2007-12-15 23:24:59 · 14 answers · asked by Michael A 6 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
better ball players than these clowns today?
2007-12-15 23:26:08 · update #1
Don't forget Hank Aaron! Those guys were the real thing. The sky high salaries that the current crop get has made them lose all sense of perspective and "cheat" in order to make the bucks. Money is the root of all evil.
2007-12-16 04:21:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Synethetic testosterone was invented in the 30s, so it seems unlikely that Ruth was using them to enhance his performance. Ruth's dominance was more likely attributable to being a big time talent in an era where most MLB players were semi-pro. Mantle and (especially) Maris make for more compelling question about their potential use of PEDs. Maris went from ~20 HRs per year to 61, then almost immediately dropped back down to ~20 for the rest of his career. The offensive upswing of the early 60s was alarming enough to the MLB that they officially expanded the strike zone in 1963. The truth is that players from the 40's-00's "could" have been using performance enhancing drugs. We actually know that a number of them in the 70s were... there was LITERALLY a federal case about it. For details, go read Jim Bouton's book, "Ball Four." Anyhow... the point is that it's stupid to believe that Jose Canseco brought steroids/PEDs into baseball. It's naive to think that any record from when you consider the golden age of baseball is unimpeachable and absolutely "clean."
2016-05-24 04:41:36 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My brother had the original Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris baseball cards...stupidly, he gave them away when he got older. They would have been worth some $$$ now.
No, I don't think steroids were around for any of the ball players you listed. They certainly didn't make anywhere near the $$$ today's players make, either.
2007-12-15 23:36:15 · answer #3 · answered by Holiday Magic 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not only did Mantle and Ruth not take any performance enhancing substances, but the stuff they DID put in their bodies (much of it 86 proof and higher) probably prevented them from being even greater than they were.
2007-12-15 23:31:59 · answer #4 · answered by Yinzer Power 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They were some of the best baseball players ever, but so was Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, and many more. They all played for the sport, not to make the big bucks.
2007-12-15 23:34:11 · answer #5 · answered by barbwire 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hank Aaron, Jackie Robinson...all were incredible and passionate about the game...
2007-12-15 23:32:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Namely you forgot Henry Aaron & the many great pithchers of "the day".. Real professionals who needed no 'enhancers'. Certainly they were better !!
2007-12-15 23:30:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I like to think I'm a good ball player......Is that what they are calling it now.
2007-12-16 00:06:46 · answer #8 · answered by Starr 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Much better payers and grossly underpaid by todays standards*
2007-12-15 23:55:23 · answer #9 · answered by Me 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
oh yes, but a lot of those older players were alcoholics and that probably hurt their games at times.......
2007-12-15 23:34:26 · answer #10 · answered by Eye of Innocence 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