ccrunner609;1627330 wrote:link? There isn't a shred of evidence that Pete bet on or manipulated games for making $.

In his autobiography My Prison Without Bars, published by Rodale Press on January 8, 2004, Rose finally admitted publicly to betting on baseball games and other sports while playing for and managing the Reds. He also admitted to betting on Reds games, but said that he never bet against the Reds. He repeated his admissions in an interview on the ABC news program Primetime Thursday. He also said in the book that he hoped his admissions would help end his ban from baseball so that he could reapply for reinstatement.
In March 2007 during an interview on The Dan Patrick Show on ESPN Radio, Rose said, "I bet on my team every night. I didn't bet on my team four nights a week. I bet on my team to win every night because I loved my team, I believed in my team," he said. "I did everything in my power every night to win that game."[SUP][39][/SUP]

ccrunner609;1627330 wrote:link? There isn't a shred of evidence that Pete bet on or manipulated games for making $. To downplay steroids to make your point shows how much you don't understand the topic

Try google if you can't find a link to prove Rose gambled on games he was involved with.

I did did not down play steroids at all. If you look I stated all that were caught should also be banned. So nice reading comprehension. Good thing you teach gym instead of Language Arts.

We are really talking about Hines Ward being in the HOF? LOL

ccrunner609;1627330 wrote:link? There isn't a shred of evidence that Pete bet on or manipulated games for making $.

He's (finally) admitted to betting on games. Even if he never bet against his team, the bets affect how he manages for those games which in turn affects subsequent games.

sleeper;1627418 wrote:We are really talking about Hines Ward being in the HOF? LOL

Dancing with the Stars?

ccrunner609;1627330 wrote:link? There isn't a shred of evidence that Pete bet on or manipulated games for making $. To downplay steroids to make your point shows how much you don't understand the topic

This is baseball, not running, so let's not pretend you have the brain cells to rub together to understand the topic either, $20-boy.

Best hitter of all-time needs to be in the HOF.

Even crackheads like Dwight Gooden and Daryl Strawberry got second chances for multiple drug offenses.

Old Rider;1627556 wrote:Best hitter of all-time needs to be in the HOF.

Even crackheads like Dwight Gooden and Daryl Strawberry got second chances for multiple drug offenses.

You lost all credibility with your first line. Pete Rose was a great hitter but Tony Gwynn, Ted Williams, and a few more were much better. He has the record for total hits due to being great and longevity. He never sniffed the .400 mark or the career average marks of Gwynn and Williams.

Huffington Post now has a front page article saying lets Pete in HOF...Even got linked to Yahoo! Front page.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5508486?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

If pressure keeps mounting then this may come to pass. There just needs to be some big names speak out on Roses behalf...

jmog;1627665 wrote:You lost all credibility with your first line. Pete Rose was a great hitter but Tony Gwynn, Ted Williams, and a few more were much better. He has the record for total hits due to being great and longevity. He never sniffed the .400 mark or the career average marks of Gwynn and Williams.

The two guys you mentioned in the same sentence with Rose are both in the HOF. Are you saying he doesn't belong? Because that was the whole purpose for this thread. I was simply saying that he is at the top of the list for most hits of all time and to me, that makes him the greatest hitter ever. No doubt that Gwynn and Williams were great hitters, but Rose has more and is at the top of the list so put him in the HOF!!

jmog;1627665 wrote:You lost all credibility with your first line. Pete Rose was a great hitter but Tony Gwynn, Ted Williams, and a few more were much better. He has the record for total hits due to being great and longevity. He never sniffed the .400 mark or the career average marks of Gwynn and Williams.

Was Gwynn really "much better" than Rose? Their slash lines are fairly close...
Gwynn: .338 / .388 / .459
Rose: .303 / .375 / .409

And if you're going to say Pete only has the hits record because of longevity, that's just absurd. Gwynn played for 20 seasons. Give him his highest hit total for a year (220) for four additional years and he's still 230+ hits away from touching Rose's record.

lookie here...

player- years played - games played -hits- av hits per game- av hits per year

Ted Williams 19 -2292- 2654 - 1.157- 139

Tony Gwynn 20 - 2440 -3141 - 1.287 - 157

Pete Rose 24- 3562- 4256- 1.194- 177

Williams and Gwynn averaged playing 120 games per year. Pete averaged 148

I guess Pete cheated because he played an extra 24 games per year over 24 seasons. What a p ussy.



