Way to miss the point, Vinnie. Does it take special training to do that?
Gherig was the best offensive player at an offensive position.
Ripken was the best offensive player at a defensive position.
Ripken was also a very competent fielder. While he lacked the range of an Ozzie Smith, he was not a defensive liability (as his 2 gold gloves demonstrate).
I do not know whether Gherig was considered a strong fielder in his day.
All of the points above are relevant only to the issue of why Ripken’s value to his team cannot be adequately compared to Gherig’s simply on the basis of offensive numbers. It has no bearing upon whether the consecutive game streak is “phony” in a way that Gherig’s was not. Of course, since the points you raised in the OP also have nothing whatsoever to do with that question, one can hardly call this a hijack.
Vinnie, I don’t think that anyone here is saying that Ripken is a better baseball player overall than was Gehrig. They’re saying that you shouldn’t compare offensive numbers for first basemen and shortstops directly because shortstop is, historically, primarily a defensive position and first base is not. Instead, you should compare Ripken to an average shortstop of his era and Gehrig with an average first baseman of his era.
Yes, it’s true that Ripken’s been pretty awful this year, but while he was playing shortstop, he had very good offensive numbers for that position, and he was generally thought to be superior defensively as well. That doesn’t take away from Lou Gehrig, it just says that Cal Ripken was a very very good player at his position. He’d be a Hall of Famer even without the streak.
For the record, I would say that Ripken is certainly not the best shortstop in history, maybe not the second best, but one of, say, the top five. Rob Neyer discussed this recently.
Nomar, ARod, and Jeter are most CERTAINLY better than Cal. Barry Larkin is right there with him, trading a little bit of power for a little more average, and besting him on defense. Same for Ozzie Smith. That’s just in the last 15 years. Hell…John Valentin, in his 5 years at SS, put up numbers equal to Cal. Granted, the SS position has gotten heavier hitting, but all of the guys I’ve listed, plus Banks and Wagner, are at least equal, if not superior, to Cal Ripken Jr.
Vinnie, you continue to spout bullshit and miss the point. Let me repeat this: Gehrig was one of the top ten players ever. Hardly anyone compares favorably to him.
Now here’s a little challenge for you Vinnie. If you think that Ripken was “defrauding” the Orioles by playing every single day instead of sitting out, who should have played in his place? Who’s this great minor league prospect in the Orioles farm system who could have put up better numbers than Ripken? That’s the key Vinnie: Ripken is only hurting his team if his streak prevents a better player from playing. He isn’t hurting the team by failing to perform like Gehrig.
There’s this phenomenon whereby an athlete’s abilities decrease slowly but consistently over a period of many years. It’s known as “getting old.” Do you want me to show you statistics for the last few years of other players to prove that Cal is not an anomaly?
Nor did I try to. I tried to show that Ripken was not as bad as a player as you made him out to be.
No, it’s not. Most RBI don’t have anything to do with the speed of the players on base. And for every player who runs faster, there’s an outfielder who throws faster to counter that. I attempted to demonstrate what baseball statisticians have known for a long time, which is that RBI is a piss-poor indicator of a player’s true ability, because it is heavily dependant upon the abilities of his teammates.
I see. The arguments get too complicated, so Vinnie just calls them all crap and that settles it. Sorry Vinnie, math isn’t crap just because it’s too tough for your peabrain to understand. Ballpark corrections are real and a standard tool of performance evaluation. Or do you think that a .330 average in Coors Field is just as meaningful as one in Safeco Field? Here is a list of park factors (PF) for all the fields in baseball today. There are also a whole bunch of other stats like Equivalent Average which I’m sure you’ve never seen before either.
I’m talking about statistics which provide a more accurate assessment of a player’s ability than the standard BA/HR/RBI line we’re so used to. Vinnie, you started this thread by attacking Ripken’s worth as a ballplayer. Now, when I try to defend him, you don’t have the balls to either back up your arguments or recant, but instead decide to have a hissy fit because I post some statistics that you don’t comprehend.
And you failed to grasp the point of my example. The numbers were meant to demonstrate how to calculate a player’s worth. Sorry if I can’t recall the average numbers of homers hit each year by shortstops during Ripken’s career of the top of my head.
Sigh. The statistics are not tortured. If you wish to attack Ripken for being a jerk, I will stay out of that discussion. I’m sure there are some journalists who think he is, and some who think he isn’t. I have never met him and thus have no opinion about his qualities as a human being. But, you have made a very strong accusation against him, and it behooves you to back it up with more than just one reporter, without even an article as a reference.
