Skip to content

Pete Rose: “I’m a firm believer that baseball is a better sport if I’m in it”

Jul 7, 2014, 11:33 AM EDT

pete rose tall getty Getty Images

Personally, I would love to see a list of Pete Rose’s “firm beliefs.” I imagine they begin with “never count your money when you’re sitting at the table, there’ll be time of enough for counting when the dealing’s done” and sort of devolve from there, but a man does have to have a code. Good on ya, Hit King.

The quote from the headline comes courtesy of this Tyler Kepner article about Rose in the New York Times. A lot of it is the pretty standard Pete Rose rebop we’ve come to know and love: he made mistakes, he’s a good boy now, if he got one more chance he’d make the most of it and help to teach young players about the game, etc.

Like I said a few weeks ago, it would not shock me if Bud Selig gave Rose a pardon as he walked out the door in January. But if he does so, it won’t be because of anything Rose himself has had to say. It’ll be all about Selig giving a gift to fans, most of whom still hold Rose in high esteem. Maybe even higher esteem because of his banishment than they would have had for him if he had managed into the 1990s or longer.

  1. Andee - Jul 7, 2014 at 11:43 AM

    Better? Not necessarily. But baseball history is incomplete, in a way. The man who got more hits than any other player in history should be in the Hall of Fame. He’s not a borderline candidate. He’s not a second or third ballot guy. Rose gets in immediately if he’s eligible.

    • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:04 PM

      Also the man with far-and-away the most Games Played, Most Plate Appearances, and Most At Bats.

      And 173rd highest Batting Average.

      67 more hits than Ty Cobb in only 528 more games played. AMAZING!

      • stoutfiles - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:09 PM

        Longevity is celebrated in baseball. Being a .300+ hitter for 24 years is impressive anyway you slice it.

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:21 PM

        And, if Rose had your aunt’s balls, TK, instead of his own smallish ones, he might still be gambling today.

      • jm91rs - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:25 PM

        Always nice when someone uses Rose’s ability to stay healthy and productive (mostly) against him.

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:42 PM

        The irony is that you don’t see that your first bullet is actually a major positive for Rose.

        Hate his actions all you want, his career was amazing.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:21 PM

        Aside from longevity his career wasn’t “amazing”.

        OPS+ of 118. Which is the same as Carlos Pena. And Grady Sizemore. And Hideki Matsui.

        Good players. Not amazing.

      • stoutfiles - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:40 PM

        Derek Jeter has a career OPS+ of 116. Cal Ripken has a career OPS+ of 112. What’s your point?

      • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:45 PM

        Oh. I didn’t realize Pete Rose played a key defensive position, and didn’t play over 600 games after the age of 40, producing an OPS+ of 86 at 1st base.

        Nothing like a Slugging percentage just over .400 from a guy playing mostly corner positions his entire career.

      • stoutfiles - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:59 PM

        Rose played LF, CF, RF, 1B, 2B, and 3B. But you’re right, players that can play pretty much anywhere are useless. Players that only play one position and swing for the fences for 5 years before riding the DL constantly are so much better. Players that people show up for and spend money to see aren’t worth having. You should be a GM.

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:08 PM

        Or, to look at it other ways, for all his longevity, he was below 80 career WAR, and even worse, below 30 career WAA.

      • raysfan1 - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM

        Is the thread here about whether Rose was better than, say Ty Cobb, or that he’d be a first ballot HoF inductee is eligible? I don’t think the first commenter was claiming he was better than Cobb, which would be pretty silly. However, I think it’s pretty obvious he would indeed be elected on the first ballot if the gambling and subsequent banishment were not there.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:29 PM

        Weak hitting players at 1st, 3rd, RF and LF are pretty useless. Yes.

        And he played more games at 1st than anywhere else. Followed by LF. Then 3rd. Then 2nd. Then RF. Then CF (70 games there doesn’t really count though now does it?)

        All the while compiling a -14.0 dWAR.