Just that stat alone makes it look like Pete plated 27-1/2 seasons by comparison.

Old Rider;1627750 wrote:The two guys you mentioned in the same sentence with Rose are both in the HOF. Are you saying he doesn't belong? Because that was the whole purpose for this thread. I was simply saying that he is at the top of the list for most hits of all time and to me, that makes him the greatest hitter ever. No doubt that Gwynn and Williams were great hitters, but Rose has more and is at the top of the list so put him in the HOF!!

Williams lifetime BA-.344
Gwynn lifetime BA-.338
Rose lifetime BA-.303

come on, there is a HUGE gap there. Williams and Gwynn were head and shoulders better pure hitters than Rose. Rose just played longer, period.

Combine playing longer with swinging at everything (he had a ton more KOs).

50 higher on base and 35 higher batting average that Gwynn is higher than Rose is NOT close statistically.

jmog;1627979 wrote:Williams lifetime BA-.344
Gwynn lifetime BA-.338
Rose lifetime BA-.303

come on, there is a HUGE gap there. Williams and Gwynn were head and shoulders better pure hitters than Rose. Rose just played longer, period.

Combine playing longer with swinging at everything (he had a ton more KOs).

50 higher on base and 35 higher batting average that Gwynn is higher than Rose is NOT close statistically.

That's not that huge of a gap.

And again, Gwynn played for 20 seasons. His best year in terms of number of hits was 220. Give him that for 4 more years and he's still 230+ hits from reaching Rose's record. Williams played for 19 seasons. His best year for hits was 194. Give him that for 5 more years and he's 632 away from Rose's record.

I'm not going to say that Rose is better than Gwynn or Williams. But I will say that to downplay Rose's record by saying he was only able to get it because he played a long time is just stupid.

vball10set;1627224 wrote:I'm still lol'ing at the Hines Ward comparison--any cred he may have had is out the window with that comment!

Hines Ward is 9th all-time in receptions, 21st in receiving yards, 42 in TD's, 66 in all-purpose yards, 156th in points scored....

Rose is something like 150th in career average, and maybe the true Ironman. Otherwise he doesn't really register on the greatness scale in any other regard. If you're going to compare the entire body of work relative to other hitters, Rose is a borderline HOFer - great singles hitter (something a lot of people would describe Ward as) who was consistently good for a long time, with a few great years.

Both are known as fierce, hard-nosed competitors. It's a very good comparison, you're just looking at the two thru rose-colored glasses.

Rose was a good hitter who accumulated a ridiculous amounts of hits because he played for an incredibly long time with incredible durability (which is a really weak HOF criteria, whether we agree on that or not). Since Gwynn was mentioned - Rose maybe only played a few more years but played 60% more games.

ernest_t_bass;1627271 wrote:Gut is full retard.

This needs to be brought up once again with his last post. Borderline HOF'er.... FFS dude, really?

gut;1627986 wrote:
Rose is something like 150th in career average, and maybe the true Ironman. Otherwise he doesn't really register on the greatness scale in any other regard.

Other than leading the league in some of the major hitting categories a whole bunch of times. Ward led the NFL in any of the categories you named exactly how many times?

Doesn't register?

First in hits (don't give a damn how long he played.
First (tie) in 200-hit seasons (this is a BIG deal, those who claim otherwise are grossly ignorant about the game or are being dishonest in their arguments).
Three batting titles. That means he was the BEST hitter in the league three separate seasons.

Your comparison is ignorant of the game.

Rotinaj;1627988 wrote:This needs to be brought up once again with his last post. Borderline HOF'er.... FFS dude, really?

The statistical arguments are all there. Typically what we find are the idiots are the ones arguing without facts - he was a good hitter who owns the hits record because of amazing longevity/durability...and the hits record/average are pretty much his singular claim to HOF worthiness.

