Pete Rose is dead

Pete Rose is certainly a complex case.

He was my favorite position player as a kid (Nolan Ryan was my favorite pitcher). I bought into the whole Charlie Hustle thing — loved his competitiveness, loved that he loved the game, and I was too young to g to remember Ray Fosse.

I would not have wanted to know Pete Rose, and I would not have wanted to be his teammate.

 

That last sentence is where you took a bulldozer to your own argument.

He DIDN'T play in this era. The game was played differently, especially in the NL and particularly on artificial turf, in the late 1970s/early 1980s. Leadoff hitters, ones who could get on-base, use their speed or both, is what ignited offense at the time. He was valuable in that sense. The Phillies, who never really had a power-hitting first baseman in their 70s/80s salad years before Rose either, wanted someone reliable to get on-base and to be in scoring position when Mike Schmidt or Greg Luzinski came to the plate.

It seemed to work out just fine for the Phillies in 1980 which is another reason this slotting of traits at certain positions is silly.

I mean, what difference does it make whether your power comes from LF (Luzinski) or whether your on-base guy comes from 1B (Rose)? A lot of teams, particularly in that era, got their speed/leadoff guy from LF and their power from 1B, but it really makes zero difference so long as both fill their role effectively in the scope of the overall offense.

It's that kind of linear thinking - 1B has to hit for power! - that got us into a box of pretty boring playing styles and static team-building.

Also? There wasn't a power-hitting 1B available in free agency after the 1978 season that fits your description anyway. Darrell Evans was the only one who remotely qualifies. He was an excellent player, but he was also primarily playing third base at the time. Obviously, the Phillies weren't in the market for that position at the time.

Do you think the Phillies would have won the World Series in 1980 with Richie Hebner, the pre-Rose 1B, playing there instead with a bit more power, but without the ability to play at the top of the lineup? It's certainly possible, but we know they got over the top with Rose.

 

Before this season, Arraez was primarily a second baseman. They Padres already had the middle infield covered with Kim and Bogaerts. Arraez had played both second and first, so it it made sense for him to slide over full time. I'm not sure that is a long-term solution.

 

He was perceived to be valuable. While his OBP was good, it wasn't spectacular and he never stole bases at a good percentage.

Position value is important because it means another player with more offensive worth could play an easier defensive position.

 

One thing about Rose. When he was a player, his teammates loved him. Can't speak to Manager Pete, but I was around the '80 Phillies and they couldn't say enough good things about him. I interviewed Bench right after the lifetime suspension and well, he was like me in my earlier post. He knew what Rose did was horribly wrong. But Rose had helped him win so many games.

 

Of course it's been said many times, many ways, but Pete Rose is all over the Hall of Fame -- his career is extensively documented in many displays covering the teams he played for and I believe there's an exhibit about the Chase for Cobb, too.

He's all over the HOF -- he just doesn't have a plaque.

PS -- Research the last decade or so has shown that at the very least Joe Jackson was fully aware of the '19 Series fix and did nothing to stop it.

There's little doubt Jackson did receive a payoff of $5,000, with full awareness he was supposed to help the Sox lose.

The issue primarily seems to be, when did Jackson become aware, or convinced, the gamblers were either going to stiff him completely or pay him much less than the agreed payoff ($20-25,000) and realizing this, Jackson flipped back to the good side and played his best after that.

That's not a very good alibi/explanation.

So old Joe can stay in the cornfield too.

 

I read a piece about how his overall stats looked good in the WS, he didn't hit well when it mattered.

 

Citations please. I was there, for his whole career, and he was the second-most feared Red after Morgan when he was with them and he was someone the Phillies couldn't have finally won without. Does the catch he made in Game Six 1980 when the ball popped out of Boone's glove count in that article? The idea Pete Rose was a bad person who deserved his lifetime ban is completely defensible. The idea he wasn't a great player and wasn't recognized as such when he played is complete bullshit. The more you post to that effect, the more foolish you look.

 

I don't think you were there for the 1919 WS.

 

The fuck does that mean?