1975 Reds vs 1927 Yankees

[Phoenix2]

Appears the best ever AL and NL teams heading for a showdown.

https://sports.yahoo.com/best-teams-...040153862.html

[Bourgeois Zee]

There's no harm in being number two all time.

That 1927 Yankees team had two guys with OPS+ over 220(!), two HOF starting pitchers, and two other HOF guys.

C: Reds (Big-time)
1B: Yankees (Bigger time)
2B: Reds
SS: Reds
3B: Reds
LF: Even
CF: Yankees (Big time)
RF: Yankees (Bigger time)

SP1: Yankees (Hoyt)
SP2: Yankees (Pennock)
SP3: Yankees (Pipgras)

Bullpen: Reds (but close)
Bench: Reds (but negligible)

[dougdirt]

One team played watered down competition because it only allowed white dudes to play. That also means that they weren't nearly as good as a team as they could have been. 1975 Reds in a landslide.

[Bob Sheed]

One team played watered down competition because it only allowed white dudes to play. That also means that they weren't nearly as good as a team as they could have been. 1975 Reds in a landslide.

I hear this argument a lot, and it just doesn't hold water to me.

Reason being, white dudes were the only ones allowed to play on every MLB team in 1927. It's like saying Babe Ruth was overrated because he never had to hit a 102 mph fastball.

You have to judge players and teams within the context of the times they played in. You can't pick and choose advantages and disadvantages from different eras.

[dougdirt]

I hear this argument a lot, and it just doesn't hold water to me.

Reason being, white dudes were the only ones allowed to play on every MLB team in 1927. It's like saying Babe Ruth was overrated because he never had to hit a 102 mph fastball.

You have to judge players and teams within the context of the times they played in. You can't pick and choose advantages and disadvantages from different eras.

I absolutely can and forever will judge the players pre, roughly 1960 when all teams were integrated to a decent amount, because they absolutely without question were playing against far lesser competition than their counterparts were after that. It's not about Ruth not having to hit 102 MPH. It's about Ruth, and all of the other dudes, not having to play against the best baseball players as a whole within the United States/Venezuela/Mexico/Puerto Rico/Dominican Republic. Ruth was playing, daily, against guys who in a non-segregated world, who would have never played Major League Baseball. They would have been playing minor league baseball. But instead, they were white, so they got to fill out rosters with spots that otherwise would have been given to players that were much better than they were. And that lasted until about 1960. I mean for crying out loud, the Cincinnati Reds didn't have their first African American player until Chuck Harmon in 1954 - a full SEVEN YEARS after Jackie Robinson made his debut. I'm not going to pretend that they weren't playing against a bunch of watered down competition. They were - their fault or not.

[Bob Sheed]

I absolutely can and forever will judge the players pre, roughly 1960 when all teams were integrated to a decent amount, because they absolutely without question were playing against far lesser competition than their counterparts were after that. It's not about Ruth not having to hit 102 MPH. It's about Ruth, and all of the other dudes, not having to play against the best baseball players as a whole within the United States/Venezuela/Mexico/Puerto Rico/Dominican Republic. Ruth was playing, daily, against guys who in a non-segregated world, who would have never played Major League Baseball. They would have been playing minor league baseball. But instead, they were white, so they got to fill out rosters with spots that otherwise would have been given to players that were much better than they were. And that lasted until about 1960. I mean for crying out loud, the Cincinnati Reds didn't have their first African American player until Chuck Harmon in 1954 - a full SEVEN YEARS after Jackie Robinson made his debut. I'm not going to pretend that they weren't playing against a bunch of watered down competition. They were - their fault or not.

It's probably not possible to accurately compare teams from different eras. Way too many variables between 1927 and 1975, 1975 and 2020, etc.

[dougdirt]

It's probably not possible to accurately compare teams from different eras. Way too many variables between 1927 and 1975, 1975 and 2020, etc.

The players today are way better than the ones in 1975, who are way better than the players in 1927. Those are just plain facts.

I have no problem with comparing players from their era to players from their own era.... once we get to full on integration. But OPS+/ERA+ pre-1960 isn't the same as it is post 1960 because the competition levels were simply watered down due to racism. A 150 OPS+ against only white guys in 1927 is not nearly as impressive as a 150 OPS+ in 1965 or 1995 or 2019 when the league wasn't watered down due to racism.

[malcontent]

I absolutely can and forever will judge the players pre, roughly 1960 when all teams were integrated to a decent amount, because they absolutely without question were playing against far lesser competition than their counterparts were after that. It's not about Ruth not having to hit 102 MPH. It's about Ruth, and all of the other dudes, not having to play against the best baseball players as a whole within the United States/Venezuela/Mexico/Puerto Rico/Dominican Republic. Ruth was playing, daily, against guys who in a non-segregated world, who would have never played Major League Baseball. They would have been playing minor league baseball. But instead, they were white, so they got to fill out rosters with spots that otherwise would have been given to players that were much better than they were. And that lasted until about 1960. I mean for crying out loud, the Cincinnati Reds didn't have their first African American player until Chuck Harmon in 1954 - a full SEVEN YEARS after Jackie Robinson made his debut. I'm not going to pretend that they weren't playing against a bunch of watered down competition.

I was leaning the other way on this, considering the unfairness of taking things out of historical context, but you make a convincing argument, dougdirt.

[Tomlin8]

I absolutely can and forever will judge the players pre, roughly 1960 when all teams were integrated to a decent amount, because they absolutely without question were playing against far lesser competition than their counterparts were after that. It's not about Ruth not having to hit 102 MPH. It's about Ruth, and all of the other dudes, not having to play against the best baseball players as a whole within the United States/Venezuela/Mexico/Puerto Rico/Dominican Republic. Ruth was playing, daily, against guys who in a non-segregated world, who would have never played Major League Baseball. They would have been playing minor league baseball. But instead, they were white, so they got to fill out rosters with spots that otherwise would have been given to players that were much better than they were. And that lasted until about 1960. I mean for crying out loud, the Cincinnati Reds didn't have their first African American player until Chuck Harmon in 1954 - a full SEVEN YEARS after Jackie Robinson made his debut. I'm not going to pretend that they weren't playing against a bunch of watered down competition. They were - their fault or not.

youre nuts

[dougdirt]

youre nuts

Thank you for your opinion.

And you're right. But my being nuts is not at all related to the post you quoted, which is 100% correct.

[TNRED]

One team played watered down competition because it only allowed white dudes to play. That also means that they weren't nearly as good as a team as they could have been. 1975 Reds in a landslide.

Your logic fails here. If you use logic it could also be said that the Yankees were watered down also because they only had white players.

[dougdirt]

Your logic fails here. If you use logic it could also be said that the Yankees were watered down also because they only had white players.

Uh, that team was definitely watered down because they were all white guys. There's no logical failure happening here on my part. Perhaps there was on yours by assuming I somehow didn't imply such a thought when speaking about that team. Or in my subsequent posts within this thread talking about all pre-1960's baseball being watered down because of racism.

[Bob Sheed]

Uh, that team was definitely watered down because they were all white guys. There's no logical failure happening here on my part. Perhaps there was on yours by assuming I somehow didn't imply such a thought when speaking about that team. Or in my subsequent posts within this thread talking about all pre-1960's baseball being watered down because of racism.

30 MLB teams today. Pretty watered down.

I think it's strange that your sole focus is on one aspect of the watering down of baseball, albeit a major one, I'll give you that.

I'm guessing that you've probably been patted on the back for your take here more than once, so now it's gospel to you. Which is fine.

But it doesn't change the fact that you are putting all of your "watering down" eggs in one basket, when it's quite easy to provide a laundry list of aspects that have both improved the game product and made it worse too, over the entire history of baseball.

Segregation was huge.
So was steroids.
So is cheating.
So was the deadball era.
So were amphetamines.
So is technology.
Improved nutrition.
Globalization.

Etc etc etc

[dougdirt]

30 MLB teams today. Pretty watered down.

I think it's strange that your sole focus is on one aspect of the watering down of baseball, albeit a major one, I'll give you that.

I'm guessing that you've probably been patted on the back for your take here more than once, so now it's gospel to you. Which is fine.

But it doesn't change the fact that you are putting all of your "watering down" eggs in one basket, when it's quite easy to provide a laundry list of aspects that have both improved the game product and made it worse too, over the entire history of baseball.

Segregation was huge.
So was steroids.
So is cheating.
So was the deadball era.
So were amphetamines.
So is technology.
Improved nutrition.
Globalization.

Etc etc etc

30 teams is more than 14. The population pool that we are pulling from is also significantly higher. Just stop.

[jimbroznan]

30 MLB teams today. Pretty watered down.

Etc etc etc

In 1927 the population was 119 million, 1/3 of today's population while the number of teams has basically doubled. In 1927 there was no competition for the high school stud athlete - no NBA,NFL so it was baseball or work on daddy's farm or in Carnegie's steel mill.