Pete Rose is very much the Hines Ward of baseball - the parallels are almost uncanny.

queencitybuckeye;1627990 wrote:Other than leading the league in some of the major hitting categories a whole bunch of times. Ward led the NFL in any of the categories you named exactly how many times?

Your comparison is still stupid.

I'm not sure why otherwise smart people cling to not being wrong when a little reflection makes it clear that they are.

The homer in you is strong. Rose is a borderline HOFer. I must have missed where he led the league in homeruns, RBI...Like I said, without the durability to get the hitting record this would be a much more rational conversation.

And Hines Ward racked up the stats he did playing most of his career on a run-first team that didn't have benefit of a good QB until the 2nd half of his career.

There's some 200 MLB players in the HOF. When you factor in some of the great power hitters, along with pitchers, statistically Rose IS a borderline HOFer. His durability and competitiveness truthfully drive the conversation more than statistical dominance.

gut;1627991 wrote:The statistical arguments are all there. Typically what we find are the idiots are the ones arguing without facts - he was a good hitter who owns the hits record because of amazing longevity/durability...and the hits record/average are pretty much his singular claim to HOF worthiness.

Pete Rose is very much the Hines Ward of baseball - the parallels are almost uncanny.

Ahh yes, Gut resorting to his classic "I am smarter than you, if you disagree with me you are an idiot" tactic. The facts have been presented to you, however you insist on trying too hard to compare Rose to a "good" player in Hines Ward. Again, here are the facts:


-Take away his last 5 seasons and he is still #2 on the hit list. In fact, take a look at the all time hit list. Only a few players above 3000 hits are not HOFers (yet). Derp.
-MVP
-Top 10 in MVP voting 9 other seasons
-ROY
-2x Gold Glove winner
-Silver Slugger winner
-17x All Star
-7 time league leader in hits
-3x league batting champion
-10, 200 hit seasons
-World Series MVP
-MLB ALL CENTURY TEAM
-And 3 world series rings

Yeah, he is definitely a borderline HOFer. LOL.

Jesus Christ, gut. You're really looking bad here man. Why are you just focusing on the hit record? Why don't you look at everything? How about the fact he's a 17 time all-star (at 5 different positions)? How about his Rookie of the Year award? Or his 3 NL batting titles? Or his NL MVP? Or his World Series MVP? He had 2 Gold Gloves and a Silver Slugger.

If that is the resume of a borderline HOF'er, then there should be only a handful of people in the HOF.



**EDIT** Reps to like_that for making the same point and beating me to it by a minute.

But Hines Ward was a 4 time pro bowler, practically the same thing!!!!!!!!

lol someone think s Pete Rose is borderline HoFer and also thinks Hines Ward is a HoFer? Excuse me while I LMAO. IPOTW

Commander of Awesome;1628003 wrote:lol someone think s Pete Rose is borderline HoFer and also thinks Hines Ward is a HoFer? Excuse me while I LMAO. IPOTW

Don't mind the fact that everyone disagrees with him on this thread. He is obviously the smartest poster on this site, thus none of the arguments presented are credible. /sarcasm

gut;1627994 wrote:The homer in you is strong.

As is the asshole in you.

Rose is a borderline HOFer.

Not admitting one is wrong when it's clear to everyone isn't going to convince anyone you're the smartest kid in the room. It proves the polar opposite.

I must have missed where he led the league in homeruns, RBI

There's no accurate word in the English language to describe the gross tonnage of what you missed, or intentionally misrepresent.

Rose was primarily a leadoff hitter. His job was to reach base so that the power hitters in the lineup could drive him in. He scored the sixth most runs in MLB history (that's how you win games, scoring more runs than the other team). He was one of the best if not the best of his era at this job.

...Like I said, without the durability to get the hitting record this would be a much more rational conversation.

*As I said

There's some 200 MLB players in the HOF. When you factor in some of the great power hitters, along with pitchers, statistically Rose IS a borderline HOFer.

I didn't know the HOF limited induction only to power hitters. If so, it would show a massive ignorance of the sport.

Like yours.