Fact or Fiction

https://www.mlb.com/cut4/adam-ottavino- ... c301697952

My vote is fact, more or less.

Guy who pitches a total of 10 innings per month? Right………..Let’s make both of them have to pitch and hit in a 9 inning game and cannot be relieved, at the peak of their powers you get first pick.

Guy who pitches a total of 10 innings per month? Right………..Let’s make both of them have to pitch and hit in a 9 inning game and cannot be relieved, at the peak of their powers you get first pick.

That's not the issue. He's saying that he thinks he could strike Ruth out consistently. I agree. Ruth's swing was way too big for modern baseball. Of course, if Ruth had been born in 1993 he would have a much different hitting approach. And he would be in lots better shape than he was in his later years. So to some extent trying to compare players from different eras is just a futile exercise.

Ruth was pretty ordinary against the hard throwers of his day, like Grove and Johnson. Vs. Johnson, In 107 at bats, Babe hit .280 with 8 doubles, 2 triples and 7 home runs. He walked 19 times giving Babe an on base percentage of .389, and Ole Walter punched him out 25 times. Against Grove, in 133 AB's, Ruth had a line of 316/377/534-9-33. Good numbers, but hardly Ruthian. Against George Uhle, one of the first guys to regularly throw the slider, his line was 299/400/429 in 98 AB's.

And pitchers today have much more refined stuff, not to mention generally more velocity. I shudder to think what Ruth would think about seeing his first splitter.

very difficult to compare era's...Although could you imagine current millennials having to play all day games...or monster ballparks...traveling by train...they would be crying for mama...

Yes. Train travel for sports teams would be a hoot.

If he faced Ruth's team in a series he'd have about a 50/50 chance of facing him one time. So when he says he'd strike him out every time he means, yea I'd face him once a series and I think I'll strike him out. Have a hard time taking someone serious who thinks 40 batters a month is real baseball. It's today's baseball for sure.

Here is Ruth versus Johnson

https://baseballhall.org/discover/inside-pitch/ruth-outlasts-johnson

https://fenwaypark100.org/2014/05/21/when-the-greats-faced-the-greats/

https://www.mlb.com/cut4/babe-ruth-and-walter-johnsons-1924-halloween-game/c-155304596

Walter Johnson gave up a home run once in every 107 at bats through his career, Ruth hit one in every 15 against him.
Batters had an OBP of .282 against Johnson over his career, Ruth was .389.

very difficult to compare era's...Although could you imagine current millennials having to play all day games...or monster ballparks...traveling by train...they would be crying for mama...

And no smart phones....omg grounds for suicide right there!

Walter Johnson gave up a home run once in every 107 at bats through his career, Ruth hit one in every 15 against him.
Batters had an OBP of .282 against Johnson over his career, Ruth was .389.

Those numbers right there speak volumes. Ruth's talent was undeniable. If he played in today's era, he'd be a totally different player, but I believe he'd still be a great player because he'd have access to all kinds of things he didn't have in his time.

I don't know with the way the balls are juiced this year, who knows a Babe Ruth in his prime might have hit as many as 25, or even 30 HRs over 162 games.

I have been saying for years that most of the pitchers Ruth homered off of would not make AA teams of today.