Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Dec 2, 17:22
2: Dec 2, 11:48
3: Dec 2, 08:21
4: Dec 1, 17:33
5: Dec 1, 11:23
6: Nov 30, 15:54
7: Nov 30, 09:41
8: Nov 29, 16:44
9: Nov 29, 08:01
10: Nov 28, 16:19
11: Nov 28, 09:42
12: Nov 27, 18:07
13: Nov 27, 12:04
14: Nov 27, 08:26
15: Nov 26, 18:06
16: Nov 26, 12:05
17: Nov 26, 08:29
18: Nov 25, 18:33
19: Nov 25, 11:12
20: Nov 25, 07:08
Posts: 157
In response to
"
It’s not even the best player in terms of youth/excellence that the Red Sox have ever sold.
"
by
spamlet
not according to WAR -- nm
Posted by
Beaker (aka Anniebecca)
Feb 5 '20, 06:55
(No message)
Responses:
Which is not the best thing as we see in this example. Ruth was unlike anyone else playing at the time. -- nm
-
Krusty
Feb 5, 07:20
Yes because Ruth was 2 years younger and recently converted from pitcher.
-
spamlet
Feb 5, 06:58
4
*shrug* the article uses stats going back to 1898, just because he turned out great doesn't mean he showed it leading up to the sale -- nm
-
Beaker
Feb 5, 06:59
3
He was a two way player that was one of the best pitchers and hitters in the game. He won 47 games in '16 and '17 with an era -- (edited)
-
Krusty
Feb 5, 07:26
1
He was the best player in the game before the trade -- nm
-
Krusty
Feb 5, 07:28
Yeah, Ruth barely outhomered half the teams in the league in 1919! -- nm
-
spamlet
Feb 5, 07:02
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.
