Talk:Bob Gibson

Inclusion about story of Pete LaCock

I recently added and cited a story about Gibson's last game. This was the text that was reverted:

In his final game, he gave up a pinch-hit Grand Slam to the light-hitting Pete LaCock. Years later, Gibson would face LaCock in an old-timer's game, and he beaned him. When questioned about this by sportscaster Bob Costas, Gibson said, "the books must be balanced, Robert."

The reasoning for the revert was "I don't see how this is important or relevant to Gibson's career; additionally, its a story which may not even be true."

In my opinion, the relevance pertains to Gibson's reputation as someone who threw at batters and took things personally, even beyond his playing career. Perhaps it would be better to create a section dedicated solely to this, or as another example under "Pitching style" where there are other stories about his surliness.

The citations, I feel, are enough to offer veracity. I'm also happy to cite Joe Posnanski's latest book, in which he also writes about this.

Rather than start a revert war, I thought we should discuss it here. :)

What do you think, @Omnis Scientia? Mxbndr (talk) 23:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you allowing me to explain why I have removed the story about LaCock and Gibson.

I'm sure you can give many sources for this particular account; I have read it many times. It is a story that people love to tell, including LaCock and Gibson. BUT, as with many legendary stories about baseball, I would not put them into a Wikipedia article because, each time, the facts are different.

Additionally, Gibson himself felt - and I agree - that his reputation did not do him justice. He was known to push back on it, in fact (see here: Posnanski interviewed Gibson about it). Contrary to his reputation, he did not deliberately throw at batters. Don Drysdale hit more batters in a shorter career than Bob Gibson did over longer one, for example. So I'm not in favor of making a seperate section with stories like that (I was thinking about removing the Jim Ray Hart story as well - currently searching for a better alternative). Many of them aren't true. Some are exaggerated, in fact, by the very people involved.

And as for why it is not important or relevant to Gibson's career... Where you put the story, it really is not important. The paragraph is about the Gibson's final season and you added in an Old Timers game anecdote AND an interview with Bob Costas, years after these events took place. It just did not fit there. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I'd like to somehow capture the way Gibson inspired stories like these, in a way that both shows the stories and also shines some truth on them (either the actual facts or simply demonstrating that despite there being many stories they are hard to verify and can conflict with sources like even Gibson, himself). To that end, I've tried to rewrite the "Pitching style" section to instead be "Pitching style and reputation," with an eye on presenting the stories as something significant enough to warrant inclusion in Gibson's article while also capturing the doubt. I'd love your help with finding conflicting accounts to back up this approach.

What do you think of this draft?

--

Gibson was a quick worker on the mound with an explosive delivery, falling towards first base each time he released the ball. He relied on pinpoint control and had a vicious slider and both a two-seam fastball and a four-seam fastball, released with a low, three-quarter arm angle.

He had a reputation as a fierce competitor who was known to throw brushback pitches to establish dominance over the strike-zone and intimidate the batter, similar to his contemporary and fellow Hall of Famer Don Drysdale. Statistically, however, he hit fewer batters while facing more overall; compared to Drysdale, who hit 154 batters out of 14,097 batters faced in his career, Gibson hit 102 out of 16,068.Drysdale also led the league in hit batters 5 times, while Gibson never did (and only once finished in the top 3). As of 2023, Gibson's 102 HBP (hit-by-pitch) was tied for 89th all-time among pitchers who hit batters.

There are many stories attributed to Gibson, either built upon or contributing to his reputation as "mean", a description Gibson pushed back on.One tale frequently told is about his final game, in which he gave up a pinch-hit Grand Slam to the light-hitting Pete LaCock. Years later, Gibson would face LaCock in an old-timer's game, and he allegedly beaned him. When questioned about this by sportscaster Bob Costas, Gibson is often quoted as having said, "the books must be balanced, Robert." (In Joe Posnanski's book Why We Love Baseball: A History in 50 Moments the quote is published as "the scales must be balanced, Robert," casting some doubt about the truth). Other possibly apocryphal quotes about Gibson include, "He hated everyone. He even hated Santa Claus," attributed to Don Sutton, and "The only people I ever felt intimidated by in my whole life were Bob Gibson and my Daddy,” attributed to Dusty Baker.Baker, in particular, is frequently cited with regards to Gibson's reputation, having also told stories of Gibson angrily rebuffing Baker when the latter tried to say hello, as well as reciting a poem about how to deal with facing Gibson, based on advice from Henry Aaron.

There are also claims that he did not fraternize with opposing players. At the 1965 All-Star Game, Milwaukee Braves catcher Joe Torre caught Gibson in the 9th inning; afterwards, when he complimented Gibson's pitching, the latter allegedly ignored him and merely got dressed and left. Stories also exist that suggest he could be surly and brusque even with his teammates. One told by his catcher Tim McCarver describes what happened when McCarver went to the mound for a conference, and Gibson brushed him off, saying "The only thing you know about pitching is that it's hard to hit."

