Time to face facts: Cal Ripken is a fraud!

Great Debates
1

I know no one is allowed to bad mouth the hallowed saint of baseball, but here’s some food for thought:

Before he “broke” Lou Gehrig’s streak, there were several documented instances where his manager wanted him to sit out a game, but Cal refused, putting his record over that of the good of the team.

Statistics show that the year he broke the record, he was batting well below .300 and it was clear that there were other players that were better suited for the shortstop position, but it was more important for Cal to get his record than for the Orioles to win games.

No, obviously at that point you can’t ask the guy to give up his streak, but it just goes to prove what a phony baloney record this really is.

The only reason Gehrig had to end his streak is because he became terminally ill, but if it were not for that, it could have been possible that Cal would never even come close, because let’s face facts, Cal Ripken really is ½ the player Lou Gehrig was.

But Gehrig got cheated out of his legacy by a selfish ball player who manufactured this phony record by milking an above average but unspectacular career over 2 decades.

When you look at what Lou Gehrig accomplished during his Iron Man run as opposed to what Cal Ripken accomplished during his, Cal couldn’t hold Lou’s jock. Ripken is one of the most overrated baseball players of all time.

Yeah he hit over 400 home runs, but when you see that he has had only ONE- count 'em ONE 30 HR season, you can see that he stretched mediocrity over a long long time. Take any ball player who hits 25 home runs a year, and keep in him in the lineup for 20 years, hell he will hit 500! Take a guy who gets 150 hits a year in 700 at bats, well if he sticks around for 20 seasons, he will join the 3000 hit club. Meaningless.

In addition, Ripken has had just four 100+ rbi seasons. That’s good, but again, that means in all the seasons he played every game, excluding the 2 strike seasons, if my math is correct, he’s had 11 seasons with less than 100 RBIs, and that isn’t making a very big contribution.

And don’t give me the “most home runs by a shortstop” crap. That’s like holding the record for most goals by a goaltender in hockey. Shortstops traditionally are weak at the plate.

In addition, he’s batted over .300 only four full seasons for a good but certainly not Hall-of-fame lifetime .277 batting average.

And while he was a very good player in the 1980s, he didn’t bat over .300 from 1985-1990, and from 1995 until he sat, didn’t bat over .300. If it were any other player who hit those numbers, they would sit once in a while, but no not Cal.

As a matter of fact, Ripken batted .257, belted 30 or less HRs and earned less than 100 rbis in 1987, 1990, 1992 and 1993, but you know, there was that streak that had to be kept alive even if Cal kinda sucked.

On the other hand you have Lou Gehrig, who didn’t get to fly from game to game, and who didn’t have the benefit of advanced training and nutritional methods in the 1930s, who played over 2100 consecutive games- WITHOUT the benefit of 2 strike shortened seasons may I add!

During those years, Gehrig hit over .300 12 TIMES, and averaged .340 over his career back in the days when the game wasn’t diluted with too many teams with bad pitching like it is today. In addition, he belted 493 home runs.

Gehrig’s stats are so head and shoulder above Cal’s its almost a crime for Ripken to have stolen this record from such a great ballplayer like he did. The Real Iron Man batted over .300 12 CONSECUTIVE YEARS; hit over 30 home runs 9 STRAIGHT times, including 5 40+ home run seasons! And not only did Lou belt in 100+ rbis 9 straight times, he also had SEVEN 150+ rbi seasons. Yes, Lou Gehrig almost had twice as many 150 rbi years than Ripken had 100. It’s such a joke.

All this came crashing down in 1938, when Lou’s skills deteriorated due to his yet undiagnosed illness. Then, in that year he ONLY batted .295, hit 29 round trippers, and had 114 rbis. In other words, a dream season for Cal the Fraud was sub-par for a terminally ill Lou Gehrig.

And of course, rather than bowing out gracefully before the beginning of the season when it was clear that he was shot, Cal decided that he was going to announce his retirement before the season gets cranking, so he could have his “farewell tour”. If your that banged up, why not just retire now and open up a roster slot? Don’t worry, Cal you’ll get your ceremony.

To make things worse, he gets elected to the All-Star team, which proves that’s a joke since he’s hitting a minor league level .229. You know Cal, some hard working minor leaguer might want that spot on the Orioles to pay their bills, and maybe some other AL player might not mind getting that All-Star selection on their resume, you selfish prick.