        So….I guess being able to play all those positions pretty badly is something.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:31 PM

        @raysfan1 He’s not a first ballot Hall of Famer. That’s the point. The only thing he had going for him is longevity.

        172 players would have compiled more hits than him given the same number of opportunities.

        That makes it a not particularly impressive record. Especially when you consider he played 600 games at 1st base while hitting like David Eckstein to compile his last 500 hits.

        And, you know….he was kind of filling out the lineup cards at the time too.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:33 PM

        And as fun as this is, I’m not saying he was a bad player. I’m not even saying his career isn’t Hall of Fame worthy.

        But his numbers are ridiculously hollow.

      • raysfan1 - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:55 PM

        Let me re-phrase. If you look at players who have been inducted to the Hall, you will see that there are a number who are elected in the first ballot who were not really as good as some who had to wait. I am not saying I think Rose is better than any particular player. I am saying I think the BBWAA would have voted him into the Hall in his first year of eligibility had the gambling scandal not intervened. Since it did, if he were made eligible, I still think he would be elected, again probably on the first try.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 3:16 PM

        @raysfan1 at this point he might get in on the first try (and yes, he probably would have gotten in on the first try previously because of the lack of statistical analysis at the time), but it’s also possible that after reinstatement some writers might choose to punish him longer, or even take a more detailed look at his career.

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 7, 2014 at 3:23 PM

        I would have voted him in his first year. And, he’d have appeared to be less of a “compiler” if he had, say, retired after his age 40-year in 1981. He would have been over 80 WAR (many of his years after that were WAR-negative) and been at almost 40 WAA. Almost half of his negative dWAR came during the post-1981 phase, too.

        In other words, sabermetrically, his chase for Cobb’s hit records made him look a lot worse, about like Early Wynn’s chase for 300 wins.

        He retires after 1981, he’s still third in career hits, better on those sabermetrics, and has a BA of .310, he’s up to 111th on career BA.

      • sportsfan18 - Jul 7, 2014 at 8:25 PM

        @tfbuckfutter

        the operative word when you said the following “172 players would have compiled more hits than him given the same number of opportunities.” is GIVEN.

        Pro sports players, in the other leagues too, are NOT GIVEN opportunities.

        Players have to create them, keep playing well enough at an advanced age to hang on.

        Johnny Damon WANTS to be playing right now… so do many others.

        Out of the thousands and thousands and thousands of men to play in the big leagues, ONLY 26 men have 10,000 or more at bats in the history of the game.

        WHY? It’s damn hard to last that long, play that well to accumulate that many at bats.

        ONLY 8 men have 11,000 or more at bats in the history of the game.

        WHY? ALL other players who have played had the same opportunities to play the game they loved…

        But injuries happen, some bodies are not meant for the demands of pro sports. Some are but their skill drops off a cliff seemingly overnight.

        ONLY 2 men have more than 12,000 at bats…

        ONLY one man has over 13,000 at bats – Pete Rose

        ONLY one man has over 14,000 at bats – Pete Rose

        Yeah, he hung on… but think about what that entails. Teams are NOT giving out 4 and 5 yr contracts to players at that age… many players WANT to continue their careers but they are told they can’t or they KNOW they can’t.

        Sure, Ty Cobb FAR out hit Rose for average… From Rose’s time on, were any players hitting what Ty Cobb did? What Honus Wagner did? What Ted Williams did?

        Barry Bonds does NOT have a .300 career batting average.

        Some guys may hit .300 for 2,000 at bats, then 3,000 at bats but then they get older and begin to decline and they can’t maintain their .300 average.

        Yeah, Rose hit well below .300 for yrs at at the end but he was high enough above .300 far enough into the end of his career that it didn’t bring him below it.

        Why did others not hit .300 in thousands of at bats fewer? When it’s easier to hit .300?

        Hitting .300 is damn hard. It’s harder to hit .300 for 12,000 at bats (age to get to that many, declining skills, slowing reflexes, less hand eye coordination, slower running down the line to beat out a hit etc…) than it is to hit .300 for 5, 6 or 7 thousand at bats when you’re much younger…

        What Rose did is incredibly impressive.

