Clayton Kershaw
 

80-0 when given 4+ run support.

Only three times in the last 100 years has a pitcher had 3 consecutive games with 10+ k and no walks. Kershaw has two of those. The best!

He's the best arm in the game, and worth every penny of his contract. Barring any injury, he will go down as one of the best in the history of the sport.

I'm a fan and he seems like a decent guy too.

10/3/14 Kershaw was given 6 runs (Dodgers scored 9 in game) but Kershaw allowed 8 earned runs and lost.

Playoff game wasn't it.

i used to be a billingsley guy when they first came up but i've come around on kershaw. we've always known he was special long before, but he's about the perfect baseball player on and off the field. ferocious competitor always working to improve his game and gain an edge, whether a new pitch or batting. has his faith but doesn't have the holier-than-thou attitude. builds schools and churches in africa, but you'll never hear him toot his own horn or have a big national story written about him...he pretty much ignores his own local station that carries the dodgers games.

Yup. :)

I think I have to say that Kershaw is now the best I've ever seen. Better than Pedro, better than Maddux. It's just unbelievable that he's getting even better now.

In the past five years, he's won three Cy Young Awards, was runner up once, and finished third place last year. And this year? He's showing a career-best 218 ERA +. He's struck out 77 batters, and has walked 4 in 8 starts. He's walking one batter every other game, lol. His WHIP right now is 0.726. He's striking out 11.2 batters per 9 IP.

Get this card, guys, while it's still semi-affordable.

http://net54baseball.com/picture.php...ictureid=15139

When I get my dental work paid off, the first thing I'm doing is selling mine, and upgrading it to a Beckett-graded. My card is sharp, but the centering is off a little left to right, and there's a slight diamond cut on the left and right edges.

I respectfully disagree. As much as I would like to have a fellow southpaw at the head of the pack, I believe Pedro Martinez was the best I've ever seen...and there is more of a gap between he and the next three (Maddux, RJ and Kershaw) than between the Maddux, Johnson and Kershaw.

Pedro was at his most dominant when hitters were at their most dominant. At 170 pounds, it was absolutely difficult to believe even when watching. He also shared the stage with Maddux, Johnson and PEDClemens.

It's easy to forget what an offensive game it was when Pedro and Maddux pitched. Much more offense than now.


.

Pedro
 

Have to agree with Ray on this one, Pedro M. was the best pitcher I ever saw. Kershaw surely is tough and certainly a case can be made he`s the best pitcher in today`s game. Maybe I`m jaded living in the Boston area and having seen most of Pedro`s starts, but anyone that pitched the the 1990`s when 40 bombs was "eh so what" and made half his in the A L East and still flirted with an ERA around 2.00, WOW. Lastly, when the old timers tell me Pedro was the nearest to Koufax in their hay days that says a lot. Sorry to hijack the thread but these discussions are very fun and interesting. My 2 cents..........

I also agree with Raymond. I'd love to see what Pedro could have done if he pitched today. Since ERA+ was brought up I'd point out that Kershaw's career high of 218 in a quarter of a season doesn't even approach Pedro's career best in a full season.

He has walked 4 batters in 62 innings. It is unfathomable.

i love pedro, i mean LOVE...still hurts today that he was traded from the dodgers for delino deshields, but i don't know if he juiced or not. i mean half the guys were cheating, his homeboys manny and ortiz was juicing. i wouldn't blame him if he did to level the playing field. he was dominant in that era, i wouldn't use the argument he was more dominant than kershaw because he was clean pitching against roided players...we never know.

to me it's a toss up right now with the clear nod to pedro, but kershaw still has 2-3 more prime years barring injuries to further cement his legacy. as is he's already better than koufax imo and already a hof'er.

I'll take Kershaw over Pedro. As a lefty, most hitters ( righties ) should hit him and they don't. As a righty, Pedro had the better match-ups in terms of righty / righty, than Kershaw will ever have as a lefty / righty. Kershaw has had to be that much better imo.

Look out for lightning bolts!

The difference in workload alone should keep all such comparisons holstered.

.

Kershaw is all of 28. He likely has a lot more than 2-3 more prime years.

kershaw just made his 250th start. a dodgers site just compared that to koufax's first 250 (on 06/1965...he only pitched for another season and a half):

koufax: 119-71, 2.96 ERA, 1,692 innings, 159 home runs, 622 walks, 1,746 strikeouts
kershaw: 119-57, 2.40 ERA, 1,670 innings, 100 home runs, 468 walks, 1,815 strikeouts

kind of amazing their innings pitched were similar even tho kershaw plays in the relief specialists era.