Cal Ripken is a guy who got to play all those games in the 80s because his dad was a manager, and then strong-armed Baltimore management into letting him play even when there were instances where he was hurting his team.

Oh, he’s special because he played all those seasons with one team? Well, if he’s so damn special how come they only won one World Series, and did you ever think that the reason he stayed in Baltimore is because he knew that it was the only team in the Major Leagues that was too scared of their fans to make him sit out a game?

To make things worse, I’m sick and tired of all this talk about his “wholesome” image. Please. The guy usually travels alone, and let’s not forget that baseball card stunt. And I admit I have no proof of this, but I’ve heard on the radio from at least one credible journalist that he’s a lot different guy when the camera is off. Probably no proof since of course since, God forbid you say anything bad about Cal.

Baseball is so desperate for heroes they have to turn to creatine chugging muscleheads and low batting order egomaniacs for idols.

Cal Ripken is a self-serving fraud.

2

Hey, Vinnie, ease up a bit.

No one ever said that Cal Ripken was a better player than Lou Gehrig. However, with regard to the consecutive-game streak, he did top Gehrig. It’s the same with, say, Walter Johnson and Steve Carlton. Just because Carlton (and later Ryan) broke Johnson’s record doesn’t mean that Carlton was a better pitcher than Ryan. However, with regard to strikeouts, Carlton did top Johnson. Same with Gehrig and Ripken.

As far as him playing over his manager’s objections goes, ultimately, the manager agreed to play him. If the manager flat out refused, Ripken wouldn’t have a choice. He can’t play if he’s not in the lineup. Alternately, the manager could have saved him as a pinch hitter or defensive replacement. The fact that his managers ultimately played him shows that they either (a) bowed to the player (which is bad, IMHO) or (b) bowed to upper management (which is just as bad).

Now, you may not like Ripken as a player, but I don’t think you can deny that he is one of the best shortstops to play the game, can you?

Zev Steinhardt

3

I’ve never been a huge Cal Ripken fan, and I happen to think that, once he joined the rest of the Players Union in going on strike, ending the 1994 season, his streak was OVER. (Lou Gehrig never took a few months off in mid-season, did he?).

I also think he was overrated, in large part because he was a favorite of the media (if surly Eddie Murray had smiled more for reporters in 1983, HE would have been MVP, rather than Cal).

Still, Ripken’s streak was phenomenal. If you doubt that consider that there’s no active player who’s appeared in even 500 consecutive games, let alone 1000. What’s more, Ripken did it at shortstop, a MUCH more physically demanding position than first base.

4

What was he supposed to do, play with himself? :slight_smile: Look, there were actually players who were opposed to the strike, but the bottom line was that they all had to go on strike together. (It’s possible Ripken was a public proponent of the strike and I’m misremembering, but IIRC he wasn’t.) I don’t think it’s reasonable to hold the players’ strike against him. Now, if Ripken had been suspended from baseball for something, then I would certainly be right there with you in saying his streak was over, since he himself would be the reason he missed games. But the players’ strike? Nah.

5

Vinny, amen. I’ve made my case against Ripken in the All Star thread in the Pit. I’m not going to reprint it here, but suffice it to say that Ripken is one of the most selfish, overrated players in the game today, and if he makes the HOF, he has nothing but Lou Gehrig’s Disease to thank.

6

Gehrig did indeed have The Streak, but bear in mind that a lot of the games in it were pinch-hitting appearances, in games where he never took the field, simply to keep the streak alive. For most of Ripken’s streak, he played EVERY INNING at the most difficult position other than pitcher.

The argument that he was hurting his team by staying in would only apply if the O’s were pennant contenders at the time. But they haven’t been for a long time, and, this being the entertainment biz above all, it’s hard to condemn him for that except on the narrowest purist grounds. And can one really claim that they would have done better with Manny Alexander at SS instead?

Ripken wasn’t a power hitter in Gehrig’s class, but before him, shortstop wasn’t even considered a power-hitting (or even offensive) position, unlike Gehrig’s 1B. He did make it “culturally” possible for the game’s Nomars and A-Rods to stay at the position instead of having their size force them to other positions.

Now, how does one explain away Ripken’s 2 MVP awards, btw? Or was it 3?

7

Vinnie

I’m tempted to say:

“Cite, please?”

But that would be the way of the smart-ass.

