Should they lift his ban even after his death? If so will they let him into the hall of fame? So many questions surround this possibly misunderstood baseball legend. Shoeless Joe got his name from what is believed to a blister on his feet from a new pair of cleats. So he took them off and played in his socks throughout the ball game, resulting in Shoeless Joe Jackson. A man who just wanted to play the game of baseball and was banned from it.

Jackson had a career that spanned thirteen years, and played with four teams in all. Most notable was his tenure in Chicago, but he also played for the Indians, Athletics, and Naps. His numbers as a professional ballplayer were very impressive.

Some of these numbers include a .356 career batting average, 785 RBIs, and 168 career triples. The power was low, but this came in an era where lower home run totals were more commonplace.

The power is low, but this came in an era with much deeper home run fences, and just before Babe Ruth made his impact as the first major power hitter in baseball, revolutionizing the game. Players hit for average, with an emphasis on extra base hits (Jackson averaged- triples per season). A closer look at Jackson’s stats show some very impressive attributes.

9.4 walks percentage, 4.2 strikeout percentage, .423 on base percentage. 517 slugging percentage, and a .940 OPS. These are great numbers and H.O.F. numbers in fact.

Now let’s get into the Black Sox scandal of’19. The White Sox faced the Reds in the World Series. The White Sox lost the series and Joe Jackson, and eight other players were accused of throwing the series. But Shoeless Joe stats show he did not play poorly. Do you think a .375 average and 12 hits (a world series record) is throwing the series? His fielding percentage in the series was 1.000, having made no errors.

I have researched that many say the Reds triples were hit to left field. Most of them anyway, and Joe Jackson was the left fielder. This is actually false. It is a fact that no triples were hit to left field in the World Series vs. the Reds. Now the only flaw in my thinking is that he received a $5,000 payment.

The Legend of Shoeless Joe Jackson. Let him in? It is your decision.

Enjoy more articles by this writer about topics like the faux fur bomber hat and faux fur coat concepts.

categories: baseball,sports,recreation,history,hobbies,teens,entertainment,gambling,celebrities,ethics,opinions,advice,social issues,free

Another new season of tennis is upon us as the Aussie Open is underway. The women’s side of tennis is certainly interesting with Justine Henin back, but this article will focus on the men’s tour.

Things will certainly be interesting in men’s tennis this year. It’s one of the first years in recent memory where fans legitimately believe that more than just two players have a chance at finishing on top.

Though Federer and Nadal occupy the top two spots in the world, there are a few players who could end up the year ranked at number one. Let’s take a look at the most likely finishers now.

Obviously, there’s Roger Federer. He should always be considered the favorite to finish at the top of the rankings, as he’s done so nearly every year during the course of the last decade. Still, his age of 29 means he’s getting up there in years.

Last year, Federer’s dominance was threatened by Rafael Nadal, who legitimately owned the Swiss legend in their head to head matchups. Having beaten him in the finals at the Australian Open and Wimbledon the prior year, Nadal looked to be the likely heir to the throne. Still, he has injury issues that tend to get in the way.

Out of nowhere last year came Juan Martin Del Potro, a young sensation from Argentina who seemingly came out of nowhere to stun the world when he defeated Roger Federer in the finals of the US Open last year. Many believe that he could very likely finish the year at number one.

While Federer, Nadal, and Del Potro are the most likely contenders, there are two more who shouldn’t be overlooked.

Novak Djokovic is one of those guys who everyone thought would be number one at some point, yet he hasn’t quite gotten there yet. He’s more mature at the age of 23, and could finally have both the physical and mental game to get there.

Then, there’s Andy Murray. At 22 years old, this British talent is on the rise and peaked as high as number two last year. With some big wins in 2010, he could be this year’s dark horse.

The writer additionally often contributes articles on topics like maple hardwood flooring and maple laminate flooring.

categories: tennis,sports,celebrities,entertainment,gambling,teens,advice,hobbies,games,leisure,recreation,free,international,opinions

Following Tuesday night’s dugout clearing clash between the Toronto Blue Jays and the New York Yankees, Major League Baseball gave penalties to the 2 core troublemakers – Jorge Posada and Jesse Carlson. For their role in Tuesday night’s fracas, Posada and Carlson each got 4-game suspensions. Their suspensions had been reduced to three games since neither Posada nor Carlson fought the suspension.

If someone can explain to me how the MLB came up with 4 games each, I’d genuinely appreciate it.

When it comes to how many games a player is hit with for his actions, it’s anybody’s guess. It seems to me there are no firm rules for penalties. That is a big issue in my eyes.

Let’s take a look at two non-steroid related suspensions that have been handed out so far in 2009:

Does everyone else see what is strange here? There’s no rhyme or explanation for all of the suspensions.

How did Youkilis and Porcello receive five games for provoking a bench-clearing mle, although Posada and Carlson only received 3 games? What did Youkilis and Porcello do differently that their brawl led to two more games?

In my mind, a dugout-clearing fight is a dugout-clearing clash. They are like coincidences; there are no degrees.

How does Beckett receive a six-game suspension for aiming at someone’s head, but Zambrano becomes the same game suspension for roughing up a water cooler? I didn’t realize possibly ruining someone’s career could be just as detrimental as roughing up an inert object.

This isn’t a Red Sox-Yankee issue – this is a common sense problem. I feel as if I am taking crazy pills even writing something such as this. If you do A, you are hit with B. It is as basic as that.

Major League Baseball – and I am talking about you Bob Watson – needs to draw up a benchmark penalty for every infringement.

At the moment, it just does not make any sense.

Come to the best MLB baseball forums online and answer trivia questions at RootZoo.