The Rose Award For 6-10-2007.
in [Detroit Tigers]
|
From: rm on 12 Jun 2007 17:04 In rec.sport.baseball slidge(a)slidge.com wrote: >> 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. > > No, that just makes Pete Rose the player with the most hits. The greatest > hitter is the player with the most total bases, by definition and without > qualification. Hardly. The greatest hitter is the one with the greatest number of hits. The player with the greatest number of total bases is the greatest slugger. > A hitter who hits five homeruns is a greater hitter than the > hitter that hits five singles. No, he is a greater slugger. How many have hit 5 home runs? cordially, as always, rm
From: rm on 12 Jun 2007 17:06 In rec.sport.baseball slidge(a)slidge.com wrote: >> We aren't measuring atbats. We're trying to determine which >> player had the _greatest_ number of hits. > Wrong, you are determining which player had the *most* hits The most hits = greatest number of hits. Unless, of course, you wish to change the meaning of the words. >> That player would be the _greatest_ hitter, by definition and >> without qualification. > Again, wrong. The _greatest_ hitter, by definition and without > qualification, is the hitter with the most total bases, unless you > believe that a single is a _greater_ hit than a homerun. No, that would be the greatest power hitter or slugger. And "the most total bases" is a qualifier. You do know what "without qualification" means, don't you? cordially, as always, rm
From: rm on 12 Jun 2007 17:08 In rec.sport.baseball Steve Cutchen <maxfaq(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > In article <lyAbi.521$ZY1.43(a)newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, > <slidge(a)slidge.com> wrote: > >> > We aren't measuring atbats. We're trying to determine which player >> > had the _greatest_ number of hits. >> >> Wrong, you are determining which player had the *most* hits >> >> > That player would be the _greatest_ hitter, by definition and without >> > qualification. >> >> Again, wrong. The _greatest_ hitter, by definition and without >> qualification, is the hitter with the most total bases, unless you believe >> that a single is a _greater_ hit than a homerun. > > "If I made my living hitting singles like Pete, I'd wear a dress." > - Mickey Mantle "If I made my living drinking rye like Mickey, I'd be dead." - Pete Rose cordially, as always, rm -- A statfan, who refused to fly after reading of the alarmingly high probability that there will be a bomb on any given plane, realized that the probability of there being two bombs on any given flight is very low. Now, whenever he flies, he carries a bomb with him.
From: rm on 12 Jun 2007 17:09 In rec.sport.baseball Phil <phil(a)nomail.com> wrote: > Maybe he's trying to say Cobb was the greatest hitter qualified by the > phrase "who didn't gamble on his team when he was in a position to > affect the outcome of games, forever and irrevocably placing his > integrity in question"... Pete Rose never bet on baseball while he was a hitter. You must be talking about Shoeless Joe. As for Cobb, we'll never know if he threw a game, but he never won the WS. That makes a curious person wonder. cordially, as always, rm
From: Bill Kawalec on 12 Jun 2007 17:32
oooohhh!!! now I get it! Rose is greater than Cobb, because Cobb wasn't on teevee!!! -- I never read email at the Yahoo address! <rm(a)biteme.org> wrote in message news:NRDbi.113067$NO1.73925(a)fe05.news.easynews.com... > 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 |