        16 “years” or seasons on the back of his baseball card have him over .300 for those seasons.

        So many guys couldn’t last 16 seasons in the bigs and certainly couldn’t hit .300 for that many total seasons in their career.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jul 7, 2014 at 8:50 PM

        You have no idea how pleased I am that 5 hours later you wrote 1,100 words on this.

        The only point I have to make is, once again, he hit like David Eckstein while manning 1st base for 6 years (3 of which he was putting together the lineup and, oh coincidentally also betting on the games).

        He never should have had the opportunity to hang on.

        The 500 hits he racked up in the 600+ games he played after 40 mean nothing. His hit record means nothing except that he was afforded an opportunity no one ever was or will be afforded again, and that’s the only reason he holds any records.

        625 games where he averaged 125 games a season, mostly at 1st base, and averaged 1 HR a season. AT. FIRST. BASE.

        That’s not hanging on. That is an embarrassment to the league.

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 8, 2014 at 1:27 PM

        @Sportsfan 18: It’s easier to “hold on” when you’re your own manager at the end, too, for the last 2 1/2 years. Hell, Omar Vizquel would still be chasing 3K hits in that case.

        Speaking of, wouldn’t that have been the easiest way for Rose to bet AGAINST the Reds? Couple of runners on base, key point in the game, infield grounder and an “oops” on fielding the throw to first?

  2. Marty McKee - Jul 7, 2014 at 11:50 AM

    Actually, I think Rose may be right this time.

    Well, let’s put it like this. Is baseball right now a better sport because Rose is *not* in it? I don’t think it is.

    At this point, I see zero downside into letting Pete back in the game in some capacity. With the 2015 All-Star Game being played in Cincinnati, I have the feeling the Reds are pulling some major strings with MLB to allow Rose to take part in the All-Star ceremonies–throwing out the first pitch, something.

    • rbj1 - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:43 PM

      Yes, baseball is better with Pete Rose being permanently barred. When the all time hits leader is banned for betting on the game, it creates a powerful incentive to others not to bet on the game and possibly intentionally lose a game. I can watch a game knowing there’s honest effort all around.

      • schmedley69 - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:51 PM

        Maybe if they permanently banned Braun and the other PED users, it would give other players a powerful incentive not to use?

      • koufaxmitzvah - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:18 PM

        I have a great idea. You just did something that’s wrong. Flat out wrong. Not illegal, but against the rules. Now turn over your livelihood and never, ever play baseball again because somebody who isn’t a doctor has decided that you’re permanently flawed as a human being and athlete. Yessir, that’s the power of persuasion!

        What a world you live in, Schmedley. In light of Pete Rose’s fight and moral turpitude, you decide to take it out on other people. Good stuff.

      • schmedley69 - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:55 PM

        koufax – I think that you are taking yourself, and my comments, too seriously. I am just pointing out the inconsistencies in the PED vs Gambling debate. That reply to you earlier was a direct quote from Craig’s post earlier this morning, basically calling people who admonish PED users hypocrites who should worry about their own faults, and then an hour later he makes fun of Pete Rose’s gambling issues. Craig is great, but that seems kind of inconsistent to me. Then I questioned the other commenter’s logic, that keeping Pete banned was a good deterrent to keep others from gambling, and asked why the same logic didn’t apply to PED users? Lets face it, nobody is perfect. The people who take PEDs, or their accusers. No one deserves a lifetime ban without a second chance, and that goes for Pete as well. I personally think that the PED users have done a lot more damage to the game than Pete did, but what the hell do I know? Never the less, thanks for taking the bait on my trolling. Good stuff.

      • raysfan1 - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:21 PM

        Here I was, all fired up, Schmedly, and then you defused it. I was ready to come guns blazing about amphetamines, corked bats, and associations with known steroids dealer when he was a manager, and you had to go and turn all reasonable. Oh well, someone will post another Rose article in a couple weeks.