So I’ll just say, “What baseball card thing?”

8

This is the weak point in your entire argument. The point about goalies is meaningless, because they are not part of the offensive scheme. Shortstops, by contrast, bat every nine times. The reason shortstops hit so poorly is because the critical need for defensive skills at that position makes it worthwhile to carry their poor offensive production. A shortstop who can also hit is adding a lot more to the team than an outfielder or first baseman who hits just as well.

This also takes away from your argument that Cal hurt the team for the sake of his streak. He hurt the team by insisting on playing when he was hitting poorly if there was another shortstop available who could have hit better. You haven’t shown this.

  1. There are many people who believe that playing so many consecutive games hurt Ripken’s performance. But there is no objective evidence that this is so.

  2. It is difficult to compare players from different eras. There are many other factors involved.

  3. I once read (or heard) that Gehrig would occasionally, in road games, bat in the first inning and get replaced in the field in the bottom half of the inning. Ripken, by contrast, came by his streak in a more straightforward manner, and in fact, held the “record” for the most consecutive innings played, until his father took him out of a game, saying that particular streak had become a distraction.

9

Vinnie conveniently ignores the documented instance in which Gehrig was quite sick but played one inning in order to preserve his precious streak. Cite, you ask?

“[F]or fourteen consecutive years and 2,130 consecutive games, he was nover off First Base, except one game which he started as shortstop merely to be in the line-up and preserve his great consecutive games record at a time when he was bent double with lumbago.” (Lou Gehrig Pride of the “Yankees” by Paul Gallico, pg. 86)

IIRC, Gehrig was the nominal shortshop for 1/2 inning in which he just stood there and hoped that a ball wasn’t hit to him. If this isn’t cheating to preserve a streak, what is?

Gehrig was probably one of the top 10 players of all time, so it’s not saying much to state that Ripken wasn’t half as good as he was.

But I notice that Vinnie consistently ignores the era in which a player played in evaluating his statistics. In these days of back to back 60 homer seasons, where Bonds will probably reach 40 by the All-Star Break, and even a skinny guy like Gonzalez might hit 60, it’s tough to remember that the 80’s were an era where 30 or even 25 homeruns in a season was quite impressive. Gehrig, however, played in an era where entire teams hit .300 and pitchers were in four man rotations, going the distance each time.

Here is what Ripken’s stats would look like if he were to have played his entire career in conditions exactly like we have now, in a completely fair ballpark.

Of course, Gehrig’s would look pretty spiffy as well, (url=http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:wokZm8uEv_g:www.baseballprospectus.com/cards/transfiles/gehrilo01.html+lou+gehrig+player+card&hl=en) but they don’t change as much. Ripken’s BA improves about 25 points; Gehrig’s barely budges. Gehrig’s adjusted RBI total actually goes down, reflecting the fact that he played on one of the greatest teams ever for two decades, while Ripken was on a mediocre one.

And of course, in order to really evaluate a player, we need to compare him to his contemporaries and colleagues. If the average first baseman in the 1930’s hit 25 homers a season (Gehrig averaged 35), while the average shortstop in the 1980’s hit 10 (Ripken averaged 21), then Ripken was a more valuable player (at least in terms of homers), because he provided twice the homers of a potential replacement, whereas Gehrig provided only a 40% increase above the standard. I just pulled these numbers out of the air, but sabermetricians analyze this stuff to death to come up with statistics like VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) and TPR (Total Player Rating).

I’m not claiming that Ripken was better than Gehrig–he was not. I don’t think anyone else claims he is either. Only Vinnie, in his nonsensical rant, seems to think that because Ripken bested Gehrig in one area that he should also be better than him in every other field, or else the record is undeserved and fraudulent.

Vinnie’s bullshit about Ripken’s “off the field” demeanor is about as credible as recent rumors of him punching Kevin Costner, which is probably what Vinnie is refering to anyway.

I posted this simply because I like Sabermetrics, not because I think there’s a chance in Hell that Vinnie’ll read this and change his mind, or even think logically about the issue.

10

on posts that I otherwise agree with.

  1. Elvis I believe catcher is the second most difficult position, not shortstop.

  2. Opus, I think you err in using percentages over replacement players, as opposed to absolute amounts. For example, suppose the average shortstop hit one HR and the average 1st baseman 25. A team is better off with a 50 HR first baseman than with a 3 HR shortstop.

