The Sosa stuff didn't bother me so much as your temporal-centric point of view about players in the past...and you weren't talking about Cap Anson types who played 130 years ago, you were talking about Ted freaking Williams. Williams hit .388 in 1957 and Hank Aaron hit .322. In 1971 Aaron hit .327 and Pete Rose hit .301. In 1981 Rose hit .325 and Rickey Henderson hit .319. In 1990 Henderson hit .325 and Ken Griffey Jr hit .300. In 2005 Griffey hit .301 and Mark Teixeira hit .301. You see what I'm doing there? When do baseball players and their baseball talent become legit to you? 1995 or something? To think that an UNGODLY hitter 50 years ago would be some scrub today is completely stupid. Is Rickey Henderson legit in your mind? If so, then you have to say Pete Rose is legit because they both co-existed and were successful in the same season against the same competition. If Pete Rose is legit to you then Aaron must be legit. If Aaron is legit to you then Ted Williams should be legit. The basic elements of the game (to which real baseball talent applies) haven't changed all that much in 100 years. The talent pool is bigger and the players are obviously more athletic than they used to be, only a fool would deny that, but that principle applies to guys who played in 1985 just like it applies to those who played in 1915. So when do you stop being a snob toward players in the past? If Ted Williams was 30 years old playing in the game today he'd still be hitting the absolute piss out of the ball. Would he have a .400+ season like he did in 1941? Probably not, but I imagine he'd still be in the running for a batting title.