Talk:Hank Greenberg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Other son?[edit]

The below sentence doesn't make sense in the article because there in no mention of the 'other' son.

"Their other son, Stephen, played five years in the Washington Senators/Texas Rangers organization."

Any objection to editing out the word 'other'?

Mattsky (talk) 17:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Citations[edit]

The entire article is quite heavily lacking in citations, especially with respect to facts. Can we add some?

Dbk1441 (talk) 05:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV - Jewish[edit]

Is it really necessary to point out he was Jewish with such prominence and overkill? Some of the introductory paragraph seems to not be NPOV... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.195.114.79 (talk • contribs) 24 June 2005

I agree. The opening paragraph or sentence should be a quick summary of who the player was but not into his overall background. I moved info regarding his religion into a seperate section although I question the relevance of it in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dysepsion (talk • contribs) 7 July 2005

I realize this is a really old conversation, but I wanted to leave a not as to why I'm re-inserting the Jewish thing into the intro. Greenberg played baseball at the height of anti-semetism, and he was the only star Jewish athlete of the time. He was heckled with anti-Semitic slurs, and it's commonly believed that he didn't break Babe Ruth's home run record in 1938 because pitchers who didn't want a Jew to hold the record pitched around him. He was a role model to young Jewish men at a time when they were stereotyped as weak, sneaky, and bookish; the Sandy Koufax of his era. Not mentioning Greenberg's Judaism in the into is, frankly, like not mentioning that Jackie Robinson or Hank Aaron are African-American. Greenberg's Jewishness is central to his place in baseball history. --Djrobgordon 22:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I just looked at the Jackie Robinson page and nobody is complaining about NPOV. It seems that any positive mention of Jews is going to get tagged in Wikipedia. Pedantrician (talk) 00:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you; It was well known that he would have gone past the "Babe"s record if he was christian or similar.......

Msjayhawk 02:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The comments posted above are ridiculous. Have you ever played baseball? You do understand that the point of the activity is to WIN, correct? You do understand that if you pitch to Hank Greenberg in 1938, he hits it out of the yard, and you LOSE, right? You do understand this? Do you also understand that as a species, it is commonly accepted that all human beings like money, right? And that if Hank Greenberg hits one 500ft off you, you get less of said money, right? The fact that Greenberg was Jewish absolutely comes into play, but this is the fact that should be in parentheses, not the more obviously logical explanation that the opposing team simply wished to WIN the games and get more money. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.219.192.217 (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Except the statistical record shows (as explained in a recent New York Times article) that there was a highly unusual spike in the number of walks Greenberg got as he got closer to the Babe's record. The next season the number of walks went down to normal. For all the other home-run kings on record, there was no such unusual spike. Despite your experience in major league baseball, your "understanding" of pitchers motivations would appear to be flawed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.160.10 (talk) 23:14, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If baseball in 1938 was all about winning and money...why didn't baseball teams field the best players? Oh...no African Americans allowed. Hank was denied the home run crown because he was a Jew. Simple as that and it is relevant. The NYT article shoots down all of the but but but arguments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basaltmark (talk • contribs) 08:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're lost. Hank walked 119 times in 1938, which is a far lower number than the 137 times Ruth walked in 1927. Furthermore, Greenberg's walk total was greater in the first two months of 1938 than in the last two months. Furthermore again, you don't understand that only 11 years after Ruth made the record, there just wasn't that kind of emotional weight to it to make people wanna try to rip off Greenberg. Finally, as I'm sure you know, back in the thirties, players received large bonuses for making the playoffs. 7 of the Tigers last 11 games were against against the Cleveland Indians, and both teams were jockeying for a playoff position. Sooooo... when faced with having to pitch to a man having a herculean season, or taking home a few thousand bucks, they chose to take the money and walk him. Until you can muster some FACTS...get offa my baseball diamond! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.11.160.251 (talk) 08:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But I'd never want you to just take my word for it. Voila! The Tiger's 1938 season: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1938-schedule-scores.shtml

Take a look! See? Hank got unlucky. He faced the one team that had the competitive and financial incentive to walk him. Otherwise, who knows? He may have hit three more and shared the record today instead of those fraudulent bums McGuire and Bonds. Oh yeah, how often was Bonds walked in his season? Over 30%. So get your race talk outta my sport, fellas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.11.160.251 (talk) 09:09, 26 May 2010 (UTC) And another thing... a very reputable source agrees with me: Hank Greenberg.[reply]

Ethnicity in lead sentence[edit]

Greenberg's ethnicity is gone into detail in the body of the article where it belongs. Thanks --Tom 20:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Micellaneous section[edit]

It has one reference? Most of that stuff should go as unsourced/original research. I'll hold off for now. --Tom 20:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

58 Homers in 1938[edit]

It sounds like you are saying from 1927 to 1961 he was the only person to hit 58 homers. What about Foxx hitting 58 in 1932?

