Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

I agree with Jack completely.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ruth
Gehrig
Mays
Mantle
Musial
Ted Williams
Honus Wagner
Rogers Hornsby
Cobb
DiMaggio

Off the top of my head, for starters. As of '99, Bonds didn't rank ahead of a single one of them. And I'm sure I am not the only one that thinks so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Take a look at your list - the latest anyone on your list played was 1973. Why's this? Well, in a smaller league, with a smaller talent pool, it's much easier to dominate. Factor in modern medicine which allows the careers of useful players to continue on despite what used to be career ending injuries, and there's an environment in which it's MUCH harder to dominate.

Do you honestly think every single one of the top ten position players of all time started their careers over 50 years ago?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

Identify the position player who cracks the top 10 who played after 1980, other than Bonds due to his post-98 feats. Griffey would have but for injuries. Maybe A. Rodriguez will one day. Mike Schmidt? A reasonable argument can be made for him, but who does he replace? Rickey Henderson? Nah.

The last 20 years have seen some of the great talent, wasted for one reason or another, such as Eric Davis (injuries), Ken Griffey Jr. (injuries), and Darryl Strawberry (nose candy). But sorry, I don't see a position player other than Bonds who cracks the top 10. Who do you suggest?

PS, there are about 11 1/2 decades of pro baseball. There are 10 names on the top 10 position player list, obviously. That's less than one player per decade. So the idea that no players from the 80s or 90s make the list is not crazy.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

I think we're in total agreement?

As the talent pool size decreases, the average talent level of a smaller pool increases, thereby making the over-all level of talent in a smaller league better?

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

But the talent pool has grown very very very much so. Think of it like this: since Ruth's time, the league has less than doubled in size. How much larger is the talent pool now? It's HUGE! There's a higher level of competition because the talent in the leagues is much more concentrated at the top percentile.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

Awful pitching is far from prevalent. Unless you somehow think with the population boom brought on from the 1940s, the addition of blacks, latinos, and asians, as well as increases in medicine has not doubled the talent pool that the MLB draws from since the time of, say, Ruth.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

What I'm saying is that the league, at 30 teams, is much smaller now in comparison to the talent pool than it was 80 years ago.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

[ QUOTE ]
But the talent pool has grown very very very much so. Think of it like this: since Ruth's time, the league has less than doubled in size. How much larger is the talent pool now? It's HUGE! There's a higher level of competition because the talent in the leagues is much more concentrated at the top percentile.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Have you seen the pitching these days? In the mid-70s, a 3.00 ERA was considered average. Today, 4.50 is considered respectable. You think that's all due to the increase in the hitters talent pool? Steroids? New stadiums? Live ball? Sammy Sosa's corked bat? Or maybe it has more to do with the fact that a terrible pitcher like Jimmy Haynes (just to pick one) seems to find his way into a rotation every season. I think you have an uphill battle if you're going to argue that the talent in baseball is not diluted.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

the talent may be diluted, but overall, the quality of players are much better now then they were 60 years ago.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Awful pitching is far from prevalent. Unless you somehow think with the population boom brought on from the 1940s, the addition of blacks, latinos, and asians, as well as increases in medicine has not doubled the talent pool that the MLB draws from since the time of, say, Ruth.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I don't disagree with you or TSC here. The average player today is better than the average player in the 1940s. No question about that. My point I think is that great players today play against a greater percentage of players that are far inferior to them than the great players of, say, the 40s. That makes it easier for a player like Bonds, A-Rod, Sosa, etc., to be so far ahead of the rest of the league.

Re: I feel bad for Barry Bonds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Awful pitching is far from prevalent. Unless you somehow think with the population boom brought on from the 1940s, the addition of blacks, latinos, and asians, as well as increases in medicine has not doubled the talent pool that the MLB draws from since the time of, say, Ruth.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I don't disagree with you or TSC here. The average player today is better than the average player in the 1940s. No question about that. My point I think is that great players today play against a greater percentage of players that are far inferior to them than the great players of, say, the 40s. That makes it easier for a player like Bonds, A-Rod, Sosa, etc., to be so far ahead of the rest of the league.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you serious? The talent pool is not diluted. There are 6 billion people on the planet. Do you really think there arent enough great baseball players to fill 30 teams?