Good, but flawed research, Chad. I'm sure you meant Koufax's LAST 250 games.

I stand by my conviction that Koufax was better...and I absolutely will not 'pay any attention to the man behind the curtain'.

.

Koufax's LAST 250 he was probably 250-0. Those are almost certainly his first 250.

mmm yea reading is hard, and certainly you would want koufax's LAST 250 starts to compare to anybody's. koufax had to retire after his age 30-season. i'm willing to bet barring injury after kershaw's age 30 year i would take his 5-year stretch over any of sandy's.

of course legends are made in the postseasons, and koufax is so beloved because he brought home a couple championships. kershaw hasn't done it yet (though not entirely his fault), and i don't feel as constructed the dodgers will win big anytime soon during kershaw's prime years.

Peter - you are so right...I wasn't paying attention to details again...anytime I see a comparison to part of Koufax's career, I assume it is the last portion that is being mentioned - and I typed out a response without even reading what I was responding to.


You can only imagine how bad I would be at Twitter...:eek:


.

Kershaw is certainly on his way but still very early in his career for me, I still think Greg Madfux is the best pitcher I have ever seen. I was shocked this week on the ESPN rankings having Pedro in 1st by quire a bit. I was lucky enough Enough to see Pedro pitch 5 starts and 1 inning of relief on either the last or next to last of the season. He was 0-4 with 1 no decision. As great as he was I just saw him in person on the wrong nights?

Based on the combination of greatness at his peak and longevity, I would take Clemens with Maddux a close second. Don't overlook the Big Unit either.

But, NOT based on his integrity.





.

How can you look over a Big Unit? Do tell.

By overstating the case for Pedro as the greatest ever.

Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)


Black Ink Pitching - 58 (19), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 215 (31), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 206 (21), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 60 (16), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS Starting Pitcher (21st), 84.0 career WAR/58.2 7yr-peak WAR/71.1 JAWS

COMPARED TO THE UNIT

Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)


Black Ink Pitching - 99 (6), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 280 (14), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 331 (3), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 65 (12), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS Starting Pitcher (9th), 102.1 career WAR/62.0 7yr-peak WAR/82.0 JAWS
Average HOF P (out of 62) = 73.9 career WAR/50.3 7yr-peak WAR/62.1 JAWS

COMPARED TO CLEMENS

Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)


Black Ink Pitching - 100 (5), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 320 (7), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 332 (2), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 73 (5), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS Starting Pitcher (3rd), 140.3 career WAR/66.3 7yr-peak WAR/103.3 JAWS

I'm on the Pedro/Koufax bandwagon with respect to post-war dominance over a specific period of their careers. Clemens, Maddux and Johnson may have had better numbers over a longer length of career, but over a consecutive 3-4 year stretch, I'll take Pedro first and then Sandy. They were so much better than their contemporaries over their respective stretches that I would challenge someone to provide evidence that anyone was better since the end of WWII.

I'm still holding my breath that Julio Urias stays healthy, because he reminds me of Pedro throwing from the left side... While obviously putting the cart before the horse and being somewhat blasphemous to the Dodger blue, he may make Kershaw's dominance an afterthought in a few seasons.

from the pitchers i saw, i would take peak pedro and maddux's longevity. i would also take andy pettite in the playoffs.

as for urias he doesn't profile to be a future ace, i'd say a very good 2 is his ceiling. he's very advanced and polished for his age, thus he can dominate the high minor leagues at 19-20...but his body doesn't project to grow anymore so it's not like he's gonna start throwing like thor syndergaard in a couple years. he definitely doesn't have pedro's electric stuff...but i can hope he gets fed some mexican ped's and start throwing 97-98 soon and reach kershaw's level.

3-4 years is a very short time. Dizzy Dean would be up there for such a short stretch too. Alexander and Johnson had some mind blowing short stretches.

We shall see.

You don't need to be able to throw through a wall, but know how to pitch around it. I think Urias' arsenal and growing maturity will surprise those that project him to be a midland starter and claim he's just been a men among boys so far.

Using the Bill James HOF Statistical Ranking System puts a lot of emphasis on volume no matter how long it takes. Eddie Murray, Dave Winfield and Nolan Ryan are just three that benefit from it.