Do you agree with what I put in....... ? Msjayhawk 02:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Msjayhawk 19:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misc section needs better sourceing[edit]

The sources might be at the end of the article, but each "fact" really should have a citation so readers don't have to look for them. I knoe Epee has done alot here, could that be done as well? TIA --Tom 16:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few.--Epeefleche 21:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deleted section[edit]

I jsut deleted the following section added earlier on 17 December 07: ==Anti-Semitism==

All during his major league career, Greenberg faced anti-semitsm. Many people screamed and yelled at him during the games, calling him names offensive to Jews. Henry Ford was one of the anti-semetic people. He wrote a book called The International Jew, which blamed some of the world's problems on the Jews. Despite the name calling and rowdy fans, Hank stood proud and tall. He did not let the crowd upset him.

I have no doubt that Mr. Greenberg suffered through anti-semitism. I deleted this section because, for one, the anti semitism is addressed in the article. Second, this section has no references. Third, the inclusion of the Henry Ford comment, true as it is either has no bearing on this particular article, or does not make a case as to why it should be included here.

If someone can reference it, and show why the Henry Ford comment is of relevance here, then please re-add it. Good editing! LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just my own theory here, but Henry Ford was not only a prominent industrialist of the day and, therefore, influential to many people, but he was also one of the most prominent Detroit citizens of his day, and with Greenberg playing for the Detroit Tigers, having one of the leading local citizens (and employers) so verbally anti-semitic couldn't have made his life in Detroit any easier.CrashRiley (talk) 00:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great Grandson and commentary[edit]

I deleted the edit related to his great grandson. Perhaps I should have left it with a request for reference. The commentary is really what I wanted to revert ("and i dont think that Hammering Hank would appreciate it that people keep editing this out of his page. Thanks....."). This should be on the talk page, no? Wikipelli Talk 03:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

5x MLB All-Star, info box ... is incorrect[edit]