Sigh. Once again, whether Ripken “deserved” to be in a game can only be determined by comparing his skills to those of whoever would have been his replacement, not to a first baseman who played sixty years previous. Or do you also think that Pete Rose does not “deserve” the all time record for games played, because his numbers were so much worse than Babe Ruth’s?
Thanks for reminding me to tell the truth. I was really planning on lying until I saw that. No, I never lived anywhere near Baltimore. Did you live in New York in the 1930’s?
Anyone who wants to dismiss the streak as a fluke, or contrived, is free to do so. To a large degree, I even agree. But even if it had never happened, there’s no escaping the conclusion that Ripken was the finest shortstop of his era, and one of the finest hitters too.
2 MVP awards, one of only 23 players ever to win more than 1. The others: Stan Musial, Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Frank Robinson, Ernie Banks, Johnny Bench, Mike Schmidt, Yogi Berra, Roger Maris, Roy Campanella, Hank Greenberg, Jimmie Foxx, Hal Newhouser, Carl Hubbell, Dale Murphy, Joe Morgan, Barry Bonds, Robin Yount, and Frank Thomas. How’s that for company?
The only player in AL history to win the MVP on a sub-.500 team and the third player in major league history, besides Ernie Banks and Andre Dawson
Rookie of the Year
2-time Gold Glove winner. So he was considered the best defensive player at a traditionally-defensive position, despite being primarily an offensive player, only twice? That really stinks, doesn’t it? Oh, and he holds the AL record for assists by a shortstop in a season with 583, and has a career FP of .977.
421 career homers before this season, when that number alone was enough to get anyone but Dave Kingman into the Hall.
Well. I suppose it wouldn’t be worth my time to point out that the REASON that shortstop has gotten heavier hitting is, at least in part, due to Ripken? That you DO have to consider such issues as career longevity (if A-Rod moved to third next year, would we consider him the greatest shortstop ever? Not at all!) and how often you could expect a player to be in the lineup? I mean, fine, great, Nomar is a better than Ripken ever was. What good is he doing the Sox this year? I agree, Ripken’s streak is rather a fluke, but by avoiding the DL, he certainly helped his team a lot more than a great player who spends half a season sitting, didn’t he?
And again, you must take ballpark effects into consideration. Was Vinny Castilla the best third baseman in baseball during his years in Denver? I mean, look at his stats! Has he been any good since he left? Hmm… Ooh, but that Dante Bichette… oh wait. Okay, so Denver’s a bad example… Okay, how about Safeco? Didn’t A-Rod put up great numbers last year playing half his games there? Well, yeah, but compare his home numbers to his road numbers and then TRY to tell me that it didn’t hurt his performance. He hit twice as many homers on the road, batted 80 points higher, had 30 more RBI… Just a fluke? Not hardly. (Yes, I’m quite aware that RBI and BA aren’t exactly the most useful stats around, but apparently, we must limit ourselves to using them because more helpful ones are too “fantasy baseball.”)
Gehrig is my all times favorite baseball player. I don’t care if Ripken broke his record, because it was only part of what Gehrig did. His batting average, his home runs, just about everything he did was tremendous. Then you look at who was his teammate for so many years. Everyone knows about the homeruns that Babe Ruth hit but not about his batting average. The amazing thing is that Ruth hit one hell of a lot of triples and doubles for that matter. There have been great players that have played together like that since, but show me two with the records those two had and also ones that stayed together as long. The Babe was the one with the ego and yet he never seemed threatened by Gehrig. That is probably due more to Gehrig, but Ruth can’t be counted out.
I’m sorry Opus, it is just that I think you got to a point where stats can get overanalyzed, and when you get to that certain point, the numbers become suspect when you throw in new equations. I’m sure if I look hard enough, I can come up with several formulas to back up my argument as well.
I can handle the math- it’s just that if I wanted to I could come up with any number I wanted to to justify my side too.
I prefer to stick with the basics: batting averages, home runs, rbis etc… You know, stats that have been accepted by baseball historians as a pretty darn good measurement for decades?
Not to mention even when we do use your stats, you STILL cannot prove Cal Ripken was a better ballplayer than Lou Gehrig by your own admission.
With the disparity in numbers between the two players, I don’t think there is any room for pulling apart atoms here. We both agree Gehrig was a better player. I will concede that Ripken was a very good player. Let’s chalk it up to a difference of opinion.
