PDA

View Full Version : Would Pete Rose...



Ltlabner
01-08-2007, 01:57 PM
...be as revered if he had played for the Dodgers in the 70's?

Would his brand of "give it your all" baseball still be respected by the fans in Cincy who generally admire and respond to hard-charging baseball players?

Or would he be dispised because he was a Dodger thus the exact same Pete Rose would be loathed instead of deified.

Always Red
01-08-2007, 02:05 PM
If Rose had been an LA native, and had the same career with the Dodgers, he would be totally despised by Reds fans, but the Rose cult in LA would be even bigger than it is in Cincinnati today.

If he had played for the Yankees, and been born in NYC, he would have never been caught betting on the game, and would today be in the HoF. There are too many people there who would have helped him, in any way possible.

Rose has not been the only player to bet on baseball since 1920 (no, I have no proof of this; these things don't happen in a vacuum, however). No way, no how. He was the only one dumb enough to be caught, however. :nono:

Team Clark
01-08-2007, 02:06 PM
...be as revered if he had played for the Dodgers in the 70's?

Would his brand of "give it your all" baseball still be respected by the fans in Cincy who generally admire and respond to hard-charging baseball players?

Or would he be dispised because he was a Dodger thus the exact same Pete Rose would be loathed instead of deified.

Great question. Pete's luster is somewhat related to the "Hometown Hero" lore. No question he would still be labeled as a Great Player but I'm not sure if all the superlative adjectives that accompany Pete would still work.

George Anderson
01-08-2007, 02:12 PM
I think had Rose been a Dodger, while he may not of been liked I think at the very least he would have been respected. Lenny Dykstra is a "give it your all" player similar to Rose and while not loved by reds fans he is at the least respected. I think the same would be said about Rose.

Spring~Fields
01-08-2007, 02:19 PM
If Rose had been an LA native, and had the same career with the Dodgers, he would be totally despised by Reds fans, but the Rose cult in LA would be even bigger than it is in Cincinnati today.

If he had played for the Yankees, and been born in NYC, he would have never been caught betting on the game, and would today be in the HoF. There are too many people there who would have helped him, in any way possible.

Rose has not been the only player to bet on baseball since 1920 (no, I have no proof of this; these things don't happen in a vacuum, however). No way, no how. He was the only one dumb enough to be caught, however. :nono:

In our society, it is very possible that the points that you are implying could be very true. Inconsistencies and double-standards do occur.

I will always believe that baseball muffed the Rose dealings at the point of having him banned from the HOF, a museum.

They should have let him have his one day, his plaque with an asterisk saying that he was banned, listed the reasons, and stuck with the lifetime ban from baseball. The whole Rose thing would have long passed away like a tumble weed in the wind, long before now.

Team Clark
01-08-2007, 02:19 PM
I think had Rose been a Dodger, while he may not of been liked I think at the very least he would have been respected. Lenny Dykstra is a "give it your all" player similar to Rose and while not loved by reds fans he is at the least respected. I think the same would be said about Rose.

I agree with that 100%. I do have a question for you. Do you remember Dykstra for being a met or a Philly? I remember him more as a Philly.

George Anderson
01-08-2007, 02:38 PM
I agree with that 100%. I do have a question for you. Do you remember Dykstra for being a met or a Philly? I remember him more as a Philly.

Philly, mostly because the 94' WS with the Phils was more recent than the 86' WS he played with the Mets

Team Clark
01-08-2007, 02:43 PM
Philly, mostly because the 94' WS with the Phils was more recent than the 86' WS he played with the Mets

Me too. I also remember that cool SI cover of him. Big Chew wad and all. :thumbup: I remember when he flirted with .400 through the All Star break and attributed his success to a "rigourous" off-season workout program. Ohh yeah and the "vitamins". :laugh:

Handofdeath
01-08-2007, 02:54 PM
I totally agree but to me that still seems like a double standard. There are far, far worse people in the Hall than Pete Rose. Should they put "racist" on Cap Anson's or Ty Cobb's plaques? How about "boozing philanderer" on The Babe's? Let him in the Hall, if he can get the necessary votes and that's no sure thing, and keep him banned from Organized Baseball.

Team Clark
01-08-2007, 02:58 PM
Should they put "racist" on Cap Anson's or Ty Cobb's plaques?

You forgot Bob Feller.:wave:

Always Red
01-08-2007, 03:01 PM
In our society, it is very possible that the points that you are implying could be very true. Inconsistencies and double-standards do occur.

I will always believe that baseball muffed the Rose dealings at the point of having him banned from the HOF, a museum.

They should have let him have his one day, his plaque with an asterisk saying that he was banned, listed the reasons, and stuck with the lifetime ban from baseball. The whole Rose thing would have long passed away like a tumble weed in the wind, long before now.

Rose forced MLB, in a way, into the muff. He really did dig his own grave; and I grew up idolizing the man. I still love what he did as a player, and he remains my favorite, though very tarnished. Growing up on the west side of town in the early 70's, there was no other way other than Rose worship for baseball playing boys from Cincinnati.

In NYC, if he had been raised there and played for the Yankees, he still would have done what he did, but he'd have been surrounded by a lot of people whose job it would have been to keep Pete out of trouble. Not so in the fishbowl of being a star in flyover country.

