Cal Ripken's Legacy

[NJ BIRD FAN]

Re: Skill vs Talent, I do not think that really comes into play for purposes of this discussion. The cross-era comparisons really come down to physicality. Baseball as a game does a terrific job today trimming the fat such that the players at the major league level are both skilled and talented.

There are some that lack the raw talent to be a star, but are skilled enough to execute and carve out a career in some capacity. There are players with great physical talent but without the means to most efficiently implement that talent.

I see dozens of kids each year at the high school and collegiate level that are both skilled and talented but lack the physical means to compete at the pro level. Mark Payton is an outfielder at the University of Texas that could have been a top three round pick out of high school (Illinois) and this year as a collegiate junior based on talent and skill. But he's short and not particularly strong (5-foot-8 and generously listed at 185 pounds) without possessing game changing speed. He does everything well, batted just under .400 this spring, but will almost certainly never be considered a prospect. If you dropped him into the 1920s, he'd be a major leaguer, and potentially a standout.

I have never heard of this kid. But I will pray to that make believe guy in the sky that the kid becomes a star in MLB. This close minded thought process makes me ill.

[Stotle]

Sounds a lot like Dustin Pedroia. Yeah, never makes the ML. He does all things right, just doesn't look like a ML ballplayer. He's got titties?

Basically Pedroia without pop or up-the-middle defensive profile.

[DrungoHazewood]

I have never heard of this kid. But I will pray to that make believe guy in the sky that the kid becomes a star in MLB. This close minded thought process makes me ill.

It's fun to root for the underdog. But I'm not fully understanding why you take issue with scouts differentiating likely MLB talent from unlikely talent. How is it closed-minded to recommend not highly drafting someone who possesses few if any of the traits of a future MLB player?

[NJ BIRD FAN]

It's fun to root for the underdog. But I'm not fully understanding why you take issue with scouts differentiating likely MLB talent from unlikely talent. How is it closed-minded to recommend not highly drafting someone who possesses few if any of the traits of a future MLB player?

Maybe because I do not like what baseball has become. The robot player does nothing for me. Dig in, swing as hard as you can and hope. So you hit .215. Doesn't matter much, all the new metrics say i'm worth 6.8 mil next year, after all I hit 29 home runs. The art of the game of baseball is being washed away. In this tread I have read about how much smaller players were years ago and they would not be able to compete in todays world. You can assume it is true all you want, I may disagree, however, I think the much more interesting thing to watch would be todays player trying to play 50-60 years ago. When you had to know how to bunt and move runners and hit and run. Take anyone of todays players and stick him in 1945. They are not going up to the plate sitting on 95 mile an hour heat.( which by the way supplies a lot of their power ). No they have to learn to hit junk thrown up there. Dig in? ummmm no. Jeter like diving across the plate? No way. Next one comes up and under the chin. Complain to the ump, the ump says " that's baseball kid". You put a player today in 1945 and he would be charging the mound every game. I would love to see that clown Big Papi sent back to 1945. " what do you mean he can throw six inches off the plate, that's not fair" This kid Puig would never get out of the minor leagues with his lack of fundamentals. Now that is much more interesting to me then taking someone from 1945 and putting them in 2013.

[Can_of_corn]

Maybe because I do not like what baseball has become. The robot player does nothing for me. Dig in, swing as hard as you can and hope. So you hit .215. Doesn't matter much, all the new metrics say i'm worth 6.8 mil next year, after all I hit 29 home runs. The art of the game of baseball is being washed away. In this tread I have read about how much smaller players were years ago and they would not be able to compete in todays world. You can assume it is true all you want, I may disagree, however, I think the much more interesting thing to watch would be todays player trying to play 50-60 years ago. When you had to know how to bunt and move runners and hit and run. Take anyone of todays players and stick him in 1945. They are not going up to the plate sitting on 95 mile an hour heat.( which by the way supplies a lot of their power ). No they have to learn to hit junk thrown up there. Dig in? ummmm no. Jeter like diving across the plate? No way. Next one comes up and under the chin. Complain to the ump, the ump says " that's baseball kid". You put a player today in 1945 and he would be charging the mound every game. I would love to see that clown Big Papi sent back to 1945. " what do you mean he can throw six inches off the plate, that's not fair" This kid Puig would never get out of the minor leagues with his lack of fundamentals. Now that is much more interesting to me then taking someone from 1945 and putting them in 2013.

I am absolutely sure Puig would not make it in 1945, the color of his skin would ensure that.

[NJ BIRD FAN]

I am absolutely sure Puig would not make it in 1945, the color of his skin would ensure that.

You would be wrong. Cuban players were playing in MLB as far back as 1911 and in 1945 there were no less then 12 Cuban born players in MLB.

[CA-ORIOLE]

You would be wrong. Cuban players were playing in MLB as far back as 1911 and in 1945 there were no less then 12 Cuban born players in MLB.

Only "light" skinned Cubans that could be rationalized as white. Probably not the case for Puig.