As for the MVP awards, that is a weighy accomplishment by Ripken, but an achievement that emphasizes my point: where was Ripken from 1984-1990, and from 1992-1998?
Other items of note:
-Cal had a .977 fielding pct. Lou Gehrig had a much superior .991. Granted, it was at 1st base, but we are again talking about a large enough gap in mumbers that it is at the very least a wash.
-You all got me on the MYPs, in I think 1983 and 1991. Cal had a hell of a season in '91, but steadily declined from there, and that is when he really started becoming a liability to his team.
As for who would replace Ripken? Well I guess we might never know- why should the ballclub waste valuable time and money scouting shortstops when you have a very popular adequate but overrated player that you suspect will refuse to step down for the next 5 years to perpetuate The Streak?
In short, Cal is a selfish player.
Not a nationally syndicated comulmniust, but here’s another writer who kind of sums up what it is I am thinking, and points to the dangers of allowing a ballplayer to start consecutive games streaks:
I guess it should also be mentioned how Cal put the team in jeopardy several times in the 1990s- when he had a broken nose, back spasms (no not the ones that occurred AFTER he broke the record, and DID sit down), and he messed up his leg- but still played, even though if it were any other player, he would have sat and allowed a healthy plyer to hit.
But, of course, The Streak is more important than winning ball games!!!:rolleyes:
Again, you misapply even simple statistics. You simply cannot wave your hands and pretend that positional differences are unimportant. Here’s an illustration.
Ozzie Smith is considered by many to be the finest defensive shortstop ever. He set teh major league record for single season fielding percentage by a shortstop. That record is .987. He won 13 straight Gold Gloves. His carreer fielding percentage is .978.
Bill Buckner has lasting fame for blowing a World Series by letting an easy ground ball roll between his legs. He was not that horrible a fielder generally, but he was never considerd a strong fielder. His carreer fielding percentage at first base is .992.
As to playing through injury: in most cases that is considered an admirable trait in a player. Kirk Gibson is admired for hitting a game-winning HR in teh world series, despite a back injury that hobbled him. Jack Youngblood was lauded for toughness when he played consecutive playoff games with a freshly broken leg. Willis Reed’s fighiting through injury inspired his team to an NBA championship. What those athletes knew, what they believed, and what turned out to be true, was that even at less than 100% they were the best chance their teams had to win.
IIRC, Ripken himself has always maintained that he has been a good and not a great player.
He is (justifiably so, IMHO) proud of his ability to play well day in and day out. His two MVPs, 400+ HRs, 3,000+ hits even without the streak would be sufficient to gain entry into the HOF - even if he had the manners of Albert Belle.
However, those who place Ripken, next to Wagner are way, way off base, IMHO.
Cal did help break ground for today’s power shortstops but Robin Yount, IIRC, established that first.
While Cal is an excellent fielder, with good range, his hitting mechanics were for most of his career, considered abysmal. His .277 lifetime average suffered from these which were based on his refusal to take (or even, until recently, ask) for coaching advice.
Cal is not now, nor has he ever been, a team leader. His only championship was mostly through the leadership of Eddie Murray, a great, underapreciated player.
The streak was in many ways just luck.
Injuries happen but didn’t happen to Cal - until recently.
Nor was there ever a better player on the Orioles, than Cal, at short.
Nor, for most of his career, sadly for O’s fans, was there ever a reason to rest Cal for the playoffs.
Nor did Cal’s career merge with Earl Weaver’s - who would have rested Cal when Earl felt like it - streak be damned. (Much as Earl would pitch Jim Palmer on Earl’s schedule despite Palmer’s complaints of nagging injuries.)
Nor did his streak have anything to do with Gehrig’s - save that both men stubbornly insisted on playing every day.
Raised in Aberdeen, Maryland, Cal has been loyal to his local team and to his area’s fans and is justly appreciated.
He is responsible for the popularity of the Orioles in the Baltimore/DC area - a feat never accomplished by the far superior teams of Brooks & Frank Robinson.
The Orioles have, under Ripken, been one of the most mismanaged baseball franchises, with Cal suffering the fate of many good (and great) ballplayers. Had Don Mattingly, for example, played with these Yankees rather than with the pre Joe Torre Yankees, Mattingly’s chances for the HOF would be much higher. Even at his most mediocre, Cal was often the best ballplayer on the awful O’s.
But IMHO he has been elevated well above his considerable accomplishments by the media. After the strike, many writers were looking for something good in baseball. Cal’s streak, his consideration to his fans, his European good looks, and his better than average baseball skills - were what they found.
