Sports Talk

It depends how far you extend "greatness"
ShakingtheSheets 189 Reviews 517 reads
posted

If your way of thinking is only to anoint the A+++ Hall of Fame players as "great" then your list of great athletes is going to be shorter than most. If you are starting with a premise that a Hall of Fame player of Jeter's caliber, with over 3,000 hits, is only a good player in the annuls of baseball, then you are not getting far. It sounds silly to call Jeter just a good player. Paul O'Neil was a good player. Mark Teixeira is a good player. Jeter is a great player. I am sorry, anybody who is a Hall of Fame caliber athlete is a great player when compared to the thousands of players who have come before.  

I think if you have a category above great (call it immortal, the A+ Hall of Famers) than you won't be as offended when they refer to great players.  Players like Ruth, Cobb, Jordan, Wilt, Unitas, Jim Brown, Wayne Gretzky, Howe, Nicklaus, Palmer, Rod Laver, Federer. Ali, etc., are immortals, They are beyond great. They are in the group of the greatest in their respective sports ever to play.  

Jeter is not on the above list. He is not an immortal. While he is Hall Fame great, he's not Honus Wagner. Anymore than Whitey Ford was  not Walter Johnson, or Nick Faldo was not Tiger Woods, or Derrick Brooks was not Lawrence Taylor or Mike Bossy was not Mark Messier. But that doesn't mean that Jeter, Ford, Faldo, Brooks and Bossy, shouldn't be classified as great players. They are great; not just the top immortals in their respective sports  

Yes, the media/fans do tend to over use "great" too much to describe athletes. Sometimes the lines get blurred between good/great.  But Jeter is a poor example. He is Hall of Fame Great. He may not be an immortal in the history of the game (i.e. on par with Ruth/Cobb), but he's definitely a great player.  

 

 

   

 
-- Modified on 7/15/2014 3:50:23 AM

-- Modified on 7/15/2014 3:50:54 AM

Who's great, I mean really great? Any sport...who's great?
Who's called great but is good or was good. There's nothing wrong in being good. Jeter is good, but great, nah.Ryan Sandberg was good.Pau Gasol is good.Tony Gwynn was great. Mike Piazza was good. Michael Jordan was great, really fuckin great. Those are just examples but I trip when I hear announcers say that so and so is great when I feel they're just good.....Let the non-hype begin.

-- Modified on 7/14/2014 10:08:12 PM

the superlative "great", in regards to sports, is definitely very overused.  In many cases, I feel that the announcers are just kissing up to the athletes, and acting as spokespeople for the sport, as opposed to an objective analyzer of the support, which I feel should be a sports' journalist's first priority.  

I tend to agree with most of your examples, with one notable exception.  

Derek Jeter, in my opinion, is absolutely great.  He could quite conceivably end up with the 6th most hits in major league history, and is one of the best players, at arguably one of the most difficult positions in sports.  He is, without a doubt, a first ballot Hall-of-Famer.

If your way of thinking is only to anoint the A+++ Hall of Fame players as "great" then your list of great athletes is going to be shorter than most. If you are starting with a premise that a Hall of Fame player of Jeter's caliber, with over 3,000 hits, is only a good player in the annuls of baseball, then you are not getting far. It sounds silly to call Jeter just a good player. Paul O'Neil was a good player. Mark Teixeira is a good player. Jeter is a great player. I am sorry, anybody who is a Hall of Fame caliber athlete is a great player when compared to the thousands of players who have come before.  

I think if you have a category above great (call it immortal, the A+ Hall of Famers) than you won't be as offended when they refer to great players.  Players like Ruth, Cobb, Jordan, Wilt, Unitas, Jim Brown, Wayne Gretzky, Howe, Nicklaus, Palmer, Rod Laver, Federer. Ali, etc., are immortals, They are beyond great. They are in the group of the greatest in their respective sports ever to play.  

Jeter is not on the above list. He is not an immortal. While he is Hall Fame great, he's not Honus Wagner. Anymore than Whitey Ford was  not Walter Johnson, or Nick Faldo was not Tiger Woods, or Derrick Brooks was not Lawrence Taylor or Mike Bossy was not Mark Messier. But that doesn't mean that Jeter, Ford, Faldo, Brooks and Bossy, shouldn't be classified as great players. They are great; not just the top immortals in their respective sports  

Yes, the media/fans do tend to over use "great" too much to describe athletes. Sometimes the lines get blurred between good/great.  But Jeter is a poor example. He is Hall of Fame Great. He may not be an immortal in the history of the game (i.e. on par with Ruth/Cobb), but he's definitely a great player.  

 

 

   

 
-- Modified on 7/15/2014 3:50:23 AM

-- Modified on 7/15/2014 3:50:54 AM

GaGambler545 reads

even I have to concede that Jeter has been one of the sport's "greats"

One other thing to add about his "greatness" is the era in which most of his career was played, the "steroid era" he never had even a whisper about any foul play on his part. For a "clean" player to have had as great a career against juiced up pitchers and comparing him on an even level with juiced up hitters makes his accomplishments even more praiseworthy. He deserves his victory tour every bit as much as Chipper did a couple of years ago, and yes he is/was one of the game's "greats"

our asking whether Kareem should be considered good or great? Kareem is a top three center of all time. He's in the discussion with Wilt and Russell. Those three stand alone in the pantheon of big men.  

Obviously, Kareem was a GREAT player. He is an immortal; in the front room of the hall of fame.

I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment, but in many discussions of a sport's all-time greats, Kareem frequently gets left out.  He was expected to be great ever since he was noticed early in his youth, and he has always fulfilled those expectations at every level of basketball that he has competed.  Kareem is definitely a top-shelf member of his sport.

" great ' is abused..kind of like " one in a lifetime " on TER..

First i'd pick Joe Montana=Great, Wayne Gretzky=Great, Cal Ripken=Great, Brett Farve=Great, Walter Peyton= Great, of course they are all retired.  Present Day well thats tougher but I think Adrian Petersen is getting real close to greatness, and look out for Trout he will be mentioned in years to come.. Just my opinion of course..

Posted By: hpygolky
Who's great, I mean really great? Any sport...who's great?  
 Who's called great but is good or was good. There's nothing wrong in being good. Jeter is good, but great, nah.Ryan Sandberg was good.Pau Gasol is good.Tony Gwynn was great. Mike Piazza was good. Michael Jordan was great, really fuckin great. Those are just examples but I trip when I hear announcers say that so and so is great when I feel they're just good.....Let the non-hype begin.

-- Modified on 7/14/2014 10:08:12 PM

Register Now!