Young Ruth was a pretty good right fielder -- no worse than league-average. RF is where the big throwing arms go -- outfield duffers end up in left where the occasional, crucial throw to third isn't nearly so hard. Young Ruth was a seriously athletic man, very big for the time.
Older, fat Ruth that most are familiar with from olde newsreels, well, not so good -- below average -- but that bat still had its magic, and he had to play somewhere. The Yankees lived with his defense. 1928 is approximately when his defense started slipping off.
2007-05-06 04:52:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Babe Ruth did not just pitch. He was arguably the best left hander of in baseball for five years. That alone would have gotten him into the HOF if he kept pitching. As for cumulative records, such as HR's, SB, Hits, Walks etc? Take this into account. Babe Ruth had hit 714 Career HR's. The did that with some 2500 less AB's than Hank Aaron. If Ruth were a position player from day one, he would ave hit well over 800 HR's and shattered just about every cumulative state in the game. And finally, when you judge a player as best of all time, (if you really COULD) you have to compare him to other players of his era. Babe Ruth hit more home runs in season than most TEAMS did for much of his career. He hit for incredibly high average...350 or thereabouts...and was the most feared hitter in the game. Oh, and like you said. He could pitch. Babe Ruth is so clearly the best player in the history of the game that it's almost the question should be who, after Babe Ruth, is the best player in the history of the game. Here are some stats For Aaron, Mays and Ruth: Aaron Ave. .305 Games Played 3298 At Bats 12,364 Runs 2174 Home Runs 755 Hits 3771 RBI 2297 SB 248 SLG. 555 --------------------- Mays Ave. 302 Games Played 2992 At Bats 10,881 Runs 2062 Hits 3283 Home Runs 660 RBI 1903 SB 328 SLG 555 --------------------------- Ruth Avg 342 Games Played 2503 AB 8399 Runs 2174 Hits 2873 Home Runs 714 RBI 1982 SB 123 SLG 690 Ruth had a higher slugging percentage, batting average, more runs scored or equal to as the other two. For the cumulative stats, he had more HR's than Mays, who had 2,500 more AB's. So hits, games played, RBI, stolen bases, which are cumulative stats, dont count when making this comparison. For Aaron, they count even less. He had 4500 more AB's, and only a marginal number more Home runs. Oh, and not to mention that pitching thing. Ruth is CLEARLY better.
2016-04-01 10:38:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
in babe ruths younger days he played the outfield and wasnt that great. the babe had great power at the plate so they had him as a DH for awile. babe wanted to be out helping his team on the other side of the ball, so he became a pitcher. the babe didnt play the outfield for very long in the majors then switched back to a thrower. and no he wasnt very good at getting around the outfield, he could barley get around the bases without sweating his butt off.
2007-05-06 03:58:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by ryan v 1
·
0⤊
5⤋
Babe was an adequate fielder, with a .968 fielding percentage. That is comparable to someone like Miguel Tejada of today. Not many pictures show him fielding probably because no one cared to see hit do anything else but hit.
2007-05-09 08:52:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by scoobyscupid 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
ruth pitched a lot
he was great pitcher
not sure about outfield
Manny had how many outfield assist ?
2007-05-06 00:50:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Red Sawx ® 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
He wasn't a great fielder.He was the Manny Rameriez of the 20's.
2007-05-06 00:51:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by red4tribe 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
sure he was give him credit who else has worn a cabbage leaf in their hat to keep them from sweating (fact) Anyone who would that has got to be the greatest anything of all time.
2007-05-06 00:53:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by shark4279 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
He was pretty much middle-of-the-road fielding. Early in his career, though, he was a great pitcher.
2007-05-06 19:19:26
·
answer #8
·
answered by hulidoshi 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babe_Ruth
Good overall discussion with links
2007-05-06 00:57:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by oldhippypaul 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
not really..
2007-05-06 00:58:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by Felix 7
·
0⤊
1⤋