[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How do you feel about the possibility that Babe Ruth went his entire career without facing a single pitcher who would make a MLB roster under the current conditions?

If you don't believe me, think for a minute or two about the size of the player pool that MLB drew from then and compare it to now.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you don't think that Walter Johnson or Lefty Grove would make an MLB roster today then you are a moron.

[/ QUOTE ]

I said possibility. Obviously some of them would. The point was to make him realize that, with the RIDICULOUS increase in the available player pool, players are way, way, way better now than they were 70 years ago.

[/ QUOTE ]

And by "player pool" you mean "performance enhancing drugs", amirite?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, thats obviously only legit if you are talking about putting in a player that would refuse to use anything. Its a bit of a stretch to think Babe Ruth wouldn't be using steroids if he were playing today.

But no, I wasn't even talking about that. Baseball, during Ruth's era, drew from a tiny pool. The population of the US in 1920 was 106 million. Some percentage of that was black or otherwise not white. Thats a fairly small pool of players. The US population now over 300 million. All races can play. Add in the hundreds of millions of people in Japan, Korea, Dominican Republic, Venezuala, and so on. The player pool is many, many times larger.

PEDs are a neutral issue, since they help all the other players just as much as they would have helped Ruth. You can toss that out. Globalization, integration, and just the general increase in population since the time of Ruth, but also since the time of Aaron, guarantees that the players today are much tougher.