From: Phil on
On 2007-06-12 12:48:45 -0400, rm(a)biteme.org said:

> In rec.sport.baseball John Poutre <mehatespam(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> <rm(a)biteme.org> wrote in message
>>> In rec.sport.baseball SkippyPB <swiegand(a)nospam.neo.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I beg to differ. I think of Pete Rose as an arrogant, cheating, lying
>>>> sack of sh*t. The greatest hitter of all time was Ty Cobb, bar none.
>
>>> Maybe you missed it, but Rose actually passed Cobb in hits. And
>>> that makes Rose the greatest hitter since he has the greatest number
>>> of hits.
>
>>> Cobb is second.
>
>> HAHA, umm, how many more at bats did it take Rose to get those hits? ALOT.
>> Geeze, it's not even close that Cobb is better.
>
> We aren't measuring atbats. We're trying to determine which player
> had the _greatest_ number of hits. That player would be the
> _greatest_ hitter, by definition and without qualification.
>
> What you are trying to say is that Cobb was the greater hitter but
> qualified by fewer atbats. You could also say that Cobb was the
> greatest hitter qualified by the phrase, "of those who only faced
> white pitching." Or perhaps, "of those who played for the Detroit
> Tigers" or even more salient, "of those who never won a World
> Series."

Maybe he's trying to say Cobb was the greatest hitter qualified by the
phrase "who didn't gamble on his team when he was in a position to
affect the outcome of games, forever and irrevocably placing his
integrity in question"...

From: OpEd on

<rm(a)biteme.org> wrote in message
news:N7Abi.93326$YG5.21447(a)fe07.news.easynews.com...
> In rec.sport.baseball John Poutre <mehatespam(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> <rm(a)biteme.org> wrote in message
>>> In rec.sport.baseball SkippyPB <swiegand(a)nospam.neo.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I beg to differ. I think of Pete Rose as an arrogant, cheating, lying
>>>> sack of sh*t. The greatest hitter of all time was Ty Cobb, bar none.
>
>>> Maybe you missed it, but Rose actually passed Cobb in hits. And
>>> that makes Rose the greatest hitter since he has the greatest number
>>> of hits.
>
>>> Cobb is second.
>
>> HAHA, umm, how many more at bats did it take Rose to get those hits?
>> ALOT.
>> Geeze, it's not even close that Cobb is better.
>
> We aren't measuring atbats. We're trying to determine which player
> had the _greatest_ number of hits. That player would be the
> _greatest_ hitter, by definition and without qualification.
>
> What you are trying to say is that Cobb was the greater hitter but
> qualified by fewer atbats. You could also say that Cobb was the
> greatest hitter qualified by the phrase, "of those who only faced
> white pitching." Or perhaps, "of those who played for the Detroit
> Tigers" or even more salient, "of those who never won a World
> Series."
>

Or you could say Rose is the greatest hitter that wasn't nicknamed The
Georgia Peach.



From: Bill Kawalec on


<rm(a)biteme.org> wrote in message
news:RLBbi.111073$NO1.45931(a)fe05.news.easynews.com...
> In rec.sport.baseball Sir Creep <sircreep(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> In my lifetime I would consider Carew and Gwynn and Brett better
>> 'hitters' than Rose.
>
> Ah, so you are qualifying it?
>
>> Hell, I can't even call Rose the greatest LEADOFF hitter, seeing
>> as that moniker is reserved for Rickey Henderson (another A-hole).
>
> Did Rickey have the greatest number of leadoff hits?
>
>> How about winning a batting title? Or hitting, oh I don't
>> know......370? Or how about doing nothing more than having the
>> general concensus be on the order of 'boy he sure got a lot of
>> clutch hits', 'you could sure count on him when you needed it'.
>
> But Rose doesn't need such qualification.
>
>> Let me know when your 'greatest hitter' of all time accomplishes
>> anything not involving a criminal element.
>
> Sure. Pete Rose was the greatest hitter of all time, by definition
> and without qualification. Perhaps we are using too many big words?



Pete Rose had the most hits PERIOD. He is not even clsoe to being ""the
greatest hitter,"" and would not even make that claim himself.




>
> cordially, as always,
>
> rm


From: OpEd on
>> What you are trying to say is that Cobb was the greater hitter but
>> qualified by fewer atbats. You could also say that Cobb was the
>> greatest hitter qualified by the phrase, "of those who only faced
>> white pitching." Or perhaps, "of those who played for the Detroit
>> Tigers" or even more salient, "of those who never won a World
>> Series."
>>
>
> Or you could say Rose is the greatest hitter that wasn't nicknamed The
> Georgia Peach.

Or Rose is the greatest hitter never to have faced Walter Johnson.
Lots of Rose's achievements are also marked by "qualifications."





From: rm on
In rec.sport.baseball John Poutre <mehatespam(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> LOL, thanks for the laugh. Measure the hitter by hits only? That's stupid
> but then again, right up your alley, so we expect nothing less from you.

And it's stupid enough for Major League baseball as well. 4,256 is
one of the most treasured, and well-kown, numbers in baseball. TV
stations all over NA broke in on Rose when he passed Ty Cobb.

> Thanks for playing, come back when you have bought a clue.

The thing about "clues" is that they're free, if you know where to
look.

cordially, as always,

rm
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Next: Galarraga robbed! (Jesse)