I disagree. If you can come up with any number you want using legitimate mathematical formulas and statistical corrections, then do so.
Once again, you are simply wrong. Statistical experts and baseball historians have known for decades that BA, HR, and RBI are not good measures of a player’s ability. I can direct you to the Baseball Prospectus site again, or any number of other websites and newsgroups, but why bother? I realize nothing I say can convince you, but I assure you that what I am telling you is not simply academic. GM’s and managers take into account PF’s when evaluating a player (at least the smart ones do). Teams use Davenport Translations to see how well a player will adjust from the minors. For example, the guys at Baseball Prospectus were practically screaming at the Reds not to promote Deon Sanders from the minors. They kept pointing out that while he was hitting .460, he had hardly any walks compared to many strikeouts. That lack of plate discipline is bad news in the majors versus decent pitching. Sure enough, Deon got promoted and proceeded to flop completely. You can call the math “fuzzy,” “crap” or “arbitrary,” but it is not. It has real world applications, and teams which ignore sabermetrics in favor of the standard BA/HR/RBI nonsense will continue to flounder, while those who use other evaluation factors will thrive.
Yawn. Did I ever say that he was? Let’s try an analogy. Do you believe that Pete Rose “defrauded” his teams by breaking Ty Cobb’s all-time games played record, when his stats weren’t as good as Cobb’s?
Well, you’re the one who keeps saying that he was “defrauding” his club by continuing to play.
This has already been rebutted so thoroughly by Spiritus Mundi that it serves only to further demonstrate your ignorance.
Okay, so it was only after 91 that Ripken became a liability, not all along? Are you changing your tune?
And Ripken’s refusal to “step down” can clearly be seen in the fact that he moved to 3rd base a few years ago, right?
Do you want me to point out all the numerous times that Gehrig played hurt? He broke virtually every bone in his hand at least once! Let me guess: when Gehrig plays hurt, that’s gutsy, but when Cal plays hurt, that’s selfish. Why didn’t Gehrig sit down and let a healthy player take his place? Maybe if he hadn’t played hurt, he’d have hit .360! In short, Gehrig was a selfish player for playing even when not at his physical best.
I don’t mean to criticize but I can’t seem to find much of a debate in this thread? Everyone seems to agree (with maybe the exception of Vinnie) that Cal was a good but not great player.
I did some quick research and his fielding percentage is lifetime fielding percentage is equal to the offensive short stops in the game today (if not higher) even if his career offensive numbers don’t match up. He played 3rd when there was a more competant short than him (last five years or so anyhow). He piled up stats the same way that Hank Aaron did and noone really seems to complain that he’s in the hall?
That’s just my take…in short…good but not great, hall worthy due to longevity combined with solid play.
Considering that you feel that Cal is already vastly overrated, last night’s love-fest at the All-Star Game must have been hard for you to watch, Vinnie…
There are MANY instances during his streak when Lou Gehrig played only one inning or just pinch-hit to keep the streak going. Bet you didn’t know that.
There were several cases during Joe Dimaggio’s 56-game hitting streak when he didn’t really get a hit, but a scorer chose not to call something an error so Joe could have his hit.
Stuff like that happens. Ripken’s consecutive-game streak is a number, nothing more. It’s still very, very impressive, even though he tailed off towards the end of it. That said, it’s basically just a curiosity record. I don’t know anyone who thinks it makes Ripken a better player.
Ripken won two MVP Awards; he is obviously the second greatest shortstop of all time, at this point.
For all the flackery about how he was good-but-not-great, let me be the dissenting opinion: he WAS great. His career numbers don’t look as good as the Jeters and the Garciaparras now because he played the bulk of his career in a lower-offense era, but his peak is every bit as impressive as St. Derek and St. Nomar.
astorian:
With all due respect to Eddie Murray, who was a great player, if they had voted for Murray instead of Ripken in 1983 it would have been one of the greatest MVP ripoffs of all time. Even winning a Gold Glove, Murray’s defensive value was so far below Ripken’s there’s really no comparison to be made.
I’m not even going to get into Vinnie’s absurd comparison of Ripken’s and Gehrig’s fielding percentage, which would mean that all shortstops and third basemen are the worst fielders in the major leagues. I guess Brooks Robinson sucked ass, eh Vinnie? (Career fielding pct.: .971) And I guess Frank Thomas is a magnificent fielder, since his career PCT. is .991.
