If you had to go with 1 Ruth, price no object, would you go with 1920 or 1921. I normally prefer the 20 version myself, as he seems to out everything the 21 version in his RL stats, in all but PA and D. Thoughts?

If money were literally NO object, I guess I would go with the `21 Ruth, since you're not paying any more for him. The BA and SLG are about equal, and the `21 Ruth does have, as you pointed out, 80+ more PA and a better glove. On a "value" basis, the stats are close enough that the `20 Ruth is better.

Ruth is the only position player for whom I will pay over $8 MM in an $80 MM OL. I think the `19 Ruth is actually a pretty good value at $8.48 MM. He just led me to a championship with a .317 BA, .443 OBP, .711 SLG, 64 HR, 173 RBI, 147 runs scored and 133 BB's. Not too shabby.

Quote: Originally posted by thunder1008 on 4/26/2010If money were literally NO object, I guess I would go with the `21 Ruth, since you're not paying any more for him.  The BA and SLG are about equal, and the `21 Ruth does have, as you pointed out, 80+ more PA and a better glove.  On a "value" basis, the stats are close enough that the `20 Ruth is better.Ruth is the only position player for whom I will pay over $8 MM in an $80 MM OL.  I think the `19 Ruth is actually a pretty good value at $8.48 MM.  He just led me to a championship with a .317 BA, .443 OBP, .711 SLG, 64 HR, 173 RBI, 147 runs scored and 133 BB's.  Not too shabby. 

So what park did Ruth put them big numbers up in ??

Just for nostalgia purposes, I would take his final season with the Braves. I mean, imagine have the Ruth that actually hit #714? How amazing is that?

Quote: Originally Posted By thurst63 on 4/26/2010

Quote: Originally posted by thunder1008 on 4/26/2010
If money were literally NO object, I guess I would go with the `21 Ruth, since you're not paying any more for him. The BA and SLG are about equal, and the `21 Ruth does have, as you pointed out, 80+ more PA and a better glove. On a "value" basis, the stats are close enough that the `20 Ruth is better.

Ruth is the only position player for whom I will pay over $8 MM in an $80 MM OL. I think the `19 Ruth is actually a pretty good value at $8.48 MM. He just led me to a championship with a .317 BA, .443 OBP, .711 SLG, 64 HR, 173 RBI, 147 runs scored and 133 BB's. Not too shabby.

So what park did Ruth put them big numbers up in ??

Yankee Stadium III... of course.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By Bilfert on 4/26/2010
Just for nostalgia purposes, I would take his final season with the Braves. I mean, imagine have the Ruth that actually hit #714? How amazing is that?

You'd like that, I'm sure! But I am seriously torn here; I really can't decide between the two. How often to you get a chance to have an exclusive Ruth? Its a good problem to have, but still . . .

we have 24 versions of the 1921 Ruth in MLB89440 that you might like to look at. Every team has him against many of the best pitching in SIM

Do you need the extra PA? Personally, the 20 ruth has done better for me.

I've always had great success using the 1927 version in a HR+ park......you give up a little average, but he always seems to out-perform what I expect in the HR department.

I realize price is no object, but '22 Ruth has done well for me at any salary cap. In a +Hr park he has been good for 45+ HRs every time, despite having to sit him occasionally. He has outperformed the other Ruths for me, especially if I pick someone like the 300 AB, .341 Cravath to platoon with him. That combo is good for 65+ HRs against virtually any pitching. For less than 11m.

I'm partial to the '23 Ruth myself. Seems to be steadier and more consistent....the '21 Ruth can lay an egg on occasion.

You don't HAVE to go with Ruth, alebenta...have you considered '94 Lance Johnson? Great D, lots of triples...just some food for thought...

I agree you should consider other choices. With the way our handed starting pitching options have been decimated so far you should consider leaving Ruth available for that draft.

In addition to Johnson you can consider Vernon Wells

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.