Even Harold Baines gets a higher rank due to the length of his career.

James had, in his Historical Abstracts, addressed this with Peak Value.

RJ is dominant from either perspective, but personally it's more impressive for a small guy to do it than a giant of a man.


Once again, Clemens like Bonds could have easily qualified as the best of their generation, and in many folks opinion, still are.

In my opinion, however, when the line between what was legit and what was not is blurred to the point where the actual Record Book is doubted, such an anointment is dubious at best.

JAWS is a good compromise metric because it gives equal weight to career and 7 year peak. Pedro great as he was for a time was basically done by age 33. Not much older than Koufax when he shut it down. Even if you discount Clemens as a user, Maddux was still a pretty effective pitcher into his late 30s and maybe even through 40 if memory serves.

May be a little biased but there's another guy named Chris Sale who's pitched for some pretty poor teams.

And if you're talking pennies his contract is probably as good as you can possibly get.


Better than Johnson???

Kershaw: 5 straight games with 10+ K. In that time only one walk. This is fun to watch. His curve has been sick.

Strikeout to Walk Ratio is now 24.75 to 1 !



Correction (though Bill already saw it) 22:1 - I added the last game twice.
.

His K:BB ratio is 22:1. Still outstanding.

And Sale is very good, but he's not on the same level Kershaw is.

Kershaw over the last 5 1/4 seasons:

94-34 (.734 win pct), 2.09 ERA, 22 CG, 13 SHO, 1,198 IP, 1,337 K, 246 BB, 0.919 WHIP, 6.4 H/9 IP, 0.5 HR/9 IP, 2.27 FIP, 1.8 BB/9 IP, 10.0 K/9 IP, 5.44 K:BB

Match that against Pedro's best six seasons, from 1997 to 2002:

104-32 (.765 win pct), 2.20 ERA, 31 CG, 11 SHO, 1,221 IP, 1,555 K, 268 BB, 0.925 WHIP, 6.4 H/9 IP, 0.6 HR/9 IP, 2.27 FIP, 2.0 BB/9 IP, 11.5 K/9 IP, 5.80 K:BB

Their numbers are very similar. Kershaw's ERA is slightly better, but Pedro pitched in the AL, which has more offense. Interestingly enough, they have identical FIPs, 2.27. Pedro has an edge, of course, in ERA +, 213 to 175. They give up the same hits and home runs per 9 IP. Kershaw walks slightly fewer batters, Pedro struck out more batters.

Kershaw is already 7th all-time in Cy Young shares (3.82). Martinez is 5th (4.26). It will be interesting to see if Kershaw wins his fourth Cy Young in six seasons. It's him and Arreta so far, and right now, Kershaw has the lead.

Josh,

I'll stand by the first quote.

You will have to show me the second quote that I supposedly made, since I never made that quote. Kind of anxious to find out what I " said "!

I'm referring to post #33.

Lou

Lou, I was the one that made that quote about Kershaw being the best I've ever seen. I don't know why he's attributing it to you; perhaps you quoted me in one of your responses? I look at Kershaw's being a lefty, and that's what gives him the edge, for me.

And yes, that includes Johnson. Johnson had 130 starts before he became a dominant starter. Early in his career, he had a ridiculous walks per 9 innings pitched rate. The Big Unit didn't have a good season until 1993, his fifth year in the league. Now, he went on to have a sensational career, obviously. But Kershaw had a 144 ERA + in his second season. Johnson didn't equal that until his sixth season. And Kershaw is as good now as Johnson ever was.

If you made the quote, then I'm in good company Bill!

Kershaw still has a ways to go to put up career numbers like Johnson, but thus far in their careers, Kershaw is better than Johnson.

One thing to remember: While we are comparing, in most cases, Kershaw's current record to the peaks of others, eventually his numbers will 'normalize' and only then will long-term or career comparisons be valid.

We may now be seeing the best Kershaw there will ever be...or he may surprise us and take it to still another level...now that would be really be worth waiting for.


.

Respectfully, what other level is there for him to go to? Since the start of 2014, he's 43-11 with a 1.92 ERA, 628 Ks vs 78 BB, he's given up 27 home runs in 501 innings pitched. His WHIP the past three years is 0.846; his FIP is 1.83. He's allowing 6.2 hits/9 IP, walking 1.4 batters while striking out 11.3. His K:BB ratio is a ridiculous 8.16:1.

