2007-06-23 01:20:37 · 16 answers · asked by mojo569 4 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Yes. He would have lots more publicity good and bad. The do gooders that complain about the way people eat would have a field day with his diet. He faced some pretty tough pitching back then. Lefty Grove, Walter Johnson, to name a couple. So he would do well with todays pitchers. Plus if he took steroids geeeez he'd hit 100 homers a year.
2007-06-23 01:25:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What is the arguement of having only 8 teams in Babe Ruth's era. Wouldnt that just shrink the talent pool.
If there were only 8 teams now that would eliminate over 60% of the garbage pitchers out there. If there were as many teams out there when Babe played he would have hit many more homeruns because there would have been a much larger number of inferior talent. The better arguement would have been he did not have to face half the best talent because they were playing in the ***** Leagues.
And how is a train ride more relaxing than a quick flight. Still trying to figure that one out.
2007-06-23 09:28:18 · answer #2 · answered by The Lorax 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is a great question.
I would be hopeful. He was a great pitcher and player in the field.
But back then, they only have eight teams. They also took trains so got more time to rest. Did not have the media distractions.
This really could be debated for the longest time.
Modern athletes have special conditioning. And no disrespect but Babe Ruth was not into conditioning.
I would love to see a real expert do some staticial analysis on this and see the final answer.
2007-06-23 08:52:27 · answer #3 · answered by Michael M 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
History says that Babe Ruth was a mountain of man, a man among boys, larger than any other player in the game....he was 6'1 215. That is almost considered small now. There also wasnt 100 MPH fastballs or specialty pitchers, or players working out year round. So, Im gonna say, No.
2007-06-23 11:19:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
the real question would be, how much better have the pitchers got in general over the last 80 years? As time has progessed over the decades I think there might be new pitches developed Ruth never seen. there are more pitchers and specialist pitchers Ruth would compete against. Back then there was no such thing as a pitch count pitchers went longer into games, so did many of his hits and homeruns come off the same pitcher on his 4th or 5th at bat ? Do today's pitchers throw a little harder just using more innovative offseason conditioning regimines?
My guess is he'd still be pretty good but he would be no Alex or Bonds
2007-06-23 08:38:50 · answer #5 · answered by splitter_us 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Of course! If Babe was that good at hitting back when not many people hit as many homers as today and the ballparks were bigger, he would be a lot better now. His fielding wouldn't be a problem either if he played in the AL as he could've been the DH.
2007-06-23 10:38:49 · answer #6 · answered by baseball_tennis guy 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If he was brought up with the same training and conditioning as modern players are, he would probably still be great. All the greats would be great no matter what era they played in. Imagine Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, or Joe DiMaggio today.
2007-06-23 09:39:23 · answer #7 · answered by atvman_400 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
any player who hits 714 homeruns in a career would be a star in any era
2007-06-23 08:43:12 · answer #8 · answered by ERG 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i dont think he would be as good, he would be a good player maybe but not a superstar
this is because pitchers havent been getting better because they can only throw so fast, so they have been raising mound, etc
while hitters have been constantly getting stronger
2007-06-23 09:08:15 · answer #9 · answered by What? 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think that there's any way he could keep up with the players of today. He'd be good, but not great. Players of today are a lot more healthy and fit to do their job.
2007-06-23 08:31:37 · answer #10 · answered by Silvio 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