11

Sorry about that. I can’t find the link, but in the early 1980s TOPPS was shooting pix for baseball cards and Clean Cut Cal was able to pass off a pose with an obscenity on his baseball bat. The card was pulled, and is now a collector’s item. I’m pretty sure there’s a write-up about it in one of the “Baseball Hall fo Shame” books. Cal Ripken-in the baseball Hall of Shame??? :eek:

By the way, here’s someone else that feels the same way I do:

http://www.strikethree.com/98/09/11/davep.shtml

I also disagree with the “Lou Gehrig was in a different era” argument because there is such a gaping difference between their stats that I think the fact that they were decades apart is negligible. I didn’t see what Opus posted yet, so maybe I’ll address that later.

12

Sorry, you have your Ripkens confused. The incident you describe involved Billy Ripken

13

Just out of curiosity, who thinks Sachio Kinugasa’s streak of 2215 consecutive games at third base for the Hiroshima Carp of the Central League 1970-1987, including a stretch where he played with a broken shoulder blade, should count in the comparison?

Seems to me that the level of the league isn’t important - the physical difficulty of the streak is the same. I’d count it, unlike other non-major-league records that have to be discounted because of the talent level of the opposition.

Oh, btw - Ripken may indeed have been a buttwipe of a teammate. So was Ty Cobb.

14

No doubt this was a typo (I think you meant “Johnson” instead of “Ryan”, but since you brought it up, damn skippy Carlton was a better pitcher than Ryan. Sure Ryan had considerably more strikeouts, but Ryan was a one trick pony - he through the ball really, really fast. Admittedly, this was an awesome trick, but I doubt Ryan knew half the time where the ball was going to end up.

Carlton, OTOH was a complete pitcher. Not only was he a smokin’ fastball pitcher, but he had impeccable control and an ability to pitch strategically.

'Sides which, no one has ever had a more devastating slider in the history of the game.

Sua

15

I’m confused. Wouldn’t that be a point in Cal’s favor? (I payed money to see Waterworld, damnit!)

As to the OP: lose your objectivity much? Cal wasn’t the offensive force Gherig was so he must be a fake? Cal wanted to play every game even when others suggested he sit, therefore he’s a fraud? Isn’t that exactly what the “Iron Man” award is supposed to celebrate?

As has been ably pointed out by others:

  1. Gherig padded his streak more egregiously than Ripken.
  2. SS and 1B are posiitons which demand different skills and must be judged by different criteria. Eddie MUrray has better power numbers than Honus Wagner. He wasn’t a better player than Wagner.
  3. You do have to make allowances for eras. To imagine otherwise is silly. Why not make your case that Rube Waddell was a far superior pitcher to Sandy Koufax. After all, he has more 20 win seasons, better ERA numbers, more complete games . . .
  4. Catcher is a more demanding position than SS as far as physical punishment goes, but SS is a much more demanding skill position. (see: Piazza, Hundley)
16

Yes, it was a typo. I did mean Johnson. And yes, I agree with you that Carlton was a better pitcher than Ryan.

Zev Steinhardt

17

First off, if I’m wrong about the baseball card thing, I apologize, though I SWEAR it was Cal and the incident took place in the early 80s. The link is pretty hard to refute though.

Nonetheless, it’s really a minor point. Cal Ripken is still a phony.

It still counted, right? And what’s worse . . .playing 1/2 an inning of one game out of 2130 then stepping aside that ONE GAME so someone else more capable can play . . . or defrauding your team season after season? Okay maybe Lou only was able to give 100% in 2129 games- but he sure as hell contributed more to the game in those 2129 than Cal did in 2500 or so.

**

It is interesting to note in the decade of the Home Run, Cal Ripken has belted out a measly 21 in 1990, a decent 34 in '91, only 14 in 1992, 24 in '93, a total 30 in the 256 games of the 1994 and 1995 strike seasons, 26 in 1996, 17 in 1997, and only 14 in 1998. So, according to your logic, Ripken actually got WORSE as his streak went on, lending more credibility to my opinion that he should have stepped aside a long time ago.

**

Granted, yet you can’t use that to reconcile Gehrig’s .340 lifetime average and Ripkens .277. As your argument continues, you try and twist logic, as we shall see next, but there’s no way you can reconcile 63 percentage points between two players in a similar amount of games, no matter what the circumstances.

