i know that rose was a good player, and that his contributions all over the field were very valuable. i just get annoyed with the general perception of him as one of the all time greats.
like you said, you just named about five or six players on the big red machine alone who were better than him. the winner tag has some legitimacy, but again there have been better players who have never won a world series, and there have been worse that won more. by the way, the phillies only won one world series, in 1980. rose had a great nlcs, but then didnt do anything special in the series.
he was a very good player, i will absolutely admit that, and he exemplified a lot of values that resonated with the average blue-collar fan. but i just dont hold him in the same regard as many, many other players.
|
10-19-05, 12:55 AM
Threaded Mode