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.