SouthBronxBombers wrote:Of which the overwhelming majoirty are records you get for hanging around a long time and the natural results of that. Great hitter? No, not even close. Great run producer? No, not even close. Stolen bases? No, not even close. Fielder? Hardly. Arm? Weak.
A glorified singles hitter who simply played a long time and happened to play on some good teams. Rose was never even close to being the best player on any team he played for.
Not a great run producer? He has the NL record for RUNS SCORED!!!! Only a singles hitter? He has the NL record for DOUBLES!!!!
See, you are just trolling now, not even reading what I am putting down in front of you/
Anyway, as far as him being the best player on those teams, that depends on what criteria you are using for "best player". Rose was certainly the catalyst on many of those teams, that is undeniable.You also keep calling him a singles hitter, like that is a bad thing. Does Mark McGwire suck because he ONLY hit homeruns? How about Tony Gwynn? The man had an awesome hitters eye and you cant just discount the fact that he put the bat on the ball, as many times as he did. He may not have hit 500 home runs, but to say he isnt a great hitter is ludicrous.
Hank Aaron played for a long time also, does that mean all of his records are invalidated also? You have to play for a long time to break records you know.
I dont know man, looks like you are trying awfully hard to piss all over the man's career, especially in light of the facts.
Last edited by jblank on Fri Jul 29, 2005 3:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
TheYanks04 wrote:...Or anther than cross checks a 2b in the act of fielding a ball. .
Hey TheYanks, which incident are you referring to? I remember last year when Doug Eyechart made a start at 2nd for the Sox and Delgado did this exact thing, it was pretty dirty.
What's Tony Gwynn's career average? Hmm, 35 points higher. Over half again as many stolen bases. Almost as many home runs in 1100 fewer games. A 50 point higher slugging percentage. Gwynn was a much better hitter than Rose. As for McGwire, a moderately more talented Dave Kingman.
Rose stayed around for a long time. That is the only thing he was really good at.
I'm pretty sure the Big Red Machine would have been just as good with any other starting lead off man from any other team in the game those years.
SouthBronxBombers wrote:What's Tony Gwynn's career average? Hmm, 35 points higher. Over half again as many stolen bases. Almost as many home runs in 1100 fewer games. A 50 point higher slugging percentage. Gwynn was a much better hitter than Rose. As for McGwire, a moderately more talented Dave Kingman.
Rose stayed around for a long time. That is the only thing he was really good at.
I'm pretty sure the Big Red Machine would have been just as good with any other starting lead off man from any other team in the game those years.
And what about Hank Aaron? See, you didnt answer that one. Are you going to discount his career because he played so long? Are his stats worthless also?
See, you still dont understand how important longevity is do you? I suppose Ripken's streak is just no big deal in your world. In order to break records, or even have a chance at them, you have to have longevity. To listen to you, playing for 15-20 years is no big deal. There are many players who played for a long time who arent even sniffing the stats that Rose put up. Was Gwynn's avg higher? Sure it was, but Rose still hit over .300 in a career with more at bats than any other player IN HISTORY.
No, Ripken's streak is not a big deal to me. It requires no talent to do. There were many times he did not deserve to be in the lineup but he did not get taken out simply because of the streak.
You are honestly going to compare Rose and Aaron? Aaron was a great ball player and great hitter. Rose was neither. And yes, sorry to burst your bubble, but the Reds would have won with any other of the players who started at his position in those years. He was not a difference maker.
Longevity is not talent. Rose was not a great player. The great hitters don't hit just over .300 unless they also have power.
brandnew wrote:Ha, check out Guillen's post game comments. He's acting all tough now, but after the play he was groveling at Chipper, trying to calm him down! HAHA what a puss!
I saw those post game comments by Guillen. They are even funnier because Chipper said Guillen was saying he was sorry right after the play. Jose was mad Chipper called the play dirty (IMHO it was) and told him he would show him a dirty play next time they meet. I also think he challeneged him to a fight if he had a problem.
Man Jose is one angry dude. He needs some happy pills.
i was going to stay out of this... but this is just ridiculous. to say pete rose was not a great ball player is unfathomable. i think maybe your disdain for his seedy character and off-field behavior has clouded your judgement.
longevity is an extremely impressive thing for a baseball player especially one that played the game balls to the wall like rose. he played for so long because teams still thought he could help them win. longevity does take talent otherwise you wouldnt be in the bigs.
the man has over 4000 hits for cripes sake. that is 1000 more than an automatic hof entrance. you have to admit that he put up some pretty impressive numbers and played the game the right way.
SouthBronxBombers wrote:No, Ripken's streak is not a big deal to me. It requires no talent to do. There were many times he did not deserve to be in the lineup but he did not get taken out simply because of the streak.
You are honestly going to compare Rose and Aaron? Aaron was a great ball player and great hitter. Rose was neither. And yes, sorry to burst your bubble, but the Reds would have won with any other of the players who started at his position in those years. He was not a difference maker.
Longevity is not talent. Rose was not a great player. The great hitters don't hit just over .300 unless they also have power.
YOu are kidding rite I leave for the day and this is what happens in this thread. Was Aaron a better homerun hitter than Ruth? I honestly dont think so, but Aaron has the record.
and Im sure that if a player is no longer any good he wouldnt be playing everyday, like Ripken did.
Barry Bonds is an a$$ so lets keep him out of the hall because he literally cheated and took steroids, so should his records and stats not count and should he be kicked out of the Hall??
and Im pretty sure that a guy who gets on 200+ times is hard to find even in the lead off role so Im definitely not going to agree with you on the any other leadoff hitter theory
Guillen has been a jerk everywhere he's played, including Cincinnati. Why didn't his anger management classes he took last year do him any good?
Now as for Rose: Ask his own teammates and almost unanimously they will tell you he belongs in the HOF. He didn't get the tag "Charlie Hustle" for nothing! I don't intend to open a can of worms here, but notice the geographical location of the posters who are for and against Rose. North - anti, South - pro.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by jblank » Fri Jul 29, 2005 3:31 pm 