Pedro had one season in his career with a FIP under two: 1.39 in 1999. Kershaw is carrying a 1.83 FIP over 500 + innings the past three seasons.

If you ask me, his 187 ERA + since the start of 2014 seems low, as does his 225 ERA + this season. He's struck out 88 batters in 70 innings...while walking 4 guys. Four. He has A 1.67 era. His WHIP is 0.700. Are you kidding me?

In four May starts, he's 4-0 with a 0.82 ERA; 48 Ks in 33 IP, and 1 walk. His WHIP in May is 0.576.

He should be 8-1 right now.

Exactly my point. What we are witnessing right now is probably the best Kershaw will be.

After peaking (sans PEDs) almost all players digress toward retirement.

Hence, their career figures are not as good as their peaks...which is why they call them that, I guess.

I'm all about celebrating Kershaw especially since he's a lefty, but Pedro is still the best I ever saw.


.

I believe that I misquoted you as the person who said something someone else said.................

Sale 9-0
doesn't face pitchers
But we're still talking about Kershaw................


Wonder what it would be like if Sale had been on a good team like Kershaw has most of his career. And then the whole pitching against a pitcher thing.

At 88 strikeouts to 4 walks, we might being seeing that new level. I don't think that ratio is even remotely sustainable, but I'm hoping. At 28, I think we have several years of peak Kershaw ahead.

What I meant to say was not that Kershaw couldn't pitch any better, but that I didn't see how any pitcher could humanly pitch better than Kershaw is now.

At age 28, Kershaw is better than Pedro was at the same point in his career. The things both could account for themselves-preventing walks, home runs, and hit batters, while causing strikeouts--Kershaw is better. His FIP to date in his age 28 season is 2.57. Pedro Martinez' FIP through 2000 was 2.81. Martinez had a WHIP of 1.028 over the same span. Kershaw's WHIP is 1.019. And Kershaw did that while throwing 104 2/3 more innings than Martinez.

Then, you take into consideration that Kershaw is a lefty.

he should have another 1.5yrs of absolute peakiness, then start to decline. you can cite all kinds of fancy stats to dissect what he's doing, but simply he's not wild, hitters know strikes are coming...and they still can't hit it. he's a combination of randy johnson and greg maddux.

the big en vogue stat right now for sp is their effectiveness third time thru the lineup. he's pitching like an elite closer ie andrew miller aroldis chapman, but doing it for 8 innings per start. i don't think he can keep up this pace all year, but he'll get his 8-9 win share on this crappy 82 wins dodgers. friedman is wasting kershaw's prime years with suspect relievers (his mo from tampa) and no real offensive threat.

Really? You're holding up Sale's 9-0 record as proof that he's somehow better than Clayton Kershaw? You want to go there?

First, the statement about Sale not facing pitchers is really irrelevant, at least as far as 2016 is concerned. The National League is actually scoring more runs per game than the American League. It's not a big gap, but Kershaw is not realizing any benefit there. BTW, Kershaw has 27 career starts against American League teams--185 innings pitched. He has a 2.28 career ERA against teams with a DH.

Ok, let's look at this season for Sale and Kershaw.

ERA
Sale 1.58
Kershaw 1.67
Very slight edge to Sale.

Strikeouts
Sale 62 in 68.1 IP; 8.2 K/9 IP
Kershaw 88 in 70 IP; 11.3 K/9 IP
Huge edge to Kershaw

Walks
Sale 10 in 68.1 IP; 1.3 BB/9 IP
Kershaw 4 in 70 IP; 0.5 BB/9 IP
edge to Kershaw

WHIP
Sale 0.717
Kershaw 0.700
slight edge to Kershaw

FIP
Sale 2.81
Kershaw 1.36
LOL, not even close. Sale's FIP is more than double Kershaw's

Hits
Sale 5.1 H/9 IP
Kershaw 5.8 H/9 IP
edge her to Sale

Home runs
Sale 0.7 HR/9 IP
Kershaw 0.4 HR/9 IP
edge here to Kershaw

Strikeout to walk ratio
Sale 6.20
Kershaw 22.0
not even close

So, outside of the win loss record, where's Sale's advantage? Kershaw is 6-1, Sale is 9-0. Kershaw pitched 8 innings at Atlanta against the Braves, and gave up 2 runs. Got no run support. He also pitched 8 innings at San Franciso against the Giants, gave up 1 run. Got no run support. The difference between Sale's 9-0 record, and Kershaw being 8-1, is a matter of run support. Nothing else. FIP, which accounts for the things that pitchers alone can control, shows Kershaw is running circles around Sale.

