11/21/24
September 12, 2010
Honoring Pete Rose 25 years and 4,192 hits: "It's something I'll never forget," said Reds Chief Operating Officer, Phil Castellini. "I know I'll get goose bumps again tomorrow night when I see that kind of re-lived, and see him out here among the fans."
I prefer to look at the entire career. Do anyone ever hear the words "slacked off" and "Pete Rose" in the same sentence?
Next: end the banishment. Shy of that, the baseball Writers Association of America should end its capitulation to MLB by offering a Hall of Fame vote for Rose. Open vote first; if the writers don't elect him, send it to the veterans. Either way, it would be an embarrassment if he's enshined posthumously.
posted by jjzucal at 01:59 PM on September 12, 2010
Do anyone ever hear the words "slacked off" and "Pete Rose" in the same sentence?
Now I have.
posted by Hugh Janus at 02:02 PM on September 12, 2010
Either way, it would be an embarrassment if he's enshined posthumously.
posted by justgary at 02:58 PM on September 12, 2010
Shy of that, the baseball Writers Association of America should end its capitulation to MLB by offering a Hall of Fame vote for Rose.
Too late. His 15 years after retirement have passed. They'd have to make a specific exception for Pete Rose. Thankfully, he's lied to enough writers about his betting on the game that I don't see too many of them wanting to agree to make an exception for Pete Rose.
if the writers don't elect him, send it to the veterans.
I would hope the veterans look at him and see someone who thought his personal gambling habit was more important than his commitment to the sport.
posted by grum@work at 04:20 PM on September 12, 2010
In his final 2 years of chasing the record, he put up a .668 OPS, which is approximately 14% WORSE than the average player at that time. His last season (when the record was already broken), he put up a .586 OPS, which is about 39% WORSE than the average player at that time.
1984 and 1985?
posted by tselson at 06:20 PM on September 12, 2010
1984 and 1985?
He broke the record in 1985, and then played again in 1986 to raise the bar.
Those are the years I was referencing.
His mid-August trade in 1984 to the Reds from Montreal and the remainder of that season (107 PA) would be the only time he'd be considered "above average" (> 100 OPS+) for any team in the final 6 seasons of his career.
1985 was a .713 OPS.
1986 was a .586 OPS.
posted by grum@work at 07:19 PM on September 12, 2010
Quick: who's more repellent, Pete or the guy whose record he broke?
posted by Uncle Toby at 07:20 PM on September 12, 2010
Quick: who's more repellent, Pete or the guy whose record he broke?
Ty Cobb never bet on baseball...or, never got caught betting on baseball...
posted by MeatSaber at 09:43 PM on September 12, 2010
Ty Cobb never bet on baseball...or, never got caught betting on baseball...
I'm not going to try to defend Pete Rose's character because I agree he doesn't have bags of it lying around, but I don't think not betting on baseball makes someone less repellent than someone who did. Ty Cobb had plenty of other reasons to be considered repellent.
posted by Ricardo at 07:16 AM on September 13, 2010
Ty Cobb never bet on baseball...or, never got caught betting on baseball...
That's true.. but Cobb was a racist so he had that going for him.
posted by BornIcon at 07:38 AM on September 13, 2010
Also related, The tortured life of Eric Show, the pitcher who gave up Rose's record hit.
posted by split atom at 09:43 AM on September 13, 2010
Excellent article, split atom.
posted by rumple at 12:31 PM on September 13, 2010
Quick: who's more repellent, Pete or the guy whose record he broke
I don't get this question at all. Might as well ask me which player was better looking.
There are far worse things than betting on a game outside of baseball; in baseball there's nothing worse. The rule is posted in every club house in the majors. It attacks the very integrity of the game.
This isn't a question of who is more 'repellent'.
posted by justgary at 06:55 PM on September 13, 2010
>Quick: who's more repellent, Pete or the guy whose record he broke?
>>I don't get this question at all.
Sure you do! Your answer expands on the point of the question.
As decent human beings, we abhor Cobb, but for reasons that have nothing to do with baseball. So his place in the HOF is unquestioned, and appropriately.
But Rose, as you put it, "attacked the integrity of the game," so the place we were all saving for him in the HOF remains vacant, and appropriately.
So, yeah, maybe I could have phrased my query a little better. But I deliberately left off the framing you supplied in your answer because I wanted to see how people justified their own answers. Which you did very nicely.
posted by Uncle Toby at 09:26 AM on September 14, 2010
I find it hard to be repelled by Cobb because he last played 82 years ago. My granddad was four. The living memory of his misdeeds is fading fast.
I saw Rose crying in some speech last weekend on SportsCenter last night. As a kid who loved the way he played and that Prince Valiant haircut, I'd prefer not to see him suffering like Job for the rest of time. Yes he bet on baseball, and no he did not admit it until many years later. But would it kill anybody if he got to be recognized along with the other players of his generation at the occasional Major League event and coached a Rookie League team in the Reds organization?
posted by rcade at 09:43 AM on September 14, 2010
But would it kill anybody if he got to be recognized along with the other players of his generation at the occasional Major League event and coached a Rookie League team in the Reds organization?
It wouldn't "kill" anyone, but it would send the wrong message.
I don't really have a problem if he attends a private event held by the Reds. I wasn't happy that he was allowed to attend the "All-Century Team" crap that MLB held back in 1999, but that was more of a fan/sponsor tribute than anything else.
I would be perfectly happy if he never holds a position in a MLB organization (or in their minor league affiliates). He's banned from baseball. Make it count.
posted by grum@work at 12:21 PM on September 14, 2010
But I deliberately left off the framing you supplied in your answer because I wanted to see how people justified their own answers.
Okay, now I feel used.
posted by justgary at 03:36 PM on September 14, 2010
Interesting that Pete Rose gets honoured for running himself out there as a player/manager, actively putting a BAD hitter at first base for so many games, just to reach his personal milestone.
In his final 2 years of chasing the record, he put up a .668 OPS, which is approximately 14% WORSE than the average player at that time. His last season (when the record was already broken), he put up a .586 OPS, which is about 39% WORSE than the average player at that time.
He was putting his own personal milestone and historical place in the game ahead of the team.
Of course, that might not have bothered him that much, as he was also betting on Reds games. Did he ever alter the outcome of any of the games he wagered on? We'll never know for sure.
So, enjoy it Cincinnati.
Just remember that your World Series championship in 1990 was the year AFTER Pete Rose was tossed from the game.
Amazing turn around for a team that was 5th in the division the previous year.