Roberto Clemente or Frank Robinson?

[jj410]

Clemente is regarded by many astute baseball people as the greatest right fielder of all time, Frank is not referred as such at his positions.

"He gave the term 'complete' a new meaning. He made the word 'superstar' seem inadequate. He had about him the touch of royalty." - Baseball Commissioner Bowie Kuhn (1973 eulogy)

Do we need to say more?

Ok. One more.

"The big thing about (Roberto) Clemente is that he can hit any pitch. I don't mean only strikes. He can hit a ball off his ankles or off his ear." -Hall of Fame pitcher Juan Marichal

Utterly ridiculous and utterly irrelevant.
Both Kuhn and Marichal knew Robinson was by far the more dangerous hitter.
The Kuhn quote is the kind of overstatement people make at funerals.
The Marichal quote simply refers to the fact that Clemente was a bad ball hitter, which is not a good thing. It is why he seldom walked and his OBP is so much worse in comparison to his BA. For example, Ted Williams was proud of the fact he seldom swung at a bad pitch.
BTW, BABE RUTH played right field. As did Aaron. I guess Clemente was also greater than them.
Give it up, Pirate fans, nobody else is buying it.

 

[jj410]

The real issue in debating all time players from eras gone by, or even from different eras is that it becomes insane to try to dogmatically claim one is better than the other, especially when they are without question among the greatest professional athletes/players during their era. Comparing Frank Robinson to Roberto Clemente is akin to comparing Franco Harris to Tony Dorsett, or Oscar Robertson to Jerry West, or Phil Esposito to Bobby Hull..... Bottom line these are all time great, hall of fame ~ first ballot players (Clemente was actually voted in immediately after his untimely death).... Of course there are give and takes, i.e. power vs. batting average vs. speed vs. base running vs. OBP vs. defensive prowess vs. team player vs. throwing arm, vs.....etc................. Two of the greatest MLB players to ever play the game.

Some good debate when it's all said and done, but fairly insane to even argue one is better than the other IMO......

What is even more insane is not knowing that Robinson and Clemente played in the same era. Robinson from 1956-1976 and Clemente from 1955-1972.
Otherwise, you would have a point, though one way modern baseball statisticians view it is by comparing to the norms of the player's era. People who do not understand stats like WAR do not realize it takes into account eras and ballparks.
By your logic you can never compare players, since they never play the same position on the same team in the same ballpark in the same era against the same pitchers with the same injuries. That renders AS status and MVP awards meaningless.
BTW, Clemente may have been a first ballot HOFer because of the circumstances of his death. Whether he would have been otherwise is certainly something we don't know. For one thing, he was very unpopular in the media because of his perceived temperament, which people forgot after his death. Also, the waiting period is normally 5 years after retirement, which is waived in case of death.
You really don't know what you are talking about, do you?

 

[jj410]

How many home runs would Robinson have hit if he played half his games in this ball park? How many would Clemente have hit if he played half his games in Crosley Field and Memorial Stadium?
That 365' down the left field line also had to clear a 30' high scoreboard. In right field there was a 40' high screen that ran from the foul pole to the end of the bleachers.

That is all very nice but you could have made real comparisons with a little research, evidently not your strong suit. No doubt he was hampered by Forbes.
But according to baseball-reference:
Robinson played about 10 years as a Red in years when he hit in Forbes Field. He had 34 HRs there. That is 3.4 HRs a year at Forbes.
Clemente played 15 years as a Pirate in years when he hit in Crosley Field. He had 25 HRs there. That is 1.7 HRs a year at Crosley.
The ballparks appear to explain only a part of Robinson's more than 2.5 to 1 advantage in career HR stats.
Yes, Forbes was bigger than Crosley. But Clemente was an opposite-field hitter. The one area where Crosley was longer than Forbes was to right field (366 feet to 300 feet), so he would have had that small handicap in Crosley.
PS: Clemente hit 16 HRs at Three Rivers in about three seasons, and 86 HRs at Forbes in about 15 seasons. That's 5.3 per year in Three Rivers and 5.7 in Forbes, not much of a difference. The most HRs he ever hit in a season is 29, hardly a mark of a power hitter no matter how big the ballparks he played in. In fact, in his first 5 seasons, the most total season HRs he had was 7!

 

[WDLion]

That is all very nice but you could have made real comparisons with a little research, evidently not your strong suit.
According to baseball-reference:
Robinson played about 10 years as a Red in years when he hit in Forbes Field. He had 34 HRs there. That is 3.4 HRs a year at Forbes.
Clemente played 15 years as a Pirate in years when he hit in Crosley Field. He had 25 HRs there. That is 1.7 HRs a year at Crosley.
The ballparks appear to explain only a small part of Robinson's more than 2.5 to 1 advantage in career HR stats.
Yes, Forbes was bigger than Crosley. But Clemente was an opposite-field hitter. The one area where Crosley was longer than Forbes was to right field (366 feet to 300 feet), so he would have had that small handicap in Crosley.
PS: Clemente hit 16 HRs at Three Rivers in about three seasons, and 86 HRs at Forbes in about 15 seasons. That's 5.3 per year in Three Rivers and 5.7 in Forbes, not much of a difference. The most HRs he ever hit in a season is 23, hardly a mark of a power hitter no matter how big the ballparks he played in.

Your research isn't that great either. You are leaving out the percentage of Robinson HRs hit at Crosley compared to Forbes.
BTY i am not a Pirate fan.

 

[jj410]

Your research isn't that great either. You are leaving out the percentage of Robinson HRs hit at Crosley compared to Forbes.
BTY i am not a Pirate fan.

Good point.
Bottom line, both great players.

 

[GulfCoastLion]

What is even more insane is not knowing that Robinson and Clemente played in the same era. Robinson from 1956-1976 and Clemente from 1955-1972.
Otherwise, you would have a point, though one way modern baseball statisticians view it is by comparing to the norms of the player's era. People who do not understand stats like WAR do not realize it takes into account eras and ballparks.
By your logic you can never compare players, since they never play the same position on the same team in the same ballpark in the same era against the same pitchers with the same injuries. That renders AS status and MVP awards meaningless.
BTW, Clemente may have been a first ballot HOFer because of the circumstances of his death. Whether he would have been otherwise is certainly something we don't know. For one thing, he was very unpopular in the media because of his perceived temperament, which people forgot after his death. Also, the waiting period is normally 5 years after retirement, which is waived in case of death.
You really don't know what you are talking about, do you?

Wow. I don't know what I'm talking about ? You are an idiot. How does that sound ? You are essentially defaming one of the greatest players in MLB and likely the greatest Latin baseball player of his era for what reason ? Oh, Frank Robinson had more power and had higher power production numbers vs. Clemente ? That has been stated. Reading most of your comments, you would think Roberto Clemente was a marginal HOF player, overrated in terms of all time stature and in his era. You are simply wrong. Clemente was absolutely in the elite class of players of his era and all time. And by the way, not every ball player gets voted into the HOF because he died prematurely. It's been done a handful of times (Munson, Clemente ?) The reason he got in immediately was because no-one would question his merits of being a HOF player and he would absolutely have been a 1st ballot HOF selection. Of course there is supposed to be a 5 year holding period (thx for the reminder oh brilliant one). Clemente likely ends up with 3400+ career hits, 275+ HR's (although you obviously feel he was not a power hitter) and 1500+ RBI's playing another 3-4 years, although injuries were certainly taking a toll on him. You can marginalize his career and status as an all time great MLB player all you want, but you are the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[fairgambit]

Good point.
Bottom line, both great players.

On that we can all agree.

 

[todd brewster]

I am willing to bet Ralph Kiner might have won a HR title or two if he did not play all his home games in Forbes Field..

Another side note is about how they said Fenway Park killed a lot of hitters. Many tried to change their swing to take advantage of hitting high fly balls to left. This ruined their swing and shortened their careers.

There was a player who tried to hit just about every pitch as high and as far as he could to left. I am willing to bet he would have hit over 60 HR's a year pre steroids if he was a Red Sox player. The Red Sox curse IMO is that they never tried to trade for Dave Kingman and make him their DH.

 

[fairgambit]

I am willing to bet Ralph Kiner might have won a HR title or two if he did not play all his home games in Forbes Field..

For the record, the dimensions of Forbes Field were different when Kiner played there. Between 1947 and 1953 the left field fence was 30 feet shorter to accomodate Hank Greenberg and Ralph Kiner. ("Greenberg Gardens" and "Kiner's Korner") Kiner won his homerun titles with the Bucs every year from 46' to 52' but in 1946 (before the shorter fence) he did it with only 23 home runs. The following year, with the shorter distance, he hit 51. Kiner was traded in 53', and the fence was removed after the 53' season, adding back the original 30 feet to the left field wall. Clemente never had the benefit of the shorter field.

 

[todd brewster]

Good point, but 28 HR difference has to do with two other factors - maturity and Hank's guidance.

BTW, the same argument could be used for Joe DiMaggio. Joe, if memory serves me correctly, had the same amount of HR's home and away. There was talk about Joe for Ted Williams, as both players would have had their HR numbers soar. The deal almost went through and the Yanks was going to throw in some unknown Lawrence Peter Berra kid. Again the argument is whether Yogi would have been a good catcher without the benefit of Bill Dickey's guidance.

 

[LafayetteBear]

My bad. But it makes Robinson's hitting superiority even more obvious. And Clemente's mediocre base running, despite his speed, remains.

jj: You should just give up while you're behind. Clemente htting in front Johnny Bench. LOL. Clemente a "mediocre base runner." Even funnier. You must never have seen footage of him running the bases. He had another gear when going for extra bases, and was a terrific base runner. Clemente a "poor teammate." Funniest of all. Baseball players, coaches and writers continually refer to him as "The Great Roberto Clemente" for a reason, and I can tell you it was not on account of his charitable work, laudable as it was.

As for the comparison with Robinson, what a waste of time. Robinson was a somewhat better hitter and Clemente a better fielder, but both were all time greats. Calling Clemente supporters "ridiculous" and "laughable" only reduces your credibility, just like in the Ruth vs. Williams thread.

 

[fairgambit]

Good point, but 28 HR difference has to do with two other factors - maturity and Hank's guidance.
BTW, the same argument could be used for Joe DiMaggio. Joe, if memory serves me correctly, had the same amount of HR's home and away. There was talk about Joe for Ted Williams, as both players would have had their HR numbers soar. The deal almost went through and the Yanks was going to throw in some unknown Lawrence Peter Berra kid. Again the argument is whether Yogi would have been a good catcher without the benefit of Bill Dickey's guidance.

No doubt Greenberg made a difference, and Kiner was a year older, but 30 feet was the biggest difference. The Pirates as a team hit 60 home runs in 1946. The following year, with the shorter left field, they hit 156. Put another way, excluding Kiner's 28 more, the rest of the team had 68 more. Clearly, that 30 feet made quite a difference.

 

[psu1969a]

1. Who cares about higher avg? Who had higher obp? Robinson .372 to .359
2. Better arm and defense Clemente from what I've read. Only saw very little of each.
3. Robinson had 204 steals to Roberto's 83. Not so sure about speed.
4. Robinson had a higher post-season OPS .887 TO .803 Scratch clutch off your list.
5. I'll take the significant edge in power over the significant edge in defense. 586 hr to 240 and 1812 rbi to 1305. Robinson won 2 MVP's, came in 2nd twice and 4th twice. Clemente has 1 mvp, 1 3rd and 1 5th.

One MVP in each league; do not know of another one.

 

[jj410]

jj: You should just give up while you're behind. Clemente htting in front Johnny Bench. LOL. Clemente a "mediocre base runner." Even funnier. You must never have seen footage of him running the bases. He had another gear when going for extra bases, and was a terrific base runner. Clemente a "poor teammate." Funniest of all. Baseball players, coaches and writers continually refer to him as "The Great Roberto Clemente" for a reason, and I can tell you it was not on account of his charitable work, laudable as it was.

As for the comparison with Robinson, what a waste of time. Robinson was a somewhat better hitter and Clemente a better fielder, but both were all time greats. Calling Clemente supporters "ridiculous" and "laughable" only reduces your credibility, just like in the Ruth vs. Williams thread.

You are proof that this board should stick to what they know - Pennsylvania college football.
There are too many Pittsburghers and baseball illiterates here to make unbiased knowledgeable analyses.

On this board of football fans and Pennsylvanians, it is Clemente over Robinson and Williams over Ruth by a landslide. Among expert baseball statisticians and most knowledgeable baseball fans it is a different story.

Baseball-reference.com batter ratings:
Ruth is ranked #1 all-time, Williams is ranked #2.
Robinson is ranked #14 all-time, Clemente is ranked #31.

SABR has them rated this way:
Ruth #1, Williams #3.
Clemente #20, Robinson #24.

Bill James:
Hitting:
Ruth #1, Ted Williams #2.
Robinson #13, Clemente ?.
All-around value, including pitchers:
Ruth #1, Williams #7
Robinson #24, Clemente #74
All-around value, RF:
Robinson #3, Clemente #8.
(James, perhaps the foremost baseball statistician, says Clemente had a fantastic arm but his analysis shows outfield defense is overrated by most fans.)
I personally would rate Clemente #5 or #6, but here is James, who knows more than I do, on right-fielders: https://books.google.com/books?id=3...AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=bill james clemente&f=false

 

[todd brewster]

You are proof that this board should stick to what they know - Pennsylvania college football.
There are too many Pittsburghers and baseball illiterates here to make unbiased knowledgeable analyses.

JJ410, you are completely wrong. A majority of this board does not know Pennsylvania College Football. The majority may be baseball illiterates, but they still know more about it. Have you not been following other posts?

 

[LafayetteBear]

You are proof that this board should stick to what they know - Pennsylvania college football.
There are too many Pittsburghers and baseball illiterates here to make unbiased knowledgeable analyses.

Dude: I grew up in LA, went to Cal, live in the Bay Area, and am a Dodger fan. And you think I am proof of a Pennsylvania bias? Well done.

I sense that you know a little about baseball. That is not the reason I have criticized you. The reason is your assumed air of superiority and your many posts referring to other posters as "clowns" or "morons," or to their posts as being "ridiculous" or "laughable." Discussion boards like this one are for the exchange of opinons and debate, most commonly with respect to sports related issues. If, as your posts suggest, you in fact know it all, why are you even bothering to sully yourself and participate in discussions with the rest of us? You obviously need to keep seeking for that elusive Board of geniuses.

 

[NITTANYJGK]

Clemente was unquestionable a better all around player than Robinson which is no knock on Frank. Clemente was also a better all around player than Henry Aaron. Only the Say Hey Kid, Willie Mays, was better than Roberto. Willie was the best all around player to have ever played the game. Now if you strictly want to talk hitting.....nobody comes close to Ted Williams. Fagetaboutit!

 

[thecoolestfish]

You're losing me at Batting Avg. Totally irrelevant. OBP is more important.

Yes, magoo. We've all seen 'Moneyball.'

 

[fairgambit]

Dude: I grew up in LA, went to Cal, live in the Bay Area, and am a Dodger fan. And you think I am proof of a Pennsylvania bias? Well done.
I sense that you know a little about baseball. That is not the reason I have criticized you. The reason is your assumed air of superiority and your many posts referring to other posters as "clowns" or "morons," or to their posts as being "ridiculous" or "laughable." Discussion boards like this one are for the exchange of opinons and debate, most commonly with respect to sports related issues. If, as your posts suggest, you in fact know it all, why are you even bothering to sully yourself and participate in discussions with the rest of us? You obviously need to keep seeking for that elusive Board of geniuses.

Well said. Some who post here find it necessary to demean those with opposing views rather than just letting their arguments rise, or fall, on their own merits. They tend to think they are the smartest person on the Board, and even if that were true, their arrogance obscures their message to the point where I just don't give a damn what they say. One of the best things about this Board is the wide range of educational backgrounds and the high level of intelligence. Unless someone is clearly trolling, there is no need to disrespect another poster just because they disagree.

 

[jj410]

Clemente was unquestionable a better all around player than Robinson which is no knock on Frank. Clemente was also a better all around player than Henry Aaron. Only the Say Hey Kid, Willie Mays, was better than Roberto. Willie was the best all around player to have ever played the game. Now if you strictly want to talk hitting.....nobody comes close to Ted Williams. Fagetaboutit!

Well, I was going to apologize for being insulting, but then someone posts this.
99% of real baseball experts say you are dead wrong on both counts (Williams over Ruth, Clemente over Robinson).
You might even want to argue about the others, but to say Clemente was better than Aaron is WAY WAY beyond stupid - no one with a scintilla of knowledge agrees with that. Only in the deluded minds of Pirate fans. (Unless you simply mean Clemente was a better fielder though any baseball person will tell you they would much rather have Aaron, who was obviously a much better hitter and close to Clemente as an outfielder.)
I think in the minds of romantic naive casual fans Clemente's tragic death and Williams' military service elevate them, when really it is irrelevant - only what they actually did in baseball, not lost potential, counts re their baseball ranking.

 

[NITTANYJGK]

jj410: did your mother have any children that weren't retards? First learn to read, then consider rejoining society. Then carefully consider what "better all around means".

 

[todd brewster]

Well said. Some who post here find it necessary to demean those with opposing views rather than just letting their arguments rise, or fall, on their own merits. They tend to think they are the smartest person on the Board, and even if that were true, their arrogance obscures their message to the point where I just don't give a damn what they say. One of the best things about this Board is the wide range of educational backgrounds and the high level of intelligence. Unless someone is clearly trolling, there is no need to disrespect another poster just because they disagree.

Dear Fair Gambit and Lafayette Bear. I would urge both of you to take a course in reading comprehension. The gentleman was referring to posters to stick to what they know, which is College Football. My reply, if I do say so myself, was hilarious. I was saying these posters know nothing about Baseball, but it is more than they know about Football. I was assuming that most people here are educated and thus had a good sense of humor. Thank you for correcting me.

 

[TheGLOV]

Sid Bream or Jose Tabatta: Now that's the question.

 

[fairgambit]

Dear Fair Gambit and Lafayette Bear. I would urge both of you to take a course in reading comprehension. The gentleman was referring to posters to stick to what they know, which is College Football. My reply, if I do say so myself, was hilarious. I was saying these posters know nothing about Baseball, but it is more than they know about Football. I was assuming that most people here are educated and thus had a good sense of humor. Thank you for correcting me.

Dear Mr. Brewster: Thank you for the suggestion. After 40 years of legal practice, I might actually win a case or two if I could just decipher those damn judicial opinions. That said, I can tell you that my post was not directed at you. In fact, while Lafayette Bear can speak for himself, it appears to me his post was not directed at you either. It is you, sir, who need the reading comprehension course.

 

[TheGLOV]

Dear Mr. Brewster: Thank you for the suggestion. After 40 years of legal practice, I might actually win a case or two if I could just decipher those damn judicial opinions. That said, I can tell you that my post was not directed at you. In fact, while Lafayette Bear can speak for himself, it appears to me his post was not directed at you either. It is you, sir, who need the reading comprehension course.

Don't get your legal-briefs in a bunch, fair!

LOL!!!

Now that's funny!

 

[LafayetteBear]

My reply, if I do say so myself, was hilarious.

You're right. It was hilarious. Just not in the way you intended. Much like your subsequent posts.

 

[todd brewster]

Dear Mr. Gambit: May I call you Fair? My main problem with the posters at bwi.rivals is the apathy at getting Jerry a fair trial. It has already been established that Jerry did not get a fair trial, However, recently it has been revealed that even more shenanigans went on behind the scenes to insure Jerry's guilt by a jury that already perceived Jerry as a monster. Can you explain why with all these facts the PSU community is not screaming for a new trial for Jerry. I realized there are trolls here probably planted by the Nov 2011 BOT to protect their malfeasance, but as a seasoned attorney, why aren't you leading the charge?

 

[fairgambit]

Dear Mr. Gambit: May I call you Fair? My main problem with the posters at bwi.rivals is the apathy at getting Jerry a fair trial. It has already been established that Jerry did not get a fair trial, However, recently it has been revealed that even more shenanigans went on behind the scenes to insure Jerry's guilt by a jury that already perceived Jerry as a monster. Can you explain why with all these facts the PSU community is not screaming for a new trial for Jerry. I realized there are trolls here probably planted by the Nov 2011 BOT to protect their malfeasance, but as a seasoned attorney, why aren't you leading the charge?

Certainly, and I shall call you Todd. Let me begin by stating that I am not a criminal lawyer, nor an appellate court judge. The fairness of Jerry's trial would be better addressed by the former, and decided by the latter. Beyond that I will just say that I have faith in the jury system in this country. It is the best system on earth, and I believe the juries get it right over 99.9 percent of the time. There are very limited occasions where they wrongly convict, and for that we have appellate courts. Sometimes, despite the best efforts of a jury and the appellate courts, innocent people spend time in prison. That is obviously unfortunate, but no system is perfect. As to why I am not leading the charge for a new trial for Jerry, it is because I believe he is guilty. He may not have received a fair trial, and if so, I trust he will be granted a new one, but I believe the results will be the same. I will not address the Sandusky matter further. Now, that all said, since this was, and is, a baseball thread, let me finish by stating I still think Clemente was better.

 

[Still in State College]

The real question is which one's palate was mature enough to appreciate the latest offering from Toppling Goliath Brewing Company had they both had the chance to drink it.

 

[LafayetteBear]

The real question is which one's palate was mature enough to appreciate the latest offering from Toppling Goliath Brewing Company had they both had the chance to drink it.

I smell a commercial endorsement. Likely from someone connected, in some way, with Toppling Goliath Brewing Company, whatever that is.

A fitting addition to this ridiculous thread.

 

[todd brewster]

Fair, my first reaction was to agree with Scott that Jerry was a monster. Scott knew him all his life and I did not know Jerry at all. However, I was not sure if there was evidence to convict Jerry, I followed the trial through BWI's Nathan and he wasn't sure of the outcome. And I was happy Jerry was convicted.

Since then, JZ has poured holes through the victims time lines. The prosecution said Myers was not V2, yet recently Shubin, while boasting, claimed V2 as his client. The prejudice of the judge and jury against Jerry IMO was the admittance of hearsay. I understand some hearsay is admissible, but not when there is no victim or date. That is ridiculous! Recently testimony was revealed where the janitor said the person he saw was not Jerry.

IMO, Jerry crossed boundaries, but DPW and 2nd Mile had trained professional at spotting a pedophile and would have told Jerry not to take any kids beyond the boundaries of the program, if they suspected anything (and they knew about the 1998 incident).

Fair, I realize it may be political suicide to lead the charge, but I do hope you read up the new revelations.

BTW, 99.9% of the people thought Jerry was a monster and this thread shows that if we had a trial on who was the better base stealer, 99.9% of people in Pennsylvania would say Clemente over Ruth. I disagree.

 

[jj410]

Fair, my first reaction was to agree with Scott that Jerry was a monster. Scott knew him all his life and I did not know Jerry at all. However, I was not sure if there was evidence to convict Jerry, I followed the trial through BWI's Nathan and he wasn't sure of the outcome. And I was happy Jerry was convicted.

Since then, JZ has poured holes through the victims time lines. The prosecution said Myers was not V2, yet recently Shubin, while boasting, claimed V2 as his client. The prejudice of the judge and jury against Jerry IMO was the admittance of hearsay. I understand some hearsay is admissible, but not when there is no victim or date. That is ridiculous! Recently testimony was revealed where the janitor said the person he saw was not Jerry.

IMO, Jerry crossed boundaries, but DPW and 2nd Mile had trained professional at spotting a pedophile and would have told Jerry not to take any kids beyond the boundaries of the program, if they suspected anything (and they knew about the 1998 incident).

Fair, I realize it may be political suicide to lead the charge, but I do hope you read up the new revelations.

BTW, 99.9% of the people thought Jerry was a monster and this thread shows that if we had a trial on who was the better base stealer, 99.9% of people in Pennsylvania would say Clemente over Ruth. I disagree.

OK, so how did the thread that started with the ridiculous claim that Clemente was better than Robinson wind up being a thread on how JS was not that bad?
See where shoddy logic that at first appears harmless can take you?

 

[todd brewster]

OK, so how did the thread that started with the ridiculous claim that Clemente was better than Robinson wind up being a thread on how JS was not that bad?
See where shoddy logic that at first appears harmless can take you?[/QUOTE]

The connection is that about 70% of Pennsylvanians believe Clemente is better than Robinson and that about 70% of Pennsylvanians believe that Jerry was having sex with boys for 40 years and although Joe reported him, Joe should have done more. IMO Jerry did not have sex with any boy. Regardless, he needs a new trial by an objective jury. JJ410 instead of bring up facts that Frank is better, would it be more beneficial if you made a difference by revealing the new evidence that demands a new trial for Jerry?