I’ll jump in on mayberrydan’s post, too. Yes, Ripken WAS a great, not just good, player. He brought honor and dignity to the game off the field as well, and many of the other greats can’t say that.
He may not have been the second-best ever (presumably the comparison is to Honus Wagner), since comparisons are questionable, due to differences in the evolution of the game, but he was clearly the best of the late 20th century, even without the streak.
I will be happy to see him enter the Hall along with Tony Gwynn in 5 years.
I knew someone was going to bring this up, but yeah it WAS hard to watch- since the thing was such a total set up that it made pro wrestling look legitimate! I mean, let’s face facts, the All-Star game is a bigger joke than a celebrity softball game, but somehow Cal and his cult followers managed to make it even more of a farce, if that is possible.
My mother would have a shot at connecting with that cheesy pitch Chan Ho Park fed Ripken. Ripken SOMEHOW hits a home run in the game that he steals Lou Gehrig’s record in, off an easy pitch may I add. Then, OF COURSE, in HIS VERY FIRST at bat at his LAST All-Star Game, he hits a home run!!! COINCIDENCE?? Please.
Give me a BREAK. $500 sez Ripken SOMEHOW magically finds a way to hit a home run in his final game. It’s virtually guaranteed because the pitchers “know” that lobbing Ripken a kiddie softball is the “right” thing to do for the good of the game.
To make the entire thing even more of a comedy show, they give Ripken the MVP, cheating a much more deserving Magglio Ordonez of the Chisox of the honor. Ripken went 1 for 2, and that 1 was the said cheap homer. Ordonez went a manly 2 for 3, with a well-earned, REAL home run and a hit.
Evem more disrespectful was the way Tony Gwynn was treated. All right, I’m not going to argue that Gwynn’s stats quite match up with Cal in the home runs or RBIs department, though he had a much better lifetime .338 batting average. But like Saint Cal he also has that “good guy” image, has stuck with his team too, and has played just as long as Cal, yet he doesn’t even get to step to the plate???
Ripken didn’t even DESERVE to be in the game even as a reserve, but he gets to play and is handed a home run and the MVP trophy. Meanwhile Gwynn is made an “honorary” All-Star, which Cal should have been, but hey, tonight was all about Cal, the man that supposedly saved baseball.
About the only explanation I have for this mistreatment by the fans and Major league Baseball of Tony Gwynn is . . . no, I won’t go there. :rolleyes:
No screw it, I will. Cal Ripken is white, Tony Gwynn is black.
I hate to play the race card, but let’s get it out in the open here.
In a sports world dominated over the past few years by Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, black boxers, Sammy Sosa, Pedro Martinez, Allen Iverson, Derrek Jeter, TIGER WOODS, MAGGLIO ORDONEZ . . . .white people are desperate for a white sports hero (except for hockey fans).
Vinnie, for me to adequately comment on your, uh, “thoughts” in this thread would get me an admonishment from Gaudere.
**
The only one who seems fascinated with proving this is you.
Wanna ask me about my Baltimore residency now? I never liked Ripken. I grew up in Michigan, idolizing Alan Trammell, and pouting that Ripken was the media’s darling.
That doesn’t mean that Ripken hasn’t had a Hall of Fame career. That also doesn’t mean he didn’t play in more consecutive games than any other professional baseball player, ever. He did. Sorry. It’s no more of a “sham” than Gehrig’s streak was. It is what it is.
When you go to work every day for the next 16 years without missing a day, I’ll listen to you look down your nose at somebody else doing it, OK?
And then there’s this gem:
Yeah. It was sickening to watch how terribly they treated Tony Gwynn. :rolleyes:
We won’t let certain facts get in our way, either. Like that it wasn’t him that was pushing to get an at-bat; it was other people pushing for him. That he is hurt. That he is inactive.
I thought MLB was a little to rigid and rules-focused in shooting down the idea. I mean come on, it’s a damned exhibition game. Larry Walker batted the opposite way with his helmet on backward a couple of years ago.
But to say that MLB doesn’t adore Gwynn, and the way he’s conducted himself as a ballplayer; to say that their decision was because Gwynn is black, is absolutely ludicrous.
I already presented MY statistics- BA, Home Runs and RBIs. Unfortunately, those widely accepted stats are unacceptable to you. Or as I already said:
**
I’m sure you count yourself as one of the smart ones. But would you care to list who some of these well known statisticans, managers and other experts are that you say exist? Besides websites?
