Started By
Message

re: Hank Aaron compares GOP to the Klan

Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:37 am to
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
80335 posts
Posted on 4/10/14 at 9:37 am to
quote:

But in this case, Aaron played only one more year than Ruth: 23 years vs 22, but played in 1000 more games.


2 reasons for this:

1. Aaron played the bulk of his career with a 162 game schedule vs. the 154 game schedule of the Ruth era.

2. Ruth spent the first 5 years of his career almost exclusively as a pitcher, meaning that he appeared in (at best) about 1/4 of his team's scheduled games.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89765 posts
Posted on 4/10/14 at 10:15 am to
quote:

1. Aaron played the bulk of his career with a 162 game schedule vs. the 154 game schedule of the Ruth era.


23*8=184 - potential games.

quote:

2. Ruth spent the first 5 years of his career almost exclusively as a pitcher, meaning that he appeared in (at best) about 1/4 of his team's scheduled games.


And he didn't play the whole game in many of his appearances, as well.

However - a career record is a career record. While you have to have a minimum number of at bats, appearances, etc. to be eligible for things like ERA, batting average, etc., a career record that is somehow subject to caveat because of rule changes or "But Ruth was a pitcher for 5 years" nonsense defeats the entire purpose.

A career record is a career record. Subjective qualifications aside (again, I concur that Ruth was, probably, the greatest offensive player ever - a true sports superstar, before there was really even such a thing - and should be credited with the wide popularization of baseball in the 20th century), we can, literally do this with every career record - from Rose's total hits, to Bonds 762*, and on and on and on.

If you play on a better team, you get more opportunities to record stats. However, what if the team is better because of you (Ruth, Gehrig, Rose, Mantle, Mays, etc.)?

I can sort of understand the 61 in 61, as he did hit 60 and 61 after the 154 game mark. But the way it was handled was all bull$hit - if anything, you asterisk Ruth's record and specify (* no other player has hit 60 or more home runs within a 154 game schedule) - not Maris who had, the season record for homeruns after 1961 - period.

You'll notice that Ruth's 1920 single season record wasn't subject to an asterisk (* this season was the first to feature the new composition ball - thus making homeruns much easier than before).

I guess it didn't hurt that he was shattering his own record from the previous year - but that is a coincidence of history - doesn't make the comparison any less valid.
This post was edited on 4/10/14 at 10:16 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram