Shohei Ohtani is the Best BB Player Ever

What is with the Mays worship? He is probably a top ten player, but he is not in the same league as Cobb, Ruth and Ohtani.
Except for pitching, Mays wars probably the best all-around player in baseball.

Look at the stats, but while Ohtani is limited where Mays excels a little in speed and defense, Ohtani more than makes up for that as a pitcher.

Best BB player I've ever seen at almost 70.
 
Last edited:
It's always based on era when you're comparing. Ruth would probably be a middle of the road player in todays game if he made it at all. He's be more like the Blue Jays Kirk. Overweight but able to hit the ball.

Sometimes there are freaks of nature such as a Gordie Howe or Roger Maris who just look powerful enough to play in any era. In 100 years, even Ohtani or Judge will just look like big talented guys who might just be the average or slightly taller height for baseball.

Check this height and weight distribution and how much it has changed. 150 Years later and the average baseball player is 60 pounds heavier today.

1761260231633.webp
 
Shoeheai is what 6'7"? 6'9"? Randy Johnson LHP size? Who is a big RH? DENNY McClain? Clemens? I forget. Yawning, is shoeheai better than Koufax? Pedro Martinez? Maddux, Gibson, Drysdale. Just asking. Look up Gibson WS stats off charts 9 innings.

Helps at pitching if you are tall and athletic. Not rocket science. Long arms, big hands help.

Is he great on Defense? If so? Where? 1B? RF? Yawning.

He gets special treatment for his gambling setup and at bat. Do you want to be the first guy to hit his fingers or break his face? I dont watch enough to know anymore, but does he get knocked down? Up and in? It is just batting practice for the elite it seems.

I'm out//
Today, how many pitchers go 9 innings? Like, none! They go 5 or 6 and then the day or night is over. Perhaps that will save his elbow. He's already gone through that once. It will happen again. Ohtani is no doubt a great player. The greatest? No.
 
Ruth's LIFETIME batting average was over .340. That is incomprehensible. If a person with his talent came along today, he would be nursed along like nobody else and would be just as dominant today.

As for Willie Mays, he hung around too long due to money issues, and his lifetime stats do not reflect how good he was in his prime. In the 60's it was simply common knowledge that he was the best player of his era. He was the classic five-tool player with no weaknesses.
 
I hate the Dodgers being a Phillies fan, but I gotta admit Ohtani is the best player ever. From a land of pretty short people but intelligent people, this guy is a giant to rival Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb and Willie Mays.

Not including the dopers of course.
Look...

** Pulls you off Ohtani's knob**

While the Japanese are intelligent, they don't do so well with innovation. Which is a clue to why the guy is so fricken good.

He Works at IT

I'll now return you to reality. lol
 

And yet, Ruth hit 714 homeruns. Others hit over .400. So, what's your point? I think I would disagree with you.
yea in the live ball era......there is a big difference in the conditions of play in the dead ball and live ball eras...with the ball especially and how long they used the same ball in play.......
 
I hate the Dodgers being a Phillies fan, but I gotta admit Ohtani is the best player ever. From a land of pretty short people but intelligent people, this guy is a giant to rival Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb and Willie Mays.

Not including the dopers of course.
To be a "best player ever", one woukd need a lifetime batting average of A LOT higher than .282.
 
yea in the live ball era......there is a big difference in the conditions of play in the dead ball and live ball eras...with the ball especially and how long they used the same ball in play.......


No one else in the "live ball" era hit 714 so he was thr greatest of his era.
 
right his era....if ruth would have played in the 1930's he wouldnt have been so dominate....better pitchers and more power hitters then...
Everybody has to be judged in the context of their era. We will never see any pitcher who wins 511 games. Hell, in the future we may not see a pitcher who wins 200 games but solely comparing Cy Young's wins with anyone else falls apart in context.
 
Last edited:
Everybody has to be judged in the context of their era. We will never see any pitcher who wins 511 games. Hell, in the future we may not see a pitcher who wins 200 games but solely comparing Cy Youngs wins with anyone else falls apart in context.
200 wins?....why not?.....if a good pitcher avgs 15 wins a year he has 150 in ten years....its still possible....
 
200 wins?....why not?.....if a good pitcher avgs 15 wins a year he has 150 in ten years....its still possible....
Only 7 pitchers won 15 games or more in 2025. None won 20. Read my post, it does not preclude a 200 game winner in the future.

Only 3 pitched 200+ innings, topping out at 207. When I was younger that was middle to back of rotation stuff.
 
15th post
Only 7 pitchers won 15 games or more in 2025. None won 20. Read my post, it does not preclude a 200 game winner in the future.

Only 3 pitched 200+ innings, topping out at 207. When I was younger that was middle to back of rotation stuff.
In my lifetime when younger, 20 game winners was a benchmark. For some reason a 19-game winner looked slightly different to me even though that was good. Up until the reserve clause being removed, players belonged to the teams that they played for. In my view, after the first decade or so of free agency and players not tied to the teams they played for the sport of baseball killed itself as the national past time. Endless strikes and then steroids out of control were its death knell. Player may be in better shape and even more athletic at a higher percentage, yet they are on the disabled list at a higher percentage also. The world series ratings was huge a half century ago give or take some years. Today it is a third of that era in a good year and less in many others.
 
In my lifetime when younger, 20 game winners was a benchmark. For some reason a 19-game winner looked slightly different to me even though that was good. Up until the reserve clause being removed, players belonged to the teams that they played for. In my view, after the first decade or so of free agency and players not tied to the teams they played for the sport of baseball killed itself as the national past time. Endless strikes and then steroids out of control were its death knell. Player may be in better shape and even more athletic at a higher percentage, yet they are on the disabled list at a higher percentage also. The world series ratings was huge a half century ago give or take some years. Today it is a third of that era in a good year and less in many others.
Yeah, players are pampered these days. A lot of pitchers blew out their arms by the time they hit 30ish, Sandy Koufax being the prime example. Others like Ryan, Clemens and Carlton had bionic arms and carried on into 40ish. As an investment, I can understand why innings are limited.
 
As with other stats, pitching wins could be manipulated by a change in strategy on the part of manager.

Start the game with a "short man" whose job is to go once through the batting order. Then bring in the "starter," who goes his hundred pitches and gives it up (if necessary) to a closer. The "starter" in that case on a good team could easily accumulate 25 wins in a season, in today's game.
 
As with other stats, pitching wins could be manipulated by a change in strategy on the part of manager.

Start the game with a "short man" whose job is to go once through the batting order. Then bring in the "starter," who goes his hundred pitches and gives it up (if necessary) to a closer. The "starter" in that case on a good team could easily accumulate 25 wins in a season, in today's game.
Yeah, I've seen that a few times. Go L-R or R-L.
 
Back
Top Bottom