**
So, in other words, as we saw with the Yankees, who I believe promoted Sanders to the majors, who by the way WON THE WORLD SERIES several times in the 1990s, not EVERY baseball “expert” uses these wonderful stats.
As for Deion, I’d hardly call him a “flop”. Granted, his baseball stats were not exactly sepctacular, but you accuse me of overlooking the facts, then overlook that Deion had the huge distraction of playing professional football as well. Despite this, in 641 games from 1989 to 2001, Deion still hit an okay .263. In 1992 with Atlanta he played 97 games and knocked .302, and batted .273 in 1997 in 115 games. I think the mistake was in taking football plyer, not Deion.
OOPS! Sorry about that- I forgot batting averages don’t matter to you. I’ll continue anyway.
I’d challenge any football player to do likewise. It’s an amazing accomplishement to be competent in major league baseball in itself, but to do it while being one of the greatest football players of all time is even more amazing.
Hey, you brought the name up. Maybe you’d better pick another example.
**
First off, it’s hard to artificially get over 4000 hits. It’s a skill record, much different from just showing up every day, so Rose’s accomplishment is to me much bigger than that of Ripkens.
Now as for stats, apples for apples, there is no question Ty Cobb was the better ball player. HOWEVER there is ONE huge difference between the two: Pete has several World Series rings with two different teams. Ty has ZERO.
If you want to talk about selfish, in his namesake and well-researched biography, “Cobb”, the author pointed out that Ty in his day had been questioned as a selfish singles hitter who refused to take a chance at the plate so he could inflate his own stats. This was even when the Tigers went without a pennant from IIRC 1912 until Cobb left for the A’s in the 1920s. Contrast that to Rose who was not only a great player, but also a winner. As a matter of fact, Charlie Hustle holds the Major League record for playing most winning games at 1,972.
By the way, you want me to pull stats out of my you know where to support my argument? Here’s a few for Pete:
-Only player in Major League history to play more than 500 games at five different positions including 628 at 2nd base and 634 at 3rd, two skill positions.
-All-time National League record for most career runs - 2,165
-All-time National League record for most career doubles - 746
-All-time National League record for most games 5 or more hits - 10
-Modern National League record for longest consecutive game hitting streak - 44 (June 14 - July 31, 1978) (there’s that word again :rolleyes: )
-Modern National League record for most consecutive game hitting streaks of 20 or more games - 7
In short, Pete Rose is not to Ty Cobb as Cal Ripken is to Lou Gehrig.
**
No need to try and hurl insults. Even if Cal was a better fielder, he was such an inferior hitter that Lou still goes down as the better ball player.
**
No, he was a liabilty before that for a few seasons as well.
**
I know, that was so generous of Cal to decide to “step down”, which should be the manager’s decision anyway, not the players. Of course, Cal made sure his phony record was pretty well solid for the next 50 years before making the move. I loved how he ended his streak too: he goes up to the Manager 30 minutes before opening pitch and sez he’s not starting.
Oh, Gee, Cal, I guess YOU are writing the lineup card now? What garbage!
He should feel comfortable anyway. The way Cal has hurt his team with this record insures that any intelligent manager will sit his players down at least a few times each season to nip this “Streak” nonsense in the bud before it gets out of hand like it did in Baltimore.
**
**
[/quote]
I’ll take .340 instead of .360 over .277 anytime.
But let’s for arguments sake say Gehrig WAS selfish and DID fraudently perpetuate his streak. The Yankees were in 10 World Series during Gehrig’s career, winning 8, including 7 from 1927 until Gehrigs untimely demise in 1939. Obviously Gehrig’s selfishness didn’t hurt his team.
Compare to Cal Ripken’s one World Series appearence and ring in 1984.
Uh, you know, Vinnie, stuff like this doesn’t help you much. Even a casual reader of the thread could tell that Opus was referring to the Reds promoting Sanders this season. You know, where he batted .235 in 75 AB, with only 6 runs, 4 RBI and 10 Ks?
Bo Jackson. He was easily twice the ballplayer Deion was in both sports. And then there was this guy named Jim Thorpe.
Well, gee, what magical replacement for Cal would have taken the Orioles to more World Series over the course of his career? Demonstrate that the Orioles teams of the past 20 years have been so good, with Cal the single weak link, that he has robbed them of rightful titles.
As far as the Tony Gwynn thing, you’re really off track. Cal was voted on to the team by the fans. Gwynn was not. No other explanation for Gwynn not getting an at-bat is necessary.
Oh, and he holds the AL record for assists by a shortstop in a season with 583, and has a career FP of .977.