promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Anonymous
Anonymous asked in SportsBaseball · 2 months ago

Would babe Ruth be a star in today’s game?

If you took babe Ruth as he was in his prime would he still be a star ?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Carlos
    Lv 4
    1 month ago

    The Great Babe Ruth sure but he would have to  be adjusted to modern nutrition , health and fitness training , modern technology uses and adjusting to other modern athletes that he could still be a All - Star level player .

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Babe Ruth Was The Greatest To Every Step Onto The Diamond & He Would Have Been Great In Any Era.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    He would be great in any era.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Yes. He wasn't just a slugger. He had a career batting average of .342. He was also a brilliant pitcher that had his career as a pitcher cut short because he was far more valuable with his bat in the lineup every day.

    He was a natural athlete. In this era of modern training methods, he would have taken advantage of them. He wasn't the beer-swilling, hot dog chomping fat slob he is sometimes portrayed as.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 2 months ago

    Probably, but we'll never know.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Have you seen the movie "The Babe" starring John Goodman?  If you like Babe Ruth you will like this movie.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Comparing strictly by the standards of what athletes can do today in sports measured against the clock like runners, no. Times for today's athletes dwarf times from 100 years ago. But since time travel isn't possible we will never know. 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Bob
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    He would if he trained like the baseball players playing no do, but if he trained like he did when he was playing he would not.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    All things being equal?  I think so.

    Too many today seem to have a "now" bias and get lost in all the advantages players today have.  Would Mike Trout, for example, be a star in the 1920s if he had been born in 1895 and didn't have the benefits of modern training, equipment and diet? 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Ruth stood out because, unlike other players of his era who chose to square up the bat to the ball and hit line drives, he learned to upper cut his swing to hit fly balls.

    This meant that he hit more home runs than his contemporaries but he also struck out more, and drew more walks because pitchers feared his power.

    So I think that of all the players from the early years of baseball, Ruth's game would fit best now.

    Would he be a star? His personality indicates that he would generate headlines but, possibly, more for his off-field antics than what he did between the foul lines.

    I believe he'd be a solid player who could last 15-20 years, provided he didn't overindulge in vices as he did during his heyday.

    But he wouldn't be the iconic figure that he become by playing in the 1920s.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.