Customer Reviews

Clearing the Bases: The Greatest Baseball Debates of the Last Century

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This book reviews a lot of baseball myths and debates and sheds new light on ones the experts thought were settled. As a Yankee fan from the 1950s and 1960s I was particularly interested in the chapters on Ruth and DiMaggio and questions about Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle. Barra address questions such as: Was Mays really a better all-around player than Mantle? Should Joe Jackson be in the Hall of Fame? Should Roger Maris be in the Hall of Fame? Was the asterisk on Maris' home run record a myth? Would Jackie Robinson have made the Hall of Fame if he were not black? Was Juan Marichal slighted when compared with Koufax and Gibson? How great was Mike Schmidt? Barra address these and many other issues with sometimes startling but always convincing agruments and statistics to back up his points.

Many of the debates have been clouded by emotion and Barra tries to take a very dispassionate and objective approach to the issues. The result is some new and refreshing ideas that provoke thought and controversy!

This book has a great premise, which is to use statistics to question some of the "great" debates of baseball and generally shed some new light on the subject. It is a fascinating idea. However to me it feels rather poorly executed.

The chapters seem to go from statistics to anecdotes, to statistics, to anecdotes with no clear path. The problem with this approach is that Barra never even settles on one or another as being his criteria for settling his dabates. On this level this book is highly unsatisfying. For example in comparing Ted Williams to Joe DiMaggio he "proves" that one batter was clearly the statistically only to decide that he would choose the inferior player for intangible reasons if he could go back in time. Considering that in other chapters he uses numbers almost exclusively, to argue that the 1919 Black Sox shouldn't have been favorites no matter takes away the necessary bias. Essentially the author uses numbers that prove his point, but often only presents the data he puts forth in his argument.

In the chapter I found most unsettling the author examined the legacy of the 1986 New York Mets. He does nothing less than insult Sid Fernandez for his weight problems and dismisses Dwight Gooden's career tail off as solely due to drug and alcohol problems. He compares Gooden's early career to that of Roger Clemens and rightly points out that Gooden was the better pitcher at the end of 1986 based on statistics and essentially relates his subsequent pitching performances to his personal demons. However if the reader were presented with career statistics they would see that Gooden pitched approximately 500 innings in his first 2 seasons. The man led the National League in innings pitched in his second season with 276. Add to that Gooden's high strike out totals and high complete game figures and one could argue that Gooden suffered from arm abuse as well as drug problems. To fail to mention such data seriously hinders the credibility of the author's arguments. It makes me curious as to what pertinent information is left out of his other analyses. As such I cannot place much weight on the particular merits of the authors arguments as they present very skewed statistics.

I know statistics can say whatever you want them too. It's even easier when you don't get to see all the numbers. A nice idea but poorly executed. It may present the greatest baseball debates, but it does not end them.

The book's jacket makes it sound like some revolutionary tome that uses completely original thinking to slaughter baseball's sacred cows. But a quick flip through the text reveals a collection of ideas that Bill James was bandying about back in the 1980s. Tim Raines was a great player? Mike Schmidt was one of the greatest of all time? Statistical analysis favors a peak Mantle over a peak Mays? Babe Ruth wasn't as much of a God and savior as many believe? Valid points all, but these ideas, each the subject of a Barra chapter, can all be found in James's Abstract work. So this book seems oddly stale to me, and will feel the same, I think, for many well-read baseball fans.

In the sullied craft of journalism the best, most insightful writing can always be found on the sports page. In Allen Barra we have one of the finest sportswriters in America today. Always asking the hard questions and giving in return uncompromising answers, here is a writer who has given us a book that might restore our fundamental appetite for sports as we once knew it. The questions we argued about as kids. I recall reading somewhere that if we had the answer to the Mays-Mantle-Snyder question, the universe would be a simpler more orderly place. Well, here is Barra's answer, hopefully making our universe a more orderly place. I thoroughly enjoyed this pleasurable book.

Allen Barra, a terrific columnist for the Wall Street Journal and Salon, unfortunately disappoints in this book. Most of the book consists of recycled,unoriginal conclusions. Yes, most knowledgable baseball fans know Babe Ruth didn't save baseball single-handedly and was a womanizer, Mantle was a better offensive player than Mays, Ted Williams was a better hitter than Joe Dimaggio, etc... As another reviewer pointed out, most of these ideas were originally proposed by Bill James years ago. I cannot recommend this book.

Furthermore and far worse, Barra makes several factual errors in Clearing the Bases. In his misguided attempt to tear Babe Babe Ruth down, he incorrectly states that Ruth benefited from good homerun parks in Boston and New York. This is absolutely false. One thing Barra didn't learn from Bill James: Fenway Park in 1919 was a very tough homerun park. Ruth hit 20 of his 29 homers on the road. For his career Ruth had more homers on the road. I sent the author an e-mail informing him of this fact, which he has not acknowledged. Another misstatement occurs in the Lefty Grove section. Barra says that Grove missed time in 1934 because Connie Mack was overusing him. That would have been unlikely, since Grove was traded to Boston before the season and wasn't being coached by Mack that year. Barra can do better and I hope he will try again. Don't waste your time and money on this book.