Gibson disregarded his reputation for intimidation, saying that he made no concerted effort to be intimidating. He once joked that the only reason he glared while pitching was because of his poor eyesight and inability to see the catcher's signals clearly as he did not wear glasses while pitching.He is quoted as saying, “I wasn’t trying to intimidate anybody, are you kidding me? I was just trying to survive, man.” He also said, “I’d like to think that the term ‘intensity’ comes much closer to summarizing my pitching style than do qualities like meanness and anger, which were merely devices. … My pitching career, I believe, offers a lot of evidence to the theory that baseball is a mental discipline as much as a physical one. … The part of pitching that separates the stars from everyone else is about 90 percent mental. That’s why I considered it so important to mess with a batter’s head without letting him inside mine.” Mxbndr (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes I think this idea is much better. I do think your draft needs quite a bit of work - a bit TOO long IMO and focuses too much on his reputation and very less on his pitching style, and it sounds more like a story - but, if you add it, I can tweak it up as needed. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:23, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Done! Thanks for talking through it and offering to iterate on my draft. :) Mxbndr (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

To be honest, I think the shrinking of this section in the recent edits takes away from showing the false narrative built up around Gibson. I'm disappointed, but I don't have to die on this hill. Mxbndr (talk) 22:24, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

I PROMISE that the only thing I removed from your draft were the quotes - one was unsourced, the others were lifted out of the article which isn't allowed. Other than that, I removed a few sources which I thought would be deemed unreliable AND rewrote to clean it up. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 05:41, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

A few quotes which were sourced but the language around it had to be rewritten. I changed Costas' quote - which is from an interview on MLB Network - with what Gibson alledgly shouted.

I think I did it fairly and as much in accordance with the guidelines. I'm sorry that you were disappointed, however. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 05:45, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate your attention and effort :) Mxbndr (talk) 18:23, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

References

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bob Gibson/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Omnis Scientia (talk · contribs) 13:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Reconrabbit (talk · contribs) 16:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm going to work on this review. Reconrabbit 16:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Reconrabbit, hello there! Thank you for taking the time to review this. As a heads up, I will be leaving notes of my own where I've applied your edits. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Right, I've done the quick ones. I will get to the longer ones in the morning as its quite late where I live. Photos I will look into and add. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:04, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Reconrabbit, I think I've addressed everything so far, just about. Looking forward to your feedback. Omnis Scientia (talk) 06:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

That all looks great. Once Internet Archive returns to full function, please add in that info that got misattributed to a different source. I know I'll be doing the same on some other articles. Reconrabbit 13:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Prose

• I have very little familiarity with baseball but found this very readable. Only a few things stand out:
  • the anemic batting throughout baseball included his own team "Anemic" is an uncommon adjective to describe this. It could be justified. -- Y -- changed word; I didn't even notice that there.
  • This was due to a discriminatory housing in St. Louis during his playing career Missing subject of sentence here? "A discriminatory housing" Y -- Good catch!

Manual of Style concerns

• That's a lot of "See Also" links - we don't necessarily need to link every list Gibson is on. Which of these lists are the most relevant or have the strictest criteria? --- This is pretty standard for MLB "See also" lists; Actually short compared to other HOFer articles! I've removed the retired Nos. MLB list since that isn't really relevant to Gibson. Rest are related to where he is top 100 in MLB rankings.

References

• Layout: Nothing unusual, style of reference layout is appropriate and readable. Though I will mention that it's probably unnecessary to provide an external link to Find a Grave per WP:FINDAGRAVE-EL. --- Only added as there is an image of Gibson's burial spot.
• Copyright: There is a Tumblr blog that copied this article wholesale in 2016. I would ignore that. Some statements are very similar to on the Society for American Baseball Research page as a result of many long names of organizations and assorted phrases that would be awkward to reword ("The subject was never raised with him again", "the Board of Directors of the Baseball Assistance Team (B.A.T.), an organization that provides aid"). Also, the lengthy quotes contribute to copied %. --- Y -- Where it was a bit too similar, I tried my best to rewrite.
• Indiana University had rejected him after stating their "Negro athlete quota" had already been filled. Missing reference here. Should be this? Y -- Done

Spot checking

Based on this revision:

• [2] Y Checks out, and also confirms the next statement cited to [3] that I can't check due to Internet Archive being down.
• 7 N I don't see this article as supporting the statement he needed a doctor's permission to compete in high school sports because of a heart murmur that occurred in tandem with a rapid growth spurt. Y -- removed for now; it was mentioned in his autobiography but since IA is down, I'll have to wait.
• 11 Y No mention of he gave up as a traveling member due to long travels and many double-headers, instead states that he gave up due to receiving $4,000. -- Y; also removed but only because I discovered some new info here which I will be adding shortly -- Edit: added new info.
• [17] Y
• [21] Y
• [34] Y
• 47 Y Mentions Primatene Mist but not a men's suit endorsement. -- Y -- removing the suit one until IA is back up. can't find anything on it outside.
• [68] Y
• [76] Y
• [92] Y
• [99] Y

Scope

• Broad: The scope of his early life, career, retirement and death are all outlined.
• Narrow: Detail is applied proportional to the relative coverage of events in his life, an admirable effort here.

Stability

• Neutrality: Hearkening back to "Broadness" and "Prose", it's not apparent that any pro- or anti- any particular group stance is taken here that isn't conveyed through direct quotation when appropriate. Neutrality in the prose is maintained. Y
• Edit warring: Nothing to note in recent history. Y

Images

• Licenses: Photos used are public domain, CC BY 2.0, and CC BY-SA 3.0. Y
• Relevance: The pictures are fine for what's on Commons, but why not also use a photo of him from later on that's in color like File:Bob Gibson crop.JPG, or a photo of his statue outside Busch Stadium like this one? Y -- I've added the first but the second one is not shareable, I'm afraid; a shame because its a great picture. I will see if there is one which can be uploaded.
  • It has a CC-BY-SA 2.0 license, I had no problem uploading it. You can use it from File:Busch Stadium Bob Gibson statue.jpg (I added it to the section at the end but could be moved around). -- Y -- Thank you! It wouldn't upload from where I am.
• Also as a note, the number 45 could be converted to SVG. Out of scope for this review though. --- Not sure how to do that, I'm afraid.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.