Who is the GREATEST baseball player ever?

[Dryden]

True, it's Ruth hands down, not even close. Unless, you take into account what Ted Williams would have done had WWII never taken place. Because of the war Williams essentially missed his prime. The year before he shipped off he won the Triple Crown, and the second year he was back ('47) he won it again. If you average his Triple crown years together and multiple them by the number of years he missed, which I think is fair he could have put up better numbers, Williams ranks 1st alltime in Runs Scored, RBI's, and walks. He ranks 4th in Homers, 5th in doubles, 9th in hits, and probably would have raised his career average to around .350ish which would put him 4th. Pretty good argument, I think.

And if we pretend lots of players had stats that they never actually amassed, we'd have a totally different historical record for baseball.

Even with Williams's WWII years, Ruth still holds a 94-46 record and lifetime 2.28 ERA in enough full-time seasons as a pitcher that you can count on one hand (plus his spot starts in NY), before becoming the most feared hitter of any generation. His pitching stats in his only two seasons (1916, 1917) as a "full time" pitcher compare favorably to Walter Johnson for the same seasons (they were in the same league), with Ruth writing his legend early by pitching 13 shutout innings for Boston in Game 2 of the 1916 World Series.

This is akin to a Clemens or Maddux deciding to just give up pitching in 1992, and becoming a DH that hits like Ken Griffey Jr in his prime, but even more dominant than that. Just the thought of it is absurd.

If you asked any sportswriter or baseball fan of any era to name the best player of that era, or decade, or generation, or quarter-century, or whatever ... you'll get a dozen different answers, except for the 1910s and 1920s. When Ruth played, there was never a doubt who the best player was. That says a lot.

 

[Best Buckeye]

Babe Ruth because the pro game was built by him and his reputaion, his persona.
He more than any player before while or since has done more for baseball.
While others have added to it he was the main block, the keystone of the foundation.

 

[Bleed S & G]

The Grat Bahbino

 

[HailToMichigan]

Willie Mays. To me it comes down to this: Babe Ruth was outstanding in two things: pitching and hitting. Mays was outstanding in three: hitting, fielding, and baserunning.

I'll acknowledge that Babe Ruth had the greatest impact on the game. Hell, he probably did more to popularize his sport than any other athlete, ever. Jackie Robinson also had a profound impact on the game, but I wouldn't hesitate to name 50 better actual ballplayers than him.

 

[PrincetonBuckeye]

Great to read the posts....I love to see that Ruth is an overwhelming favorite....to me he is one of the greatest. But Babe Ruth copies the "game" and swing of "Shoeless" Joe...why can't he ("Shoeless" Joe) be considered the greatest? He played in a dead ball era....and with his stats????

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I guess Ruth did have a reputation of being a little lazy on the base paths. But, considering the lineup around him (1927 in particular), he could afford it a bit.

Mays isn't a bad choice, by any means. I still have to go with Ruth though. And, I've always liked Hank Aaron's name being included in the discussion, although I still have to come out on Ruth's side when push comes to shove.

 

[scooter1369]

John Kruk

 

[Best Buckeye]

Come on guys. Yankee stadium is the "house that Ruth built" and Baseball is the game that Ruth built

 

[PrincetonBuckeye]

Come on guys. Yankee stadium is the "house that Ruth built" and Baseball is the game that Ruth built

copied from "Shoeless" Joe Jacksons' mold....

IMHO....but it is proven fact....

 

[Best Buckeye]

copied from "Shoeless" Joe Jacksons' mold....

IMHO....but it is proven fact....

Jackson was thrown out of baseball and you think he was the "greatest" player ever??

He never came close to being good enough to polish the Babe's shoes.

 

[HailToMichigan]

Come on guys. Yankee stadium is the "house that Ruth built" and Baseball is the game that Ruth built

Well, it's like I said: Ruth had the greatest impact on the game, but then again Jackie Robinson's impact on the game was also enormous and I could name 50 players who I think are better. Impact on the game should be separate from the greatest ballplayer debate.

[Shoeless Joe] never came close to being good enough to polish the Babe's shoes.

I think that's a bit harsh. If Jackson finished his career, he'd have made the Hall, no questions. He doesn't belong in the "greatest ever" debate but a .356 lifetime average and a career that projects out to about 2,800 hits (right around the Babe's number) is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[Dryden]

I love these discussions. :)

Here's something else to consider with Ruth: From 1914 - 1917 he was a pitcher, exclusively. In those four seasons, his HR totals were 0, 4, 3, and 2. In 1918 and 1919 his pitching duties declined as his abilities with the bat dictated he HAD to be in the lineup more frequently, so he pitched half as often, but began playing with more regularity day-to-day. His HR totals for those two seasons were 11 and 29. Then he was traded to the Yankees and the rest is history ... 54, 59, etc ...

If Ruth had not bothered pitching, and he had those six season back as a hitter that even remotely resembled what he'd become, his numbers project out to about 900HR, with career stats very near .350/.480/.750.

These are numbers for a 20 year career average. Mark McGwire's single 1998 season was not even that good.

In 1921, only his second year as a full time hitter, he hit 59HRs, clubbed 44 2Bs, 16 3Bs, drew 145 BBs, and stole 17 bases.

Not bad for a drunk, fat ass!

 

[Best Buckeye]

Well, it's like I said: Ruth had the greatest impact on the game,

I think that's a bit harsh. If Jackson finished his career, he'd have made the Hall, no questions. He doesn't belong in the "greatest ever" debate but a .356 lifetime average and a career that projects out to about 2,800 hits (right around the Babe's number) is nothing to sneeze at.

No the stats arent but getting thrown out does. If's are not a consideration

 

[Best Buckeye]

I love these discussions. :)

Here's something else to consider with Ruth: From 1914 - 1917 he was a pitcher, exclusively. In those four seasons, his HR totals were 0, 4, 3, and 2. In 1918 and 1919 his pitching duties declined as his abilities with the bat dictated he HAD to be in the lineup more frequently, so he pitched half as often, but began playing with more regularity day-to-day. His HR totals for those two seasons were 11 and 29. Then he was traded to the Yankees and the rest is history ... 54, 59, etc ...

If Ruth had not bothered pitching, and he had those six season back as a hitter that even remotely resembled what he'd become, his numbers project out to about 900HR, with career stats very near .350/.480/.750.

These are numbers for a 20 year career average. Mark McGwire's single 1998 season was not even that good.

In 1921, only his second year as a full time hitter, he hit 59HRs, clubbed 44 2Bs, 16 3Bs, drew 145 BBs, and stole 17 bases.

Not bad for a drunk, fat ass!

Very nice post. more fuel for my side.

 

[HailToMichigan]

Very nice post. more fuel for my side.

I thought "ifs" were not a consideration? Other than the "if" paragraph, it's impressive, but it's been said.

Here's an interesting story, food for thought for those who choose Ty Cobb in this debate: In 1925, Cobb got sick of all the attention directed at Ruth, and told a reporter it really wasn't that hard to hit home runs and he'd do so a lot more if he felt like it. He then proceeded to hit five home runs in nine at bats over the course of two days and then went back to doing what he usually did (Cobb was famous for holding his hands an inch or two apart, which sapped his power but allowed him the bat control to slap the ball to any part of the field he wanted.)