- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:02 pm to SmackoverHawg
Yeah old timer, I'm privy to all the old pitchers 
I've played, coached, and still play a lot of baseball.
Just really hard imagining a marris or Ruth digging in against some of today's top arms and doing well.
What was the average speed during the Ruth era? The difference between 85 and 95 is huge in terms of hitting.
Not condescending, I honestly don't know the typical mph average of that era since accurate clocking devices weren't around.
I've played, coached, and still play a lot of baseball.
Just really hard imagining a marris or Ruth digging in against some of today's top arms and doing well.
What was the average speed during the Ruth era? The difference between 85 and 95 is huge in terms of hitting.
Not condescending, I honestly don't know the typical mph average of that era since accurate clocking devices weren't around.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:02 pm to PhiTiger1764
quote:
1925 edition Babe Ruth is nothing more than a minor league player in 2015 IMO. But that doesn't mean he still isn't one of the greatest players of all time. An athlete's greatness should be measured by how he stacked up against his own generation. But I like thinking about things like this as well. Cannon would probably be at a Southeastern type school.
Nope. Humans have not evolved that rapidly. Athletes are no better no than they were then. Expose them to the same training and 100+ years of trial and error in techniques, experimentation, science and medicine. The greats will still be great. The biggest difference would be the black athlete. Especially in football and basketball. Of course, there were great black athletes then as well, they just didn't get to display their skill in large venues. You saying Josh Gibson and Satchell Page couldn't compete now? Mfing Satchel Page was 87 years old when he pitched in MLB and still wrecked shite.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:04 pm to SmackoverHawg
I'm talking straight time travel scenario.
If we let the athletes train with today's technology, they are today's athletes.
Grab a 1925 babe and a 2015 MLB pitcher of your choice and go all thunder dome style.
If we let the athletes train with today's technology, they are today's athletes.
Grab a 1925 babe and a 2015 MLB pitcher of your choice and go all thunder dome style.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:04 pm to BoogaBear
quote:
Just really hard imagining a marris or Ruth digging in against some of today's top arms and doing well.
bitch please
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:06 pm to SmackoverHawg
quote:
Expose them to the same training and 100+ years of trial and error in techniques, experimentation, science and medicine. The greats will still be great
Well sure if that's what we are talking about. If Babe Ruth were born in 1988 I have no doubt he would be dominating the game today. But I am sure the OP intended that you just pluck the guy out of his era and put him in 2015. If that's the case, Ruth is not making a 40-man roster.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:07 pm to BoogaBear
quote:
What was the average speed during the Ruth era? The difference between 85 and 95 is huge in terms of hitting. Not condescending, I honestly don't know the typical mph average of that era since accurate clocking devices weren't around.
There were plenty of live arms. And they weren't scared to knock your arse down. In a cotton arse hat, no helmet.
They mixed speeds, threw curves, spitballs and everything else. Today's athletes are better trained, but if the old guys were given the same training and nutrition, you'd see the same. Hell, with contacts or lasiks, there may be some new old greats. I think better ball was played in the 50's and 60's than today. It was America's game. Top athletes played baseball. Now it's scavenged by numerous other sports.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:09 pm to BoogaBear
Ruth and all of the other old timey baseball players wouldn't stand a chance in today's game. Which is funny how baseball writers out all these modern players up against freaking Honus Wagner.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:09 pm to SmackoverHawg
quote:
and everything else. Today's athletes are better trained, but if the old guys were given the same training and nutrition
Well they weren't, hence the entire reason for the debate.
quote:
top athletes played baseball.
Top athletes are better now. Wayyy better.
This post was edited on 2/24/15 at 11:11 pm
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:12 pm to PhiTiger1764
quote:Exactly. LOL at the Babe swinging at a 95 mph cutter. They could literally toy with him.
But I am sure the OP intended that you just pluck the guy out of his era and put him in 2015. If that's the case, Ruth is not making a 40-man roster.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:13 pm to Rickety Cricket
quote:
Which is funny how baseball writers out all these modern players up against freaking Honus Wagner.
what about Lou Gehrig's 181 RBIs while he had that disease?
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:13 pm to SmackoverHawg
You don't get it.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:16 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
the Babe swinging at a 95 mph cutter.
he might have had 914 homers
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:16 pm to BoogaBear
quote:
Grab a 1925 babe and a 2015 MLB pitcher of your choice and go all thunder dome style.
Ok. Young babe could swing it. I think he'd do fine. As would Ty Cobb and Lou Gehrig. Would their numbers be as gawdy? NO. But they'd be fine. It's not like they didn't face 90+mph fastballs from guys with nasty stuff. Just fewer and didn't have relief pitchers. That's a big change in recent decades.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:18 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:Prove it!!!!!
Exactly. LOL at the Babe swinging at a 95 mph cutter. They could literally toy with him.
You think no one back then threw hard with movement?
The frick out you can get. 
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:18 pm to 777Tiger
Verlander could strike out Babe Ruth at will. Could literally call the pitches and strike him out on whatever count he wanted.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:21 pm to SmackoverHawg
quote:
Ok. Young babe could swing it. I think he'd do fine. As would Ty Cobb and Lou Gehrig. Would their numbers be as gawdy? NO. But they'd be fine. It's not like they didn't face 90+mph fastballs from guys with nasty stuff. Just fewer and didn't have relief pitchers. That's a big change in recent decades.
these guys are either frustrated jv players or their kids are "travel" ball kids, they know nothing of what they speak, if they ran into one of these old players they're talking about they'd be shocked at how much they look like they could still get out on the field and kick some arse
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:23 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Verlander could strike out Babe Ruth at will. Could literally call the pitches and strike him out on whatever count he wanted.
horseshite. Call the pitches to the Babe and expect not to get bat raped? Deluded you are. So you think Mr Verlander is the best ever? Nastier than Nolan Ryan? Nolan Was old school. started pitching in the 60's. Pretty sure he could still throw a few innings now. He was still No hitting youngsters in MLB when his arse was pushing 50.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:28 pm to BoogaBear
quote:
Not condescending, I honestly don't know the typical mph average of that era since accurate clocking devices weren't around.
Guestestimation is best way. I geustjesestimate that some them old fools was breaking 90. Guranteed.
Posted on 2/24/15 at 11:30 pm to SmackoverHawg
quote:
some them old fools was breaking 90.
and pitching back to back double headers ever so often
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News