I agree he should be in the HoF for what he did on the field, and remain banned for life for what he did off the field. Pete is not a very smart man; you can tell that every time he opens his mouth these days.

PS- Len Dykstra is a Met forever in my mind; not sure why, I just never thought of him as a Phillie.

Team Clark
01-08-2007, 03:27 PM
PS- Len Dykstra is a Met forever in my mind; not sure why, I just never thought of him as a Phillie.

Was that '86 team not the best at platooning players? Dykstra/Wilson and Backman/Tefuel. There was one other platoon I thought I just can't remember.

Always Red
01-08-2007, 03:55 PM
Was that '86 team not the best at platooning players? Dykstra/Wilson and Backman/Tefuel. There was one other platoon I thought I just can't remember.

Kevin Mitchell, George Foster and Howard Johnson (3B, SS) also got a lot of AB's on that team.

That was one great team, when you look back at it.

They had Gary Carter (C), Keith Hernandez (1B), Backman, Teufel, Howard Johnson, Ray Knight and Rafael Santana in the INF, and an OF of Mookie Wilson, Daryl Strawberry, Len Dykstra, Mitchell and Foster.

Oh, and let's not forget a starting pitching staff 5 of: Doc Gooden, Ron Darling, Sid Fernandez, Bob Ojeda and Rick Aguilera (not a bad #5, eh?). And just for good measure, Roger McDowell and Jesse Orosco, both to finish games up.

Team Clark
01-08-2007, 03:57 PM
Kevin Mitchell, George Foster and Howard Johnson (3B, SS) also got a lot of AB's on that team.

That was one great team, when you look back at it.

They had Gary Carter (C), Keith Hernandez (1B), Backman, Teufel, Howard Johnson, Ray Knight and Rafael Santana in the INF, and an OF of Mookie Wilson, Daryl Strawberry, Len Dykstra, Mitchell and Foster.

Oh, and let's not forget a starting pitching staff 5 of: Doc Gooden, Ron Darling, Sid Fernandez, Bob Ojeda and Rick Aguilera (not a bad #5, eh?). And just for good measure, Roger McDowell and Jesse Orosco, both to finish games up.


That's a winner. Selfless ballplayers filling their roles. I seem to recall they were a bit "scrappy" too.

Spring~Fields
01-08-2007, 04:11 PM
I totally agree but to me that still seems like a double standard. There are far, far worse people in the Hall than Pete Rose. Should they put "racist" on Cap Anson's or Ty Cobb's plaques? How about "boozing philanderer" on The Babe's? Let him in the Hall, if he can get the necessary votes and that's no sure thing, and keep him banned from Organized Baseball.

You're right that would be another inconsistency and double-standard.

redsupport
01-08-2007, 04:51 PM
He would be reviled because he did not handle the career of Kalvoski Daniels optimally.

Handofdeath
01-08-2007, 05:47 PM
...be as revered if he had played for the Dodgers in the 70's?

Would his brand of "give it your all" baseball still be respected by the fans in Cincy who generally admire and respond to hard-charging baseball players?

Or would he be dispised because he was a Dodger thus the exact same Pete Rose would be loathed instead of deified.

I think he would be respected, to a point. But Cincy fans always love their own (The Reds) more. One of the greatest catches I ever saw was David Wright's dive into the stands to catch that foul ball. I mentioned it to a good friend (TRF actually) and he immediately named off several by Ryan Freel that he thought were better and he didn't think half a second about it. I admire that kind of loyalty. He was wrong but I admire that.

StillFunkyB
01-08-2007, 10:43 PM
I agree with that 100%. I do have a question for you. Do you remember Dykstra for being a met or a Philly? I remember him more as a Philly.

Philly, but the baseball card I had of him was as a Met. Drove past one of his carwashes when I was in SoCal a couple summers ago.

writerdan33
01-08-2007, 11:22 PM
If Rose were still born and raised in Cincinnati, and the Reds passed on him, the answer to the question is no. He wouldn't have been as beloved as a Dodger because he never would have been a Dodger.

The only reason he was drafted by the Reds was as a favor to a family member who was a scout. Otherwise, he likely doesn't get a sniff of the Major Leagues.

Right man. Right place. Right circumstances. Right time.

The story simply doesn't work anywhere else.

Team Clark
01-09-2007, 10:59 AM
Right man. Right place. Right circumstances. Right time. The story simply doesn't work anywhere else.

Unfortuantely there was a "sad ending to a sorry episode" to make us look at the story in a different light.

writerdan33
01-09-2007, 11:12 AM
Unfortuantely there was a "sad ending to a sorry episode" to make us look at the story in a different light.

True, but I was only answering the originial question - Would Pete have been as revered if he were a Dodger?

It seems the thread got off track a bit from the original intent.

Team Clark
01-09-2007, 11:14 AM
True, but I was only answering the originial question - Would Pete have been as revered if he were a Dodger?

It seems the thread got off track a bit from the original intent.

Yeah, you're right about that and I agree with what you are saying. I think most kids growing up would want a scenario similar to Pete's. Playing in front of your family and friends. Wearing the uniform of the team you grew up idolizing. Ohh yeah and being a really good player on tp of that. ;)