What I meant from that comment was all the pressure Jeter has to succeed from the New York market, the media age and the legacy of the Yankees Franchise should count in his favor. Where as Ripken played in a smaller market where everybody loved him and there really was not a much pressure i'd say. I know it was not as bad as it is now in Baltimore though.
Even if we were to allow that, it'd be the weakest of arguments in favor of one player over another. You don't know how they'd perform were their situations reversed. Maybe Jeter thrived off of the pressure and would have been bored in Baltimore. Maybe Ripken WAS bored and would have been better had he been on winning teams that were expected to win every year. How does the legacy of a franchise even begin to come into a comparison between two players? And you're going to say that it was easy on Cal because he played in a small market where everybody loved him? Um... I think Jeter falls into that category. Maybe you'll say he earned it. Well, so did Ripken.
I wonder what type of pressure Ripken had to deal with in 1983. We could all go to the SI vault and see what was written about the Orioles and Ripken that season. Ripken was a 22-year old American League MVP that season. If not the youngest MVP ever, he was certainly among the youngest. The year prior he was the AL Rookie of the Year. The only other major superstar on that team was Eddie Murray. Jim Palmer was also with the '83 Orioles but he was old then. McGregor, Boddicker, and Davis were good pitchers but never superstars. Dennis Martinez was not good that season. From 1960 up until 1983 the Orioles only had two losing seasons. They won the WS in '66 and '70. They lost the WS in '69, '71 and '79. They shared a stadium with the Colts. The football team was also usually good in the 1960s and 70s. But during Ripken's first few years with the Orioles, the Colts stunk real, real bad. They went 2-22-1 in 1981 and 1982. Being a very young superstar, playing for a team with a current quarter century of winning, facing an opponent in the World Series who was closest to his team on a map, and the fans not having a good football team anymore, I would imagine that Ripken had some pressure on him.
Best statement on Jeter ever. --------------- As for the question itself, I'd take Jeter, solely because I'm a homer. As has been said, it's hard to compare the two. I despise Ripken, 1 for breaking a big Yankees record and 2) for being an Oriole. That said, if Ripken had played for the Yankees, during the same era as Jeter, at the same age as Jeter in that timeframe, I'd say Ripken would have had a more successful career. It doesn't matter though. Both are two of the best shortstops to have played baseball professionally.
Yep. I am still glad I did. I underrated Ripken Jr. big time i'd say. And maybe overrated Jeter a little.
It's tough, I think it just matters what you are looking for in a player. I get the impression that Bowl Cut really wants it to be Jeter and I'd lean that way only ever so slightly because he plays a tough position in a very tough city whereas Ripkin played in a city that essentially no pressure existed in. I don't think either guy runs away with it but if you ask me which guy I'd build a team around I'm gonna say Jeter.
How do you figure that? NY, Boston, and Philadelphia are probably the three most pressure-filled sports cities. But are Orioles fans a bunch of pollyannas?
