Are Major League records made during the era of Segregation Legit?

Question

Obviously, unlike today, the game was rigged along racial lines and the best "men" were not playing against the best competition.

I think every stat from that time deserves an asterisk pointing out the inequity of banning all blacks and other minorties from the game.

Just look at the game the last few decades and see how many of it's stars and record holders are black and latino.

How many current hall of famers would never be there if not for the fact that minorities were kept out of the game.

I call those people "white affirmative action" inductees. Like Phil Rizzuto for one.

Answer 1

There should not be an asterisk. That would be a destructive effort against those who may not have had a choice in the matter. Instead, a constructive effort to honor players from the ***** Leagues should be made. An asterisk would, though, certainly raise questions for those of future generations and present an opportunity to explain the segregation issue, but I believe that an effort to honor the forgotten ones is a better idea than dishonoring those who did happen to get an opportunity.
Perhaps what they should do is honor the statistics of the ***** Leagues as they do with Major League statistics. That, of course, would never happen for at least two reasons. One, the statistics weren't kept in the same fashion, are lost, no longer available, or controversial. Two, a lot of people would not stand for it. It's unfortunate, but indeed something should be done to honor those who were great but handicapped by a racist society.
Regarding Phil Rizzuto (.273 career average, 38 career home runs, less than 13 full seasons), he might belong in the Yankees Hall of Fame, but not in MLB's. They should have some means to vote people out of the Hall of Fame. That wouldn't ever happen either. In some ways (though it's not really the same) The East Coast/New York bias in Hall of Fame voting and in sports reporting in general is like racism. Instead of being racists (judging and discriminating by skin color) they are locationists (judging and discriminating by where a player plays).

Answer 2

If that deserves an asterisk lets just put four **** before and after any records set since 1980 as **** Steriod Cheaters ****

As for the past I think The likes of Josh Gibson, Satchel Page and other were given credit by the knowledable fan and that credit will never cease.
Even in the day many players gave credit to they're ***** league couterparts because they had big time skills and a true players can see that.
Was segragation right no... Many of those same players coaches and owners led the charge for the first integration with Jackie Robinson. I don't belive it deserves an asterix on every achievement. It was simply "the wrong of the day."
Sad but should not lessan the achievments of the players of the day. Unlike cheating with steriods.

Answer 3

I don't think that there should be an asterick, because that was just the era people played in. Every record would have an asterick for something. Now, hitters can't break records without having an asterick because of steroids. Pitching has developed a lot, so does that mean that we have two sets of records, before and after 5-man rotations. I think it would be too complicated. After all, it's not the players fault what era they played in.

Answer 4

People advocating asterisks should offer to put up the money necessary to buy a sufficiently large supply and stick them into the record books.

What happened, happened. Better to work for a more enlightened future than to keep trying to edit the past.