Should Babe Ruth have been a pitcher instead of a hitter?
Babe Ruth was arguably the greatest baseball player of all time. He was a prodigious home run hitter, swatting 714 over his career, most of them while playing for the New York Yankees from 1920 to 1934. Few people remember though that the Babe was also one of the best pitchers in the game prior to joining the Yankees in 1920. Pitching for the Boston Red Sox from 1914 to 1919, Ruth helped the Red Sox win World Series in 1915, 1916, and 1918. After his contract was sold to the Yankees before the 1920 season, the Yankees decided to use Ruth primarily as a hitter. The rest, as they say, is history.
In terms of economics, what economic concept best describes the Yankees decision to use Ruth as a hitter rather than a pitcher? For a hint, click here. (Scroll down to read it all.)
5 comments:
The Yankees in this case obviously decided that the benefit of Ruth being a hitter was less than the cost of losing him as a pitcher. This obviously turned out to be a smart decision looking at the way history played out. Although even if Ruth had failed as a hitter, marginally it was still a great decision by the Yankees. Even though he was already a good pitcher, they formed him into an even better hitter, because he was obviously a great athlete either way and a good example of comparative advantage.
Nathan, in your first sentence I think you meant to say that the benefit of Ruth being a hitter was "greater" than the cost of losing him as a pitcher.
This is a great example of comparative example. Babe was a great hitter and with the Red Sox was a great pitcher. Even if Ruth did fail as a hitter with the Yankees, he could have fallen back to being a pitcher, because he had proven that in the past he can handle it. Overall as Nathan said it paid off in the long run that they converted him into a primary hitter.
This is a great example of opportunity cost. Babe Ruth made more of an impact as a hitter than as a pitcher. He was more successful putting runs on the scoreboard than keeping them off. It is very clear that the team would rather an outstanding hitter focus on hitting than have a decent pitcher pitch. In this case it made more sense to keep Babe Ruth focused on hitting which is what he did best than to put him in a position that made him average. For any team that wants to win, this is the best way to be successful.
This is the one of example of comparative. Boston Red Sox used Ruth as pitcher and hitter. Ruth made great score in both case. However, after he moved to Yankees, Yankees used him only hitter because they knew that Ruth's hitting was little better than pitching. Also, they knew that if he stand on one position, he can focus only one part and he can make much better score.
Post a Comment