Allen Barra does it again! Began reading this studiously written book while on vacation and almost recieved a third degree sunburn because I could not put it down long enough to get off the beach.
Is a "must read" for any baseball enthusiast!

Allen Barra's "Clearing the Bases" engaged this reader. Sure, the controversies have been tackled many times before (Mays v. Mantle; Ruth the greatest player? Why cant pitchers go 9 innings anymore, etc--that is why they remain baseball's greatest debates--but Barra's ability to (1) approach the debates from every conceivable angle and (2)marshal all the relevant statistics are just the beginning of this book's strengths. Barra could write about the history of the white powder used down the base lines and make it interesting. He is honest, he is funny, and his writing is both crisp and accessible. He is a combative bloke who will hammer you with his certainty and, in the next breath, acknowledge the flaws in his own arguments. I turned first to the chapter comparing Grove, Clemens and Koufax. I had planned to go to my grave convinced that Sandy Koufax, at his peak, was the greatest pitcher ever, but Barra argues, all too convincingly, that I might be wrong. I've tried to pick his arguments apart, but I am losing that game. Barra himself weighed in on some of these debates [e.g., Mays v Mantle] with his own preconceived notions, only to find that his methodology has led him to new discoveries and new notions. He is as honest with himself as he is with the stats. It has been suggested that the book adds nothing to what Bill James has already said. Well, James disputes that: in his cover blurb, Bill James writes, "Barra pushes aside the accumulated debris of a century's assumptions to see things as they were....A wonderful collection of thoughts and essays." So Bill James in effect says "buy this book." As Bob Costas says, "Next time you debate these questions with someone, make sure you've read this book first."

Whether or not you've decided for yourself who was the best player at his position, the best team, what is the best stat that determines anything, you must now re-think your position. Allen Barra has challenged us all to do so with this well reasoned and obviously long thought out clever look into the real facts.

It is a joy to look back at the circumstances that led us to believe what we understand to be the total picture of fact. While I don't neccesarily agree with all that Barra points to in his own reconciliation, I found myself wound up like a pretzel trying to accomodate my own beliefs on numorous occasions within the pages of "Clearing The Bases".

Following the pattern of his "That's Not the Way it Was" volume, he has outdone himself with this new set of chapters debunking the myths of sports legends. This book is a must read for anyone interested not only in Baseball, but sports of any kind. It is one of the most thought provoking, intriguing books I have read in many years.

Thank you Allen, for a re-energizing look into the greats of the game!

If you are the type of person who enjoys the serious discussion of baseball comparisons...like, "Who's better: Mays or Mantle?" Or "Who's the best _____ in baseball ever?" than this is pretty much an essential purchase for you. Just go click on the order button and you'll be fine.

Barra's book is a series of short "arguments" or meditations on various subjects. Most of them are on baseball, although he tosses a few about football and basketball in at the end. They are written as if he was given a theory, and he feels compelled to provide proof or evidence of said theory.

For example, he takes on the hallowed legend of Babe Ruth, tries to break it down into comparisons which debunk some of the "myth" surrounding his legacy, and then surprisingly, ends up validating much of his greatness.

He has some interesting insights, like the segment on the 1919 Cincinnati Reds. Who knew they were so good? He has an elegant discussion comparing Joe DiMaggio with Ted Williams.

There were startling (for me) revelations and discoveries; players who I never appreciated, like Lefty Grove, Juan Marichal and Tim Raines.

His defense of Mike Schmidt as one of our all-time greats reads like a fantastic legal closing argument. You will walk away convinced that Schmidt may be one of the, if not the most, underrated baseball players ever.

The whole Mantle/Mays thing gets a bit bogged down in statistical analysis, and in the end, I came away with they were both so freaking great, we can leave it at that. I do agree that Mays isn't as revered as Mantle, and he probably should be.

The short football chapters (and one basketball missive comparing Chamberlain to Russell) at the end are interesting, but out of place. I think they're inserted to show he can write and think about other sports. Read them separately, at a later date.

There's a lot of good stuff here: an appreciation of Roger Clemens that avoid fawning, Minnie Minoso's unrecognized stature as a cultural icon, practical ideas regarding on-base percentage/average...

... what keeps this from a five-star book is that sometimes the book gets inundated in statistical gobbledygook and loses it's momentum. Don't get me wrong: I love stats and numbers like any self-respecting baseball nut. It's just that sometimes there's a bit TOO much here...but maybe this is a minor quibble.

Baseball fans will love this stuff...I sure did.

What a fun book! Really challenges a lot of assumptions. Allen Barra can be opinionated and even contrarian, but he is persuasive and illuminating. Highly recommended and a great Father's Day gift.