In response to:

All-Time All-Stars

Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 09, 2012 2:30 PM
Not in my opinion. Pitchers have been able to throw high-90's fastballs forever (Bob Feller was clocked in the low 100's using radar). Changing speed has also always been part of the pitcher's craft. Whitey Ford threw change-ups that had batters stepping out of their shoes. On the other hand, the baseball of today has the equivalent of a super-ball core. Ruth had to hit against a dead ball, but still managed 714 HR's. He also had to face the spit-ball. Great players are great players in any era, as I see it.
DariusIII Wrote: Jul 10, 2012 6:14 PM
The 'dead ball' became extinct with the cork center, 1911. But batters still swung for line drives. Batting averages went up but homeruns did not. Ruth seems to have invented the upper cut swing. Others learned it eventually but Ruth was the first. So give the Babe marks for intelligence too.
DHE Wrote: Jul 09, 2012 5:08 PM
That is true, but the pitching mound is higher and pitchers have much better training and now don't pitch many full games or as much. A .400 hitter would be more impressive today.
Tom2568 Wrote: Jul 09, 2012 3:20 PM
Nothing is likely to get an argument started among sports fans faster than attempts to name the all-time greatest in any sport, or even the all-time greatest in a particular aspect of a sport. However, in baseball, we can at least narrow down the list of possibilities -- considerably, in fact -- when it comes to hitting.

Who was the all-time greatest hitter?

A lot depends on how much weight you give to batting average versus power hitting. But it would be hard to consider someone for the title of the all-time greatest hitter if someone else had both a higher lifetime batting...