      • sportsfan18 - Jul 7, 2014 at 8:34 PM

        rbj1

        yes and no. I agree with you in that I don’t want others to think they’ll just get a slap on the wrist if they bet on the game.

        we agree there.

        but when you say you can watch a game and know there’s an “honest” effort all around… well I disagree with you.

        Players have cheated since the game’s been played. Be it PEDS or whatever. It is NOT fair… It is NOT level.

        Hey, I’m NOT for gambling on the game and I’m NOT for PEDS in the game either.

        Forgetting that one is gambling and one is betting, they EACH affect the game in ways that are NOT honest.

        Personally, I feel that very few players are betting on the game but sadly, many players are using PEDS, still today.

        There is NOT an “honest” effort all around in the games you watch sir.

        An “honest” effort all around does not entail some of the players taking PEDS.

        Shouldn’t all those caught using PEDS be given a lifetime ban too? Like Pete for gambling on the game?

        That’s too extreme for me. Now, if PED users continue getting caught, several times, sure. But not ban them for the first time.

        Here’s another difference. Gambling, is known today to be an addiction to some. Using PEDS is not an addiction, it’s a choice.

        Isn’t that worse than one who is using/doing something they are addicted to?

        Again, I want NONE of it in the game but the difference between Rose’s penalty and these guys using PEDS is too great for me, too much disparity.

      • moogro - Jul 8, 2014 at 7:51 PM

        sportsfan: your formatting and CAPS are pretty tough stuff.

    • mangoman1966 - Jul 7, 2014 at 8:40 PM

      I hope so. People don’t remember that he faced some of the greatist pitchers of all time his whole career. Gibson marachal koufax drysdale. I can go on.

  3. schmedley69 - Jul 7, 2014 at 11:57 AM

    If only Pete had taken PEDs, he would be off limits to these moral and ethical judgments about his gambling problem.

    • koufaxmitzvah - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:10 PM

      Funny you say this, because the man is the prototype of a player that took a handful of greenies at the start of the day to, y’know, make sure he’s ready.

      • schmedley69 - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:17 PM

        If you’re the sort of person who likes to make moral and ethical judgments about folks, it’s helpful to remember the context in which you do it and examine whether or not you’re being a wee bit inconsistent in your application of such judgments.

      • paperlions - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:41 PM

        To shed some light on context, greenies have the exact same performance enhancing effect whether they are against MLB rules or not (they’ve actually be against MLB rules since 1971 as they are a scheduled drug). If people are concerned about PEDs affecting the game and making it harder to compare generations that used them to generations that did not, then the rules are irrelevant to the use. Most people really don’t care about the morality of cheating, they just dress up their nostalgia with it to try to justify belief in the purity of their childhood heroes and the numbers they put up.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:53 PM

        Sorry, Schmedley. If you read my comment, you will say that he’s the prototype of the player who does it. And what would that be? Lots of hustle. So much hustle that in a meaningless All-Star game, the player decides to launch himself into the shoulder of the opposing catcher so as to jar loose the ball. A play that’s considered fair by the rules, but foul in the context of the game/season/career of the players involved.

        Yes, I am judgmental on message boards. Absolutely. And yet it’s no skin off my nose that you mock my perspective. I really don’t give a damn whether Pete is in or out. But he is out, and that’s just fine with me.

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:07 PM

        Actually, per Jim Bouton, who was probably in a good position to know, and to tell the truth, greenies aren’t near the “performance enhancer” that PEDs can be.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:14 PM

        Speed allows people an extra fine focus on specific, fast moving objects. The spin on the ball is easier to pick up by someone strung out on speed than not. So I’ve heard, and I believe. PEDs are not magic pills that turn losers into heroes. The only reason why PEDs are “outlawed” from baseball is because Bud loves WADA more than he ought to.

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 7, 2014 at 3:33 PM

        @Koufax … But Adderall remains legal (with a “medical exemption”) not just in MLB but most professional sports. Old-time greenies probably gave some of the same focus, but not as much, and with more side effects.