[DrungoHazewood]

Maybe because I do not like what baseball has become. The robot player does nothing for me. Dig in, swing as hard as you can and hope. So you hit .215. Doesn't matter much, all the new metrics say i'm worth 6.8 mil next year, after all I hit 29 home runs. The art of the game of baseball is being washed away. In this tread I have read about how much smaller players were years ago and they would not be able to compete in todays world. You can assume it is true all you want, I may disagree, however, I think the much more interesting thing to watch would be todays player trying to play 50-60 years ago. When you had to know how to bunt and move runners and hit and run. Take anyone of todays players and stick him in 1945. They are not going up to the plate sitting on 95 mile an hour heat.( which by the way supplies a lot of their power ). No they have to learn to hit junk thrown up there. Dig in? ummmm no. Jeter like diving across the plate? No way. Next one comes up and under the chin. Complain to the ump, the ump says " that's baseball kid". You put a player today in 1945 and he would be charging the mound every game. I would love to see that clown Big Papi sent back to 1945. " what do you mean he can throw six inches off the plate, that's not fair" This kid Puig would never get out of the minor leagues with his lack of fundamentals. Now that is much more interesting to me then taking someone from 1945 and putting them in 2013.

I think we finally got to the heart of the matter. You don't aesthetically like modern baseball, and you're projecting that dislike onto the abilities of modern players. You don't like how baseball is played by highly trained athletes, you prefer the players of 50 or 100 years ago who didn't take things so seriously, didn't train as hard, didn't have the benefits of modern medicine and nutrition and data and competition. I can understand that, but it doesn't make the players of 100 years ago any better. And I also think your obvious distaste for some behaviors of modern players ignores the fact that players from previous eras had many distasteful behaviors of their own.

And if you think there weren't players in 1900 or 1960 who had far more talent than fundamentals... I think you need to take off the rose-colored glasses. Those people are either now forgotten, or only remembered fondly in funny anecdotes about how they tripled into a triple play.

[Can_of_corn]

You would be wrong. Cuban players were playing in MLB as far back as 1911 and in 1945 there were no less then 12 Cuban born players in MLB.

Only "light" skinned Cubans that could be rationalized as white. Probably not the case for Puig.

Exactly CA.

No way MLB baseball in 1945 sees this:

And goes, oh, he's just Cuban.

[DrungoHazewood]

Only "light" skinned Cubans that could be rationalized as white. Probably not the case for Puig.

Right. There were a few exceptions, but there were pretty strict limits. There was no one as dark-skinned as Puig in the majors from the late 1880s until Jackie.

[SerenityNow]

In this tread I have read about how much smaller players were years ago and they would not be able to compete in todays world.

The fact of the matter is athletes today are bigger, faster, and stronger than they were in years past. Here is a link to Olympic track records that show the progression. You can say all you want that some great track star from 1910 can compete today but just because you don't believe the facts doesn't make them any less true.

http://www.significancemagazine.org/details/webexclusive/2212801/Racing-towards-our-limits-Mens-Olympic-record-progression-on-the-track.html

[CA-ORIOLE]

The fact of the matter is athletes today are bigger, faster, and stronger than they were in years past. Here is a link to Olympic track records that show the progression. You can say all you want that some great track star from 1910 can compete today but just because you don't believe the facts doesn't make them any less true.

http://www.significancemagazine.org/details/webexclusive/2212801/Racing-towards-our-limits-Mens-Olympic-record-progression-on-the-track.html

I think he would argue that baseball is different because the skill, fundamentals, and gritty determination of players from yesteryear trump athleticism.

[mdbdotcom]

I think we finally got to the heart of the matter. You don't aesthetically like modern baseball, and you're projecting that dislike onto the abilities of modern players. You don't like how baseball is played by highly trained athletes, you prefer the players of 50 or 100 years ago who didn't take things so seriously, didn't train as hard, didn't have the benefits of modern medicine and nutrition and data and competition. I can understand that, but it doesn't make the players of 100 years ago any better. And I also think your obvious distaste for some behaviors of modern players ignores the fact that players from previous eras had many distasteful behaviors of their own.

And if you think there weren't players in 1900 or 1960 who had far more talent than fundamentals... I think you need to take off the rose-colored glasses. Those people are either now forgotten, or only remembered fondly in funny anecdotes about how they tripled into a triple play.

Of course, if the players of yesteryear were playing today, they would have all the benefits of improved training and diets, and their play would improve accordingly. Also, hitters would have the benefit of hitting coaches (a fairly recent innovation), smaller parks, smaller strike zones, and lower pitching mounds. And, they wouldn't have to compete with as many players on more minor league squads to make it to the majors. Guys in the low minors wouldn't clean up after a game by stripping down and having their manager hose them down. They would ride on air conditioned buses. Once they reached the upper minors, they would make a living wage. (The Ripkens used to send Cal and Bill money so they could eat reasonably well.)

Nobody in the minors didn't work less hard than they do today; it's just a different kind of hard.

[El Gordo]

I have always wondered what a team composed of 9 Ichiro type players, short, fast, good defenders, who could hit it where they ain't, would do against a team of 9 three true outcome guys?

[NJ BIRD FAN]

I think he would argue that baseball is different because the skill, fundamentals, and gritty determination of players from yesteryear trump athleticism.

Thank you for trying to read my mind. But I do not think players today are more athletic. They just have advantages that players years ago did not have.