Greenberg has 4 official MLB All-Star credits not 5 ([1] Baseball-Reference.com). There was no MLB All-Star Game in 1945; the official MLB All-Star rosters in 1945 were canceled. Greenberg's National Baseball Hall of Fame Plaque credits him with playing in "2 All-Star Games" (1939, 40). YahwehSaves (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He is still credited with five all-star selections in pretty much every source I see.--Yankees10 17:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
He is definitely credited with 4 MLB All-Star Games. Don't know what are all those sources you're referring to since several baseball sources do say the 1945 MLB ALL-Star Game was cancelled (in February). 8 games were scheduled instead, and 7 played as interleague exhibition games and an Associated Press All-Star game for the Red Cross and War Relief Fund effort in 1945 during the All-Star break. MLB does not include the 1945 year (no game played) for the years adding up to the present 86th, July 2015 All-Star Game, so why is "1945" in his and the other 1945 Associated Press All-Stars info box? YahwehSaves (talk) 18:42, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here are a few sources that Yankees10 may be referring to. I don't have a strong opinion on this one - except for the opinion that we should stop obsessing over numbers of All-Star selections (over and over and gosh damned over again) and move on to bigger issues in this WikiProject. If it will help to bring this to a halt, here are some sources: this short ESPN piece; this WOSU interview featuring his biographer; the Appearances on Leader Boards, Awards, and Honors section near the bottom of his Baseball Reference page; this Library of Congress page; and this sports HOF encyclopedia. I don't know which way the balance tips here, but it would be ridiculous for anyone with Google to intimate that there aren't sources to support five AS selections. A footnote would be a way to present a more comprehensive explanation of the situation, but that would involve some compromise. EricEnfermero (Talk) 07:51, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Its not a question as to whether there are five-time All-Star sources or not or should there be a footnote, but what is correct in the info box(s). Yankees10 doesn't allow non MLB awards and highlights in the info boxes except for the/his unofficial 1945 Associated Press All-Stars such as Greenberg for "1945". There are other sources that mention he was an All-Star four times, such as references mentioned in the article supporting Greenberg ("Other honors") that does not mention the 5th All-Star game (can anyone even find the game's score?) but "four consecutive All-Star teams", 1937 to 1940: The National Jewish Sports Hall of Fame [2] and the International Jewish Sports Hall of Fame [3]. YahwehSaves (talk) 17:20, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you said you didn't know where the five-time All-Star sources were, I took it as a question. I still think that a footnote is a reasonable solution and might even work in an infobox. No good reason has really been presented for not trying it. No score will be located for a cancelled game (I think forfeits are assigned a score - but that's not the case here). The point is not the game stats or score or who even played, but the selection. Sometimes that selection has come from fans; in other cases, it has not. EricEnfermero (Talk) 23:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting disruptive to me, as I said before which seems ignored (baseball-reference.com ....): there was no 1945 MLB AS Game which was cancelled on Febuary 8, 1945; there never was an official MLB, AL and NL roster selection due to the cancellation. The point is, the 1945 MLB All-Star game was cancelled and is not counted by MLB and shouldn't be in the info box for any MLB player. As I said before, there was instead a 1945 Associated Press All-Star Team selection (Baseball Almanac) that includes Greenberg that was put in his and other 1945 AP All-Stars info boxes. I can see like anyone he was a 5-time All-Star, but also seen is he is not a 5-time MLB All-Star but a 4-time MLB All-Star which is exactly what goes in the MLB info box. Unless I'm mistaken, I'm not allowed to make info box corrections and only certain editors are whether the correction is called for or not? That seems to explain the personal disruptions. YahwehSaves (talk) 01:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand feeling picked on, but I would look at it another way. Anyone is welcome to contribute edits, but anyone's edits might be changed or reverted, especially if they don't comply with Wikipedia consensus. There are some things on WP that I think are silly (punctuation outside of quote marks is hard to get used to!), but by being an active Wikipedian, I agree to go with the consensus - or let somebody else change my edits to the consensus.
You're making an argument to change consensus regarding our All-Star reporting, but consensus isn't changing; people have pointed out that even BR is a little inconsistent by including five lines under Greenberg's All-Star selections, even if one says "not played". If I dislike something that has been decided by consensus, I can bring it up again, but if I'm not convincing, consensus won't change. I shouldn't just go around inserting that stuff into articles just because I really think it's better. EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:01, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You pointed here in talk that what matters is the "selection" (that he was selected an All-Star). Well my point is, the 2 pennant winning managers that by MLB rules in 1945 were to officially select the All-Stars did not, evidently because they were not allowed to by MLB since the AS Game for 1945 was cancelled before the season like I said. Is 4-time All-Star correct or not? That's what matters. Its not a matter of what you say I think or what you say consensus thinks or what you think is better, but what is correct (MLB does not consider him a 1945 AS). I really think 4-time All-star is "correct" and should be in the info box. YahwehSaves (talk) 22:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://espn.go.com/classic/s/add_greenberg_hank.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 17:30, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links moved to talk[edit]

If there's something in these that's not redundant to what's in the article and encyclopedic in nature, it should be included in the article body, appropriately sourced: --Ronz (talk) 18:31, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Most HR in a player's final season[edit]

Ref: "No player had ever retired after a final season in which they hit so many home runs. Since then, only Ted Williams (1960, 29), Dave Kingman (1986; 35), Mark McGwire (2001; 29), and Barry Bonds (2007; 28) have hit as many or more homers in their final season."

Now that David Ortiz of the Boston Red Sox has hit his 36th home run in what is supposed to be his final season, would it be proper to change that sentence to reflect this fact, or should it be left alone for the time being, since the season isn't over and Ortiz has (1) yet to officially retire, and (2) a few more home runs that he will likely tally by season's end? AJC3fromS2K (talk) 05:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Friends[edit]

Hi Haley10jane (talk) 22:48, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hank Greenberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hank Greenberg 1933 RBI and career RBI total discrepancy[edit]

Baseball Reference and Retrosheet have his 1933 RBI total at 85 and career at 1,274, but all other sources have his '33 total at 87 and 1,276 career. Baseball Reference and Retrosheet are very reliable, so I wonder which stats are correct. Maybe BR and Retrosheet made a slight error.2601:581:8500:949C:80E3:A2F:D7A1:81A3 (talk) 15:46, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not really an error per se, but just representative of the fact that early baseball is plagued with statistical inconsistencies. Baseball fans have long had to live with slight irregularities in statistics. See here for more. EricEnfermero (Talk) 16:12, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hank_Greenberg&oldid=1205227662"