        Besides, “more focus” doesn’t matter if you can’t hit the ball any harder. A grounder to short instead of a swinging K is still an out, even if you have one more grounder and one less K every four days.

        And, the variety of stuff that falls under the PED label also promotes healing/recovery in a way greenies didn’t.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Jul 8, 2014 at 9:50 AM

        “And, the variety of stuff that falls under the PED label also promotes healing/recovery in a way greenies didn’t.”

        And this is a bad thing? Recovering quicker is considered cheating? These are rhetorical questions.

        Sounds like those who insist PEDs are for cheaters only have lost all sense of balance when discussing PEDs. That’s my only point.

      • 4cornersfan - Jul 8, 2014 at 3:15 PM

        Koufax: “Speed allows people an extra fine focus on specific, fast moving objects.” You have obviously never seen a speed freak try to get across a freeway on foot.

    • tmc602014 - Jul 7, 2014 at 3:50 PM

      Sorry, Schmed, but the penalty for PED use is a creation of the modern MLP – Player Assoc. CBA. Gambling penalties were imposed long beforehand and have never been updated. PED users know the consequences and take the chance. So did Pete the Greek. Since his acceptance of his ban, Pete has disparaged the ban, MLB administration, various commissioners, PED users, and done everything he can to avoid his responsibility for his own actions. Now, after standing on the dugout steps for two hours last month, he suddenly has a desire to “teach young players”. Pete was an excellent ballplayer. He is a master of the art of self promotion. He is also a despicable human being and I don’t have a vote, but if I did I wouldn’t vote him dogcatcher.

      • schmedley69 - Jul 7, 2014 at 3:57 PM

        By the same token, I feel like Arod and Braun are despicable human beings, and I would not vote them in. To each his own.

  4. chip56 - Jul 7, 2014 at 11:58 AM

    Whenever a “Should Rose be reinstated” column comes up I go back to this:

    Pete Rose accepted a lifetime ban from baseball as long as MLB kept details about his gambling and associations out of the public. One presumes that he understood what the term “lifetime” meant when he accepted that ban. As I’m unaware of MLB breaking their part of the agreement my stance is that Pete Rose live up to his end of the deal and be reinstated posthumously. The alternative is to reinstate Rose now and subsequently allow MLB do divulge, in detail, Rose’s gambling.

    • jm91rs - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:29 PM

      And the only point of reinstating Rose posthumously would be to give a big F-You to Rose, his fans, and former teammates. I know we’re not talking about the classiest people here, but I expect better from MLB. I would love for Rose’s gambling to be divulged in detail, except I expect that we already know all there is to know. If there were new juicy details I suspect someone would have leaked them in the form of a book by now.

      And by the way, there is a significant amount of question on whether or not lifetime actually meant lifetime when Pete was offered this “deal”. Steinbrenner was banned for life once too, wasn’t he?

      • chip56 - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:34 PM

        No, the point in reinstating Rose would to be put him in the Hall of Fame which he deserves. Steinbrenner was also banned from day-to-day management but not ownership.

    • 18thstreet - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:37 PM

      Permenant ban. Not a lifetime ban.

      A persistent mistake, and I wish people would stop making it. Death has nothing to do with it.

  5. philliesblow - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:04 PM

    Only if Shoeless Joe is reinstated first.

  6. netyank - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:11 PM

    If completion of baseball history is the goal, then Barry Bonds and A-Rod must go in HOF.

  7. infieldhit - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:22 PM

    Just as long as he doesn’t make the HOF before Randy Savage.

  8. SBoy - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:25 PM

    I don’t think it should be all or nothing… I still wouldn’t let him manage, coach or be part of personal decisions, etc… But I would let him be a broadcaster, participate in things like all-star game festivities, etc.