**

See? Now even by this frustrated number crunching, you STILL have a 38 point difference!

**

When you consider that today’s players run faster, and can get to the plate faster, it really is a moot point isn’t it?

Besides, you have to be kidding me. I can twist statistics around any way I want as well. Whose opinion is it as to what a “fair” ballpark is anyway? Fair to who? Who came up with this crap? This sounds suspiciously like “fuzzy math” to me!

This is purely subjective. The funny thing is, no matter how much you try and rationalize it and spot Cal’s stats, Lou is STILL a much better player, even on a curve! :rolleyes:

**

VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) and TPR (Total Player Rating)??? What the HELL are you talking about, Dude? Please do not bore me and the other readers with Fantasy Baseball. However, in that paragraph, you by your own admission “pulled these numbers out of the air” THEN you flame me with:

**

You are wrong, I was NOT referring to the Kevin Costner rumor. Where did I say I was?

Unlike your tortured statistics that you admitted to making up, I will cite actual sources. If you must know, one of the journalists was Howard Eskin of George Michaels Sports Machine who criticized Ripken as putting on a show when the cameras are on, then kind of being a jerk when they are off, and Eskin has covered sports for over 20 years. So I did not pull that evidence “out of my head”.

Second, there recently was a thread which I can’t pull up right now because this site is so $$#@!!! slow this afternoon, where someone brought up the Kevin Costner rumor and I posted that this was NOT true, so you have no idea what you are talking about.

I’m talking about a credible reporter’s thought on what he has seen and observed about Ripken, not a rumor.

**

What I am saying is

  1. What Cal Ripken accomplished while artificially gaining this record is shadowed by what Lou Gehrig accomplised and could have accomplised when he originally set it. The fact that Ripken did NOT deserve to be in not just one, but perhaps scores, maybe 100s of those games because he had some pretty mediocre seasons tells me, yes, he does NOT deserve it, and DID defraud his team.

  2. Cal Ripken is overhyped and overadmired by a game in desperate need of heroes.
    **

I hope I took care of that concern. By the way, just for the record, did you at any point in your life live in the Baltimore area? Please tell the truth.

{fixed code. --Gaudere}

[Edited by Gaudere on 07-05-2001 at 07:18 PM]

18

Gotta go with Sua on this one. Ryan does have his amazing longevity going for him: as it is Carlton pitched 5 years too long on a carreer shorter than Ryan’s. But in their primes Carlton was definitely the man.

19

Another point that seems to have been mostly missed here is that shortstop is a defensive position, at least until recently, while first base is an offensive position. IE, a great, or even an average, first baseman damned well better put up better offensive stats than a shortstop.

Playing shortstop is hard. By general acclimation, the second-hardest defensive position in the game (behind catcher). Few people can do it. Cal did it extremely well for a long time.

On the other hand, just about anyone who can figure out how to wear a glove can play first base. There’s a reason Frank Thomas was a first baseman, why Lou Gehrig was a first baseman, why Ernie Banks got shipped to first base when he couldn’t play shortstop anymore. That reason being that they could hit but damn sure couldn’t handle a difficult defensive position.

Was Gehrig the best first baseman ever? Probably. Almost certainly.

Was Ripken the best shortstop ever? Probably not. But he’s almost certainly in the top two. The only shortstop with any real argument to be ahead of him is Honus Wagner. I suppose Ernie Banks might be up there, too, but not really.

In short - Cal was a hell of a lot more than the streak. Even without it, he’d be a more-than-deserving Hall of Famer.

20

Well, since I think we all now can agree that Gehrig was the vastly superior hitter, I guess it’s time for the Ripken supporters to fall back on the defensive player argument, which is fine.

It’s just that Cal Ripken has won only 2 Golden Gloves Awards in 20 years, 1991 and 1992. I guess that’s pretty nice, except that since they award by position in each league, that means he was #1 of only about 14 players those years, not neccessarily the best fielder in all of the American League, or baseball for that matter. Not exactly mind-blowing stats I’d say.

SO in other words, 18 of those seasons Cal was NOT the best defensive shortstop in the American League! Wait- I thought he was one of the 2 greatest shortstops in history??? :confused:

We can’t compare to Lou Gehrig since there was no Golden Gloves award when he played. But if you are going to write off a player because he played an easier defensive position then you need to take away the accomplishements of an awful long list of great players.