Roberto Clemente or Frank Robinson?

[toddbrewster]

[QUOTE="SEPATOPTEN, Why do you say the jury was not objective?[/QUOTE]

I am a rational person and I thought at the time Jerry was a monster and should have been hung by his manhood. Everyone in Central PA thought Jerry a monster and what was worse is that PSU and the people in Central PA did not want to be known as pedophile enabler,

The "victims" were coached, changed their stories to fit time lines and gave convincing stories. The judge said he thought at the time they were 8-10 years old and it is terrible what this monster did. However, the jury is suppose to perceive Jerry as being innocent until proven guilty. This is why so few child rapists are proven guilty without 1. blood or DNA evidence 2. a cross examined eye witness or 3. the rapist confession. There is zero evidence of any of this.

There was a tape played of a detective and a lawyer conspiring about coaching an eyewitness. Can you imagine no matter how innocent the conversation of anyone being convicted after hearing that?

Very seldom is hearsay admitted, especially in a felony case. Not only did the Judge allow it, but he allowed it where there was NO victim and NO date in which it happened. Please tell me how one defends against that?

The defense attorney asked for several delays so he could do more research, but the Judge did not allow one.

On top of all of this, there has been many revelations in the past year to show that this was a lynching; as the prosecutors purposely withheld evidence and some of the "victims" stories have unraveled.

I think it is criminal that people in PA are not screaming for a new trial. Maybe Jerry is guilty, but there is now plenty of evidence that will cause doubt.

 

[GulfCoastLion]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJut2zGv_xM

Greetings. I got in a discussion about who was the better ballplayer, Roberto Clemente or Frank Robinson. In truth, one couldn't go wrong having either Hall of Famer, much like a debate of who you find the more attractive, Jennifer Anniston or Diane Lane.

I admit my bias to The Great One. However, I based my selection on the following criteria:

Who had more power: Robinson, not that Clemente was void of power but playing in cavernous Forbes Field, 457 feet to straightaway center field, it was wiser for Clemente to hit line drives.
Who hit for higher average: Clemente
Who had the better arm defensively: Clemente
Who was better defensively: Clemente
Who had more speed: Clemente
Who performed better in the clutch: Clemente (see '71 WS and Clemente had a hit in each of the 14 World Series games he appeared in '60 & '71, a 14-game World Series hitting streak if you will against excellent pitching.)

Thoughts from BWI's esteemed baseball experts? Thank you in advance.[/QUOTCame across this on on youtube today and had to post it. Its a short clip from the 1971 World Series,but comments from Orioles announcer Chuck Thompson and also Curt Gowdy (NBC) say it all, along with the highlight reels of Roberto Clemente, who truly put on a clinic in the 1971 World Series.

Roberto Clemente's World Series Game 6 Highlights - YouTube
▶ 1:40
www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJut2zGv_xM
Jan 19, 2014 - Uploaded by sscar962010
Roberto Clemente's World Series Game 6 Highlights ... Blass pitched two great games, but ...

 

[Mister Magoo]

Why do Clemente boosters think BA is more important than OBP?

Why do you say he has a better arm and is better defensively? He was. But, just say better defensively.

Clemente may have been faster, but he didn't score as many runs or have as many steals as Robinson.

Clemente boosters seem to ignore that many of his own teammates didn't think he was a great team player. Yet, Frank Robinson is universally regarded as a great team leader.

Robinson also had a higher post-season OPS. But, wasn't clutch? Do HR's off Drysdale in 66 World Series not count?

 

[GulfCoastLion]

Why do Clemente boosters think BA is more important than OBP?

Why do you say he has a better arm and is better defensively? He was. But, just say better defensively.

Clemente may have been faster, but he didn't score as many runs or have as many steals as Robinson.

Clemente boosters seem to ignore that many of his own teammates didn't think he was a great team player. Yet, Frank Robinson is universally regarded as a great team leader.

Robinson also had a higher post-season OPS. But, wasn't clutch? Do HR's off Drysdale in 66 World Series not count?

Hey Magoo, I never mentioned a negative thing about Frank Robinson, ever. He was a great ballplayer. I did defend Clemente when others talked negatively about Clemente in many posts. I have never contested Frank Robinson having better power and better power production numbers, which would be foolish. Most of the defending of Clemente is around his overall skills as a baseball player. Anyone who saw that era, or played in that era understands his overall hitting, running, defensive skills were elite. And throwing is absolutely another skill that doesn't necessarily come with great defensive skills. In other words you can win gold gloves, without having an outstanding throwing arm. Clemente had both and is widely regarded as having one of the best, if not best throwing arms, so it logically comes up in describing him. As for his lack of being a team player, much of that was in his younger years when he had major difficulties with his language skills coming from Puerto Rico and had difficulties picking up the English language. Yes he was temper-mental and talked of injuries often, but claiming he was a bad teammate is a stretch. There's no doubt in his later years he was revered and a clear leader of the Pirates, particularly with this high performance on the field of play through his untimely death.