  9. jm91rs - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:32 PM

    If he gets reinstated it will be before the 2015 All star game in Cincinnati. I just want him reinstated so the stupid argument can go away already. There’s absolutely nothing that can be said about Rose the person that we don’t already know and there’s nothing that can be said about Rose the player that we don’t already know. Rather than re-hash the same old argument, MLB should let him in and within a year or two we’ll forget we ever cared.

  10. tigersfandan - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:44 PM

    Nah… that didn’t sound arrogant at all.

    • 22yearsagotoday - Jul 7, 2014 at 12:52 PM

      Oh yes it did! Pete Rose has always been arrogance personified. He only has his stupid self to blame for his “permanent” (lifetime) ban.

      • tigersfandan - Jul 7, 2014 at 5:23 PM

        I know. I was being facetious.

  11. bbk1000 - Jul 7, 2014 at 1:25 PM

    and I’m a firm believer that any photograph is better if he’s out of it…….

  12. mpzz - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:12 PM

    It could have been a better game with him in it. And it would have been a better game with him in it, if he hadn’t been so dishonest and disreputable and dishonorable.

  13. perryt200 - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:18 PM

    There are a few things that make baseball elegant. A well turned double play, a perfect play at the plate, things like that.

    But what is at the essence of the game is the rules. The ref doesn’t “swallow the whistle” and just let them play. The obstruction call is as valid on the first day of season as it is in the WS.

    There is only one Cardinal Rule in baseball. We all know it; I don’t need to say it. Rose broke it.

    Let us hope this is a rule that does not change, because that changes the essence of the game.

  14. william1939 - Jul 7, 2014 at 2:42 PM

    I have thought from the beginning that a life time ban is absurd. Substance users who had or have inflated numbers because of the illegal use have done more harm than Rose. It is impossible to know how many game were decided by these players. These are the ones who should have life time bans. Rose only bet on and for his own team never against. So many on the ignorant claims made here are irrelevant. Also it is obvious many commentators never saw in play. Stats are nice but if you saw him play you know he is HOF worthy. Plus with all the stats out there now you could find a flaw or flaws in every player in the HOF. Rose needs to be back in baseball.

    • SocraticGadfly - Jul 7, 2014 at 3:36 PM

      Well, I don’t fully believe that, even. If Rose had bet against the Reds, as well as for them, Dowd and A Bart(lett Pear) Giamatti would have 86ed that part, probably. Or, at the least, if Dowd was worried about that, he could stop asking too closely.

      Besides, steroids were legal when the first players started using them. The anti-gambling rule **is posted in the dugout of every team in baseball** and has been for Rose’s entire playing and managing career.

      • mpzz - Jul 8, 2014 at 7:48 PM

        Steroids have NEVER been legal. They are a controlled substance, to be used for valid medical purposes only.

    • Reflex - Jul 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM

      Rose not only cheated, but was one of the early managers pushing his players to use PEDs. ESPN documented this in a great series of articles about the rise of PEDs in baseball. I do not personally agree that PEDs are worse than gambling, at best PEDs assist a player at playing better, but gambling can make a player play towards a desired, often negative outcome. That compromises the integrity of the outcome of the games themselves. PEDs have an individual effect, and while it may make that player a bit better, it has been part of the game since at least the 1950’s, and extremely widespread in its use. I don’t much like it, but PEDs did not compromise the game any more than it was already compromised.

      At any rate, even if you feel PEDs are worse than gambling, Pete was part of that problem as well. More info here:

      http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=steroids&num=2

  15. lanflfan - Jul 7, 2014 at 3:53 PM

    Pete Rose, the player, deserves to be in the HoF. No matter which cute dork “metrics” you use, the man has more hits than ANYONE ELSE in MLB history. As in a career number. That, in and of itself, implies that the player was active for a LONG TIME. Thus, longevity is assumed in the statement (or play everyday and hit .800 for about 8 years, which is still a long time).

    Pete Rose, the human being, is flawed like all of us. None of us is perfect, and we all have our vices. Being a public figure, his played out poorly for him.