 

[Still in State College]

Is this about Roberto Clemente or Jim Clemente?

I have really become confused by this thread?

 

[fairgambit]

Is this about Roberto Clemente or Jim Clemente?
I have really become confused by this thread?[/QUOTE]

It's been hanging around so long, no one remembers. I do remember, however, that Roberto Clemente was better than either Frank Robinson or Jim Clemente.

 

[LafayetteBear]

OK, so how did the thread that started with the ridiculous claim that Clemente was better than Robinson wind up being a thread on how JS was not that bad?
See where shoddy logic that at first appears harmless can take you?

jj: LOL, I could not agree more with you on THAT one.

 

[SEPATOPTEN]

jj: You should just give up while you're behind. Clemente htting in front Johnny Bench. LOL. Clemente a "mediocre base runner." Even funnier. You must never have seen footage of him running the bases. He had another gear when going for extra bases, and was a terrific base runner. Clemente a "poor teammate." Funniest of all. Baseball players, coaches and writers continually refer to him as "The Great Roberto Clemente" for a reason, and I can tell you it was not on account of his charitable work, laudable as it was.

As for the comparison with Robinson, what a waste of time. Robinson was a somewhat better hitter and Clemente a better fielder, but both were all time greats. Calling Clemente supporters "ridiculous" and "laughable" only reduces your credibility, just like in the Ruth vs. Williams thread.

Both were great. I loved Clemente. Great arm.

 

[SEPATOPTEN]

Well, I was going to apologize for being insulting, but then someone posts this.
99% of real baseball experts say you are dead wrong on both counts (Williams over Ruth, Clemente over Robinson).
You might even want to argue about the others, but to say Clemente was better than Aaron is WAY WAY beyond stupid - no one with a scintilla of knowledge agrees with that. Only in the deluded minds of Pirate fans. (Unless you simply mean Clemente was a better fielder though any baseball person will tell you they would much rather have Aaron, who was obviously a much better hitter and close to Clemente as an outfielder.)
I think in the minds of romantic naive casual fans Clemente's tragic death and Williams' military service elevate them, when really it is irrelevant - only what they actually did in baseball, not lost potential, counts re their baseball ranking.

Much better hitter? Roberto had 3,000 hits when he died. Also Williams needs no elevation. My father saw both Ruth and Williams and always said Williams was the greatest hitter he ever saw. Williams might have approached the Babe's home run record had he not served in WWII and Korea.

 

[SEPATOPTEN]

OK, so how did the thread that started with the ridiculous claim that Clemente was better than Robinson wind up being a thread on how JS was not that bad?
See where shoddy logic that at first appears harmless can take you?

Should Sandusky Be free?
The connection is that about 70% of Pennsylvanians believe Clemente is better than Robinson and that about 70% of Pennsylvanians believe that Jerry was having sex with boys for 40 years and although Joe reported him, Joe should have done more. IMO Jerry did not have sex with any boy. Regardless, he needs a new trial by an objective jury. JJ410 instead of bring up facts that Frank is better, would it be more beneficial if you made a difference by revealing the new evidence that demands a new trial for Jerry?[/QUOTE]
Why do you say the jury was not objective?

 

[Obliviax]

left out of this discussion is that Clemente played almost half of his games at Forbes Field (15 seasons). Center field was 442 feet with the deepest part of the field being 462 feet away! Left center and right center were both over 400 feet. You couldn't build a team on the home run ball.

To contrast, Crosley Field (where BR played most of his games) was 420, center field, at its deepest point. That's 42 feet closer than Forbes Field. Left and right center were ~ 380. BR played in Baltimore's Memorial Stadium for several years which had a center field at 405 with the LC and RC being 376 feet away.

Robinson was clearly the better HR hitter. Clemente was clearly the better fielder. Pirates teams were never one to steal being the "lumber company", they didn't want to run themselves out of a big inning but rest assured, RC was very fast.

In my mind, its hard to compare. With Baseball fields being what they are and both playing in different leagues, its hard to say. They didn't face the same pitching. (in an age where players played most of their career with the same team and/or league). They were just different players playing in different environments.