ in.	Brooklyn
Tony Mullane	?/?/?	        416 ft., 7¾ in.	?
Farmer Vaughn	6/23/1890	402 ft., 2½ in.	? 
Honus Wagner	10/16/1898	403 ft., 8 in.	Pittsburgh
Honus Wagner	?/?/1907	399 ft., 10¾ in.? 
Larry LeJeune	10/3/1908	435 ft.	        Chicago
Larry LeJeune	10/12/1910	401 ft., 4½ in.	Cincinnati
Larry LeJeune	10/12/1910	426 ft., 9½ in.	Cincinnati
Joe Jackson	9/27/1917	396 ft., 8 in.	Boston
Duffy Lewis	9/27/1917	384 ft., 6 in.	Boston
Clarence Walker	9/27/1917	384 ft., 6 in.	Boston
Al Nixon	?/?/?	        400 ft.	? 
Don Grate	9/7/1952	434 ft., 1 in.	Chattanooga
Don Grate	8/23/1953	443 ft., 3½ in.	? 
Glen Gorbous	8/1/1957	445 ft., 10 in.	Omaha
Jimmie Foxx 	5/21/1919	183 ft., 5 in.	Maryland
Bob Feller	?/?/1928	275 ft.	        Van Meter, IW

 

The next step is to convert these throwing distances into velocity over 60’6”. This is done by consulting Chart 2.5 in Adair’s The Physics of Baseball, which gives us a “muzzle velocity” for each distance achieved between 200 and 500 ft.; factoring in the 8-mph. drop in velocity from the release point 55’ feet away to the plate; and accounting for an additional ~8-mph. gained by “crow-hopping” (as outfielders do before throwing). According to Chart 2.5, someone who can launch a ball ~404 ft. on the fly throws with a muzzle velocity of ~110 mph. Considering that fast pitchers lose ~8-mph. on their pitches from their release point to the plate, and subtracting the extra ~8-mph. Wagner probably gained from crow-hopping, we see that Wagner’s heave was the equivalent of a 94-mph. fastball. (Likewise, if we take John Hatfield’s 400 ft., 7½ in. throw made on October 15, 1872, we see that Hatfield could speed them in at ~92-mph.)

 

If we then follow the accepted model that the strongest arms in MLB have always been on the pitchers mound, we logically infer that the fastest pitchers in Wagner’s day were throwing over 95-mph—much the same as today.

[Cubbie Swagger]

Yeah, nice cop out.

Thanks.

 

But I'm not copping out of anything. I still stand by my opinion. I'm just saying that nobody on this forum can give anything other than an opinion, given the circumstances. There will never be any proof because we will never be able to take a player from 1900 and send him to the plate in the modern era.

[Guest]

Sorry, I find those arguments utterly unconvincing.

[Derwood]

This is like Rocky IV, only Ted Williams is Rocky, working out in the mountains, dragging hay bales through the snow, and doing upside down sit ups in a barn, and Albert Pujols is Ivan Drago, working in a state-of-the-art Soviet training facility.

 

I think we know how this movie ends....

[OleMissCub]

Yeah, nice cop out.

Thanks.

 

But I'm not copping out of anything. I still stand by my opinion. I'm just saying that nobody on this forum can give anything other than an opinion, given the circumstances. There will never be any proof because we will never be able to take a player from 1900 and send him to the plate in the modern era.

 

I've asked you before and you won't answer it. When do you start taking baseball players' talents legitimately? Are Willie Mays' stats from 50 years ago legit?

[OleMissCub]

Sorry, I find those arguments utterly unconvincing.

 

That's fine, but are you of the opinion that there weren't pitchers 75 years ago that could throw as hard as some of the guys do now? There are lanky high schoolers that can throw 90mph with no real training. Do you think that there were grown men whose professions it was to get batters out that couldn't throw that hard 75 years ago?

 

What about 50 years ago? Sandy Koufax was pitching 50 years ago and he certainly looks to be throwing mid 90's or so.

 

 

What about 65 years ago? Bob Feller:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAm5fwb1Psw

 

How about 75 years ago? Dizzy Dean:

 

 

Those guys all easily look like they could be throwing mid 90's. If someone looks to be doing it 75 years ago, then why not 85 or 90 years ago?

[javy knows my name]

Cool.

[Cubbie Swagger]

I've asked you before and you won't answer it. When do you start taking baseball players' talents legitimately? Are Willie Mays' stats from 50 years ago legit?

I answered it before but I guess I didn't make myself clear. My answer is that there is no exact point when stats become relevant. I believe that it was a gradual thing. However, if I had to throw a number out there, I would say that once you start getting past the 1950's or so, stats get increasingly more relevant.

 

And yes, I think Mays was a good hitter. But now you're gonna start giving me examples of all the players who's careers overlapped over the decades, their stats, etc.

 

FWIW, I'm not "excluding" steroids. You don't think all of the modern players jacked up on roids could go back in time and DESTROY pitchers from the old days?

[OleMissCub]

And yes, I think Mays was a good hitter.

 

Mays only hit .296 in 1956, so I doubt he'd make a major league roster today. Maybe, and I mean MAYBE, he'd be a 5th outfielder...

 

on the Royals

[Cubbie Swagger]

And yes, I think Mays was a good hitter.

 

Mays only hit .296 in 1956, so I doubt he'd make a major league roster today. Maybe, and I mean MAYBE, he'd be a 5th outfielder...

 

on the Royals

 

I am not saying that players from the 50's would be scrubs today. I'm saying you would see their numbers decline somewhat.

 

But as far as players from 100+ years ago... I think you would see very significant decline. Possibly even to the point of some of them being scrubs.

[The Voice of Reason]

Yeah, nice cop out.

Thanks.

 

But I'm not copping out of anything. I still stand by my opinion. I'm just saying that nobody on this forum can give anything other than an opinion, given the circumstances. There will never be any proof because we will never be able to take a player from 1900 and send him to the plate in the modern era.

 

Really??????

 

You can't do that?

[OleMissCub]

But as far as players from 100+ years ago... I think you would see very significant decline. Possibly even to the point of some of them being scrubs.

 

I wouldn't argue against that point for the most part. However, I think the special guys from 100 years like Cobb or Speaker would still be good players today just because they were so, so much better than their competition. One year when Cobb hit .390 the league average was .256. Another thing to remember about the players from 100 years ago is that these were the best (white obviously) players of their time. There was an extensive amount of lower professional leagues (early minor leagues) back then and all the athletes in the country were playing baseball since football and basketball weren't really on the national radar all that much. So the guys who played in the bigs 100 years ago were not only the best ballplayers in the country but also among the best athletes in the country (Jim Thorpe played in the MLB for 6 years, for example). It wasn't like someone could just walk up to the park and say "hey y'all, I wanna play!!". They had a pretty big network of minor leagues and you had to work your way up just like now.