    My solution is to put Rose in the HoF now, as he should be, but with no fanfare or ceremony. He is not reinstated in MLB for any reason. Celebrate the career accomplishment of the outstanding player, but don’t give the flawed human the usual recognition as his penalty. At least its not a posthumous awarding, as he could still refer to himself as a HoFer.

  16. twoscoops72 - Jul 7, 2014 at 4:27 PM

    Last sentence of article take a shot at Pete as a manager. I’ve heard a lot of people through the years say that he was not a good manager.
    412 wins vs 373 losses.
    Better than half of the managers on any given season.

  17. twoscoops72 - Jul 7, 2014 at 4:38 PM

    @tfbuckfutter, you are killing me. You must have an ax to grind because to say he wasn’t amazing and a slam dunk first ballot hall of famer.

    If you didn’t know these accomplishments were from Pete, wouldn’t you put him in first ballot?
    17 all star games at 5 different positions
    Rookie of the year
    3 NL batting titles
    NL MVP
    World Series MVP
    2 Golden gloves
    2 NL OBP leader
    4 NL runs scored leader
    7 NL hits leader
    4 NL singles leader
    5 NL doubles leader

    Numerous other awards
    Lifetime BA of .303 after 24 years

  18. stlouis1baseball - Jul 7, 2014 at 5:59 PM

    This right here (courtesy of Chip)…

    “Pete Rose accepted a lifetime ban from baseball as long as MLB kept details about his gambling and associations out of the public.”

    Signed,
    Someone who would pick Pete Rose FIRST if given the opportunity to form his all time team.

    • SocraticGadfly - Jul 7, 2014 at 7:01 PM

      If we’re going one player, one position, for the eight non-pitching spots, Rose isn’t on my all-time team. Nor second.

      If this is an actual team, in an all-time baseball fantasy league draft, I’ll take Rose, several rounds in, as my utility player.

      • Reflex - Jul 7, 2014 at 7:07 PM

        Seriously, I have only three names for first pick, and it would be tough to choose between them. Ruth, Bonds, Mays. I doubt Rose gets picked, there are just too many better players to choose from at the positions Rose typically played. Had he been a career CF then he might have a shot to make my second or third all time team though…

      • stlouis1baseball - Jul 8, 2014 at 9:21 AM

        I gotta; start with Rose as the spark plug that gets everything moving. As Joe Morgan say’s…Pete played every out like it was the last out of a World Series game #7. Flat out…all the time.

  19. 461deep - Jul 7, 2014 at 6:37 PM

    Longevity is necessary for most all time best stats but one still needs to be good if not great to reach them. Mays & Aaron were great and played a long time. DiMaggio, Feller, Williams & others lost prime years in WW II. Joe, Mick, Ted also played in ball parks not made for their talents. Braves moved fences in by ten feet in the power alleys in 1969 allowing Hank to hit more HRs. But He still had to take advantage of the change as did Rose plating on Astro Turf. So a little help is always good in setting records.

  20. yahmule - Jul 7, 2014 at 8:59 PM

    They’ll wait until he’s dead or dying. The MLB HOF and especially the Pro Football HOF love to enshrine guys when its too late for them to enjoy it. Those pricks had 31 years to put Ron Santo in there and they left the guy hanging. They can kiss my ass.

  21. snarkk - Jul 8, 2014 at 2:46 AM

    Pete the Comedian…
    After Pete the Liar…

  22. Homesforsaleinfriscotx - Jul 8, 2014 at 11:32 AM

    Rose, betting on the team you were managing, and to LOSE…yes, I believe that you did…makes you a better example as you are…banned forever.

    A-holes like you, egomaniacs who believe they are above the game…have no place in any sport, much less baseball. I hope the day before you die, the commissioner calls you up to say they are thinking about reinstatement, and calls back 5 minutes late and says ‘gotcha’

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Pitching duel highlights Game 1 of WS
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. T. Ishikawa (2636)
  2. M. Bumgarner (2625)
  3. J. Shields (2311)
  4. Y. Molina (1997)
  5. L. Cain (1878)