Now, shall we compare Kershaw to Sale since Sale became a full-time player in 2011?

Win-loss
Sale 64-39 (.621)
Kershaw 94-34 (.734)
But let's forget win-loss records, shall we?

ERA
Sale 2.84
Kershaw 2.09

ERA +
Sale 142
Kershaw 175

shutouts
Sale 2
Kershaw 13

FIP
Sale 2.95
Kershaw 2.27

WHIP
Sale 1.046
Kershaw 0.919

Hit batters
Sale 49 in 928.1 IP
Kershaw 19 in 1198.0 IP

Hits/Home Runs/Walks/Strikeouts per 9 IP
Sale 7.3 H/0.9 HR/2.1 BB/10.1 K
Kershaw 6.4 H/0.5 HR/1.8 BB/10.0 K

Awards
Sale 4 x All Star
Kershaw 5 x All Star

MVP Awards
Sale 0
Kershaw 1

Cy Young Awards
Sale 0
Kershaw 3

Gold Gloves
Sale 0
Kershaw 1

Number of times leading the league in various statistical categories

Wins
Sale 0
Kershaw 2

ERA
Sale 0
Kershaw 4

Strikeouts
Sale 1
Kershaw 3

ERA +
Sale 1
Kershaw 3

WHIP
Sale 0
Kershaw 4

FIP
Sale 0
Kershaw 2

And, last but not least, a few metrics

WPA (win probability added-number of wins or losses this player has added to their team)
Sale 19.1
Kershaw 31.7

Black Ink (average Hall of Famer has a 40)
Sale 20
Kershaw 69

Gray Ink (average Hall of Famer has a 185)
Sale 89
Kershaw 158

Hall of Fame Monitor (average Hall of Famer has a 100)
Sale 30
Kershaw 120

Hall of Fame Standards (average Hall of Famer has a 50)
Sale 30
Kershaw 44

Oh, and most similar to at this point in their careers
Sale at age 26 Stephen Strasburg
Kershaw at age 27 Tom Seaver

So, you know what? Chris Sale is a very good pitcher. Nobody here denies that. But he's not in Clayton Kershaw's league, at least thus far, and only you can't seem to see that.

A couple more things to consider. Performance against good teams.

Career numbers against teams with below .500 records
Sale 30-12, 2.53 ERA, 0.955 WHIP
Kershaw 66-26, 2.48 ERA, 1.051 WHIP

Career numbers against teams with .500 or + records
Sale 36-28, 3.01 ERA, 1.108 WHIP
Kershaw 54-31, 2.32 ERA, 0.991 WHIP

Kershaw's performance improves against better teams.

And as was alluded to earlier, Kershaw gets better as the game wears on.

Since 2011, starting pitchers (min 100 starts) ERA against batters in their 1st plate appearance, MLB rank.

1. Clayton Kershaw, 1.72 ERA
9. Chris Sale, 2.72 ERA

Since 2011, starting pitchers (min 100 starts) ERA against batters in their 2nd plate appearance, MLB rank.

1. Clayton Kershaw, 2.21 ERA
4. Chris Sale, 2.49 ERA

The second time through the lineup, Sale's ERA is only 0.28 higher than Kershaw's. But, it's in that third time through the lineup where Kershaw separates himself from Sale.

Since 2011, starting pitchers (min 100 starts) ERA against batters in their 3rd plate appearance, MLB rank.

1. Clayton Kershaw, 2.44 ERA
25. Chris Sale, 3.59 ERA

Again, Sale is very good. But Kershaw is the best in the game, and by a comfortable margin.

Josh,

I'm more than willing to admit that I don't give Sale his due as a great pitcher. The media market and his coverage isn't very good despite the numbers he puts up. If Sale were on the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, Chris Sale would be a household name.

I would love him on the Royals!!!

Who is your avatar of?

Side note.......Users or not, Bonds and Clemens were the absolute very best of their time, and rank among the greats. Even juicing, the pitcher still has to throw the ball with expertise, and the batter still has to square up the ball and hit it. Tremendous skill is still required regardless of " enhancement " or not.