In a "best player" thread, one respondent claimed that Gehrig "is often considered better than Ruth by a lot of historians" -- well, I'd like to know which historians they are. Does anyone have published citations for claims that Gehrig was a better player than Ruth? Please provide references (or laff derisively at this mildly amusing notion).
2007-05-04 05:36:43 · 8 answers · asked by Chipmaker Authentic 7 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Served? It is to laugh. That Gehrig got a wee few more votes in a popularity contest means nothing; look at the respective fields (geez, Rose shouldn't have gotten ANY votes in the outfielder bunch). If this forum allowed real back-n-forth I'd mop the floor; I haven't been here long enough to earn Top Contrib status.
Sad though his deterioration was, we cannot give Lou more years. History doesn't work like that.
And my question still stands: WHICH historians? I want to see published testimonials and evaluations -- not some eight-year-old popularity contest.
Gehrig fully deserves his place in history and plaque in the Hall. But better than Ruth? Not from what the historical record shows. He's up there, but Babe still stands tallest.
2007-05-04 10:43:58 · update #1
If there was a Historian that stupid I am sure anything that they wrote regarding this issue has been burned and forgotten. There is no one better than Ruth ever! He was hitting 50+ home runs when the entire rosters of the other teams in baseball couldnt hit that many combined. Plus he was a 20 game winner in Boston. Enough said!
2007-05-04 05:43:11 · answer #1 · answered by manu4life_giggs11 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I said it. And I will tell why I said it.
Babe Ruth 22 years career numbers:
Hits - 2,873
Hr's - 714
Rbi's - 2,213
BA - .342
Lou Gehrig 17 year career first 2 years 23 games and 8 in last year due to his disease so basically 14 years.
Hits - 2,721
Hr's - 493
Rbi's - 1,995
BA - .340
You add 6 to 8 more years to Lou's career and he demolishes the Babe's numbers period.
Maybe this will help you as far as historians go!
Try the voters for the MLB All-Century team.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/1999/1023/129008.html
So I guess these 1,207,992 votes Lou has are from idiots?
Correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe LOU GEHRIG has the most votes of any player and that includes the great BABE RUTH! In fact Lou has more votes than anybody.
Anybody else want to step up to the plate?
2007-05-04 15:46:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Chip? Biff? or whatever your name is you have obviously bitten off more than you can chew.
There have been plenty of baseball historians that mentioned Gehrig was a better player.
Buth was fun to watch and was great with children and the public loved him for that. Ruth the player was out of control and often thought he could get away with anything, but didn't.
My advise to you is to steer clear of Romulus. He will embarrass you bad just as he did here. At least he gave you a star.
2007-05-04 16:19:46 · answer #3 · answered by Jersey Joe 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Isn't it weird that Lou Gehrig died of Lou Gehrig's disease? What are the odds of that? Dude should have bought more lottery tickets in his life.
2007-05-04 12:51:08 · answer #4 · answered by NML 1635 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you think the Pride of the Yankees could win 20 games on the mound per year?
2007-05-04 18:04:39 · answer #5 · answered by MMM 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
im not a historian or anything like that but he is my grandpa's uncle. So i think that would make him my great great uncle. So i think he is better. But seriously its awesome being related to a hall of famer.
2007-05-04 17:02:24 · answer #6 · answered by C. Hodgins B*tches Part 2 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Chipmaker. I do believe you just got served. That's what happens when you f**k with a top contributor in a topic that you're not.
2007-05-04 16:00:04 · answer #7 · answered by Æon Flux 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
dumb ones.........
2007-05-04 12:59:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