According to John Glenn, Williams was the greatest pilot he ever saw.
Williams is also considered one of the greatest fly fishermen of all time (and is in their HoF).
Some people consider him the greatest hitter who ever played the game of baseball.
Ted Williams may be the manliest man to ever put on a jock strap.
Originally Posted by Scrap Irony
He was Glenn's wingman in Korea, his second voluntary stint in the service.
Legend has it that he broke all the standards for eyesight and depth perception in his avaitor training.
He was John Wayne in real life.
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
I am a huge fan of Ted Williams but, IIRC, his admirable military service during the Korean War was not entirely voluntary. I think Ted was involuntarily recalled to active service and was not pleased to have to re-enter active duty at age 33. l can recall reading in his autobiography that Ted, no stranger to controversy, even got into a minor media blowup when he was quoted as criticizing President Truman, a criticism which Ted indicated Truman didn't take offense to, with Truman noting that he himself had had a few things to say over the years.
Ted's service in WWII also had its moment of controversy. While a few players such as Bob Feller and Hank Greenberg immediately enlisted after Pearl Harbor, Ted, like most players including his foremost rival Joe DiMaggio, played during the 1942 season. Ted wrote that he received some sort of criticism from Quaker Oats, causing him to never again eat any of its products. Ted then entered the USAAF after the 1942 season but did not see combat in WWII.
He did fly several combat missions during the Korean War and once crash landed his plane. His great fear was that he would be unable to bail out, given his 6'4" frame. And yes, Ted was John Glenn's wingman.
"Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."
RB, I didn't know that. I stand corrected.
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
It's not a question of valuable/not valuable. It's "most" vs. "second-most" ... and it's not an argument that can be settled by comparing OPS numbers.
Most valuable means the best. You can't provide the most value by not being the best player. That season, Ted was easily the best and most valuable player. He had the highest average in the league, by 47 points. He had the highest OBP in the league, by 101 points! He had the highest slugging percentage in the league, by 92 points! He led the league in runs scored by 13. He led the league in HR's.
Sure, about 8 people on the planet kept track of OBP in 1941.... but no numbers aside from team wins can explain why he didn't win the 1941 or 1942 MVP.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/sbbw0725.htm
This is interesting.
"Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard
Most valuable does not mean the best.
As for Dimaggio-Williams, I'm in no way discounting anything Williams accomplished. Clearly he was one of the true greats of the game and he had a great season in 1941. But you also have to consider everything that happened outside of the batter's box. Dimaggio was a phenomenal center fielder, Williams an average left fielder. Dimaggio was one of the game's best baserunners, Williams average or below. Dimaggio's 56-game hitting streak that season sparked the Yankees from fourth place to the pennant -- something you can't see when just evaluating end-of-seasons stats. Throw in the fact that the Yankees outperformed their run projections while the Red Sox underperformed, and the Yankees won the pennant over the Sox by 17 games, and I think reasonable people can see how Dimaggio may have been the more valuable player that season. If it's close -- and when you look at the entire picture, it clearly was -- then the advantage will always go to the player on the better, pennant-winning team.
These seasons have been debated for decades and convincing arguments can be made both ways. In my mind, that's a pretty good indication that there really isn't a right or wrong answer -- either guy could have won the award and been deserving.
So someone who isn't the best provides more value than the best?
Ted Williams never complained about losing the 1941 MVP award to Joe DiMaggio. While WAR gives Teddy Ballgame a healthy lead over the Yankee Clipper in 1941, IIRC by Win Shares it is quite close between the two.
The seasons Ted really complained about, and with justification, were losing the MVP award in both 1942 and 1947, seasons in which he won the triple crown.
"Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."
One of the many things I love about Joey Votto is that I understand he has read Ted Williams's book on hitting and attempts to apply its principles.
"Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."
Oh "The Science of Hitting" to me is the greatest hitting book ever made. I am greatful to of found it when I was in HS because without it I doubt i would of made my HS team. I still use the principles behind it when teaching my son and other kids to hit.
Funny I just found the book last night while cleaning out a closet.
"Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard
I read it when I was about 14 and it helped me in Babe Ruth and high school, with its stress of getting a good pitch to hit. I bought my son Jason a copy while he was in high school.
"Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."
If you're stacking up players in a vacuum? No. In the real world, where winning and losing matters, sometimes.
A player is either X amount valuable or he isn't. The team he plays on doesn't matter to his value.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote