|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Larry Walker was a similar player with similar video game numbers at home for 6 of his 8 years in Colorado. Yet noone looks at him as one of the greatest left handed hitters of all time. Why? Everyone talks about how his home park affected his numbers. NOONE talks about that with Koufax, but it is just as true. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
28-8 2.31 ERA 324 k This edges out Dick Ellsworth, though it is fairly close: 22-10 2.11 ERA 185 k 1966 his road numbers doubled are: 28-8 1.96 ERA 314 k That beats Juan Marichal but again it is somewhat close: 25-6 2.23 ERA 222 K However In 1965 Koufax road numbers doubled are: 14-6 2.93 ERA 198k Marichal destroys him. 22-13 2.13 ERA 240k So that gives him 2 Cy Youngs, 2 WS MVPs and 4 rings. And career numbers that aren't close to what they are when Chavez Ravene gets entered into the equation. Maybe a borderline HOFer because he is so likebale and people feel sorry for him having to quit at such a young age? Maybe? Best lefty ever though? Please. |
Boy I botched that up pretty good.
1965 is a toss up for Cy Young. Koufax road numbers doubled are: 24-10 2.72 ERA 348 k Juan Marichal: 22-13 2.13 ERA 240 k And for 1965 if we go to WAR for pitchers, Koufax INCLUDING HIS HOME GAMES is at 8.1 which was third in the league behind Marichal at 10.3 and Maloney at 8.2. But just looking at the "traditional" stats they would have used back then a good argument could be made for either one. If Koufax gets this third Cy I would agree he would be a HOFer in the traditionalist sense. If the third Cy instead goes to Marichal (as WAR says it should have anyway) then if Koufax gets into the Hall he squeaks in with a lot of help from a friendly BBWAA. |
.
|
Found this on SB Nation - looking at WAR/200 innings pitched (https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/20...-rate-stat-top) [he lists the % of games started because he broke out relievers in another table]
Rank Name Innings WAR WAR/200 IP GS% 1 Pedro Martinez 2827.5 75.9 5.37 85.92 2 Roger Clemens 4916.6 128.4 5.22 99.72 3 Lefty Grove 3940.6 98.3 4.99 74.19 4 Johan Santana 1709.7 42.1 4.92 75.48 5 Sandy Koufax 2324.4 54.5 4.69 79.09 6 Roy Halladay 2046.6 47.4 4.63 91.69 7 Randy Johnson 4135.4 91.8 4.44 97.57 8 Brandon Webb 1319.7 29.2 4.43 99.5 9 Bob Gibson 3884.4 85.6 4.41 91.29 10 Tom Seaver 4782.6 105.3 4.40 98.63 11 Roy Oswalt 1803.4 39.5 4.38 95.76 12 Walter Johnson 5914.7 127.7 4.32 83.04 13 Curt Schilling 3261 69.7 4.27 76.63 14 Bret Saberhagen 2562.6 54.7 4.27 92.98 15 Mike Mussina 3562.8 74.8 4.20 99.81 16 Teddy Higuera 1379.9 28.3 4.10 96.24 17 Harry Brecheen 1907.4 38.8 4.07 75.47 18 Kid Nichols 5056.3 102.3 4.05 90.48 19 Pete Alexander 5189.9 104.9 4.04 86.06 20 Dizzy Dean 1967.3 39.6 4.03 72.56 21 Kevin Brown 3256.3 64.8 3.98 97.94 22 Tim Hudson 2059.5 40.9 3.97 99.68 23 Cy Young 7354.8 146.0 3.97 89.96 24 David Cone 2898.8 57.5 3.97 93.11 25 C.C. Sabathia 1889.4 37.3 3.95 100 |
Quote:
Camilo Pascual was likely better than Ford in 1963, with a record of 21-9 2.46 ERA and league leading 202k. Neither of them was as good as "road" Koufax or Ellsworth in 1963 though I don't think. Sam McDowall was likely the best in the AL in 1965 but at 17-11 he would fall short even conceding his league best ERA of 2.18 and league best strikeouts of 325. I would still give the Cy to the "road" Koufax in 1963 and 1966. 1962 and 1964 forget it. 1965 still a Koufax/Marichal toss up, though advanced metrics choose Marichal in 1965 over even the actual Koufax. |
Quote:
If his 1962 away ERA is “misleading” due to injury, then so are his home ERA’s. Or was he injured only for road games and a single inning in which he gave up 2 runs (based on your 18 ERA in a single inning outing statement) solely responsible? How could he possibly have such a gap off this single performance amidst a year he pitched 182 innings? This makes no sense. It obviously makes no sense. How about a couple years later when his road ERA is 300% of his home ERA? I guess the huge, abnormal gap in his splits and for all the other Dodger pitches is just random chance or the key must still be this change that does not align with the figures. By this point, it seems clear that no argument based in math and verifiable fact will be made for Koufax, as all there is myth making and denying verifiable facts. If there is such a case for Koufax rooted in facts and not myth, it will not be made. |
To summarize:
"Road Koufax" was the best pitcher in baseball twice (1963 and 1966) and he was also either best or (more likely) second best one year (1965). "Road Koufax" doesn't sniff the top 20 in any other year. "Road Koufax" had gaudy strikeout numbers for the most part, although 1962 (196) and 1964 (198) are a bit pedestrian. The real Sandy Koufax did have four World Series rings. One of which (1955) he did little to earn. One of which (1959) he was a back of the rotation starter/reliever and two of which he was the ace of the staff and series MVP. In his 7 career World Series starts he put up gaudy numbers even with a pedestrian record of 4-3. Knowing that the above player had such a short career, is he a Hall Of Famer? If you use the Kirby Puckett "what could have been had he not gotten hurt" method then absolutely yes. But is the above player the GREATEST left handed pitcher of all time? The thought is laughable. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
In your post, #410, YOU posed the question "Is he a hall of famer"? Try to keep up . |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You saw X pitch, I saw Y pitch, and Ted Z saw Eddie Plank pitch :) What basis does that give us for comparison? Stats are the only measures we have that aren’t completely subjective, and even they have to be massaged. But personal accounts are a joke. |
Quote:
|
I guess I should say when you’re talking about two players you saw yourself. There has to be some room for knowing what it felt like to watch Pedro pitch and knowing what it felt like to watch Niekro pitch.
|
Quote:
Oh, I see . You made up an imaginary Koufax and you want to know if the imaginary Koufax is a Hall of famer |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Facing a guy like Sam McDowell or Sandy Koufax or Walter Johnson or Nolan Ryan will obviously "feel" different than facing a knuckleball pitcher like Niekro, or a junkball pitcher with brains and control, like Tommy John. But there are guys who had more success hitting heat rather than butterflies. |
One thing that should be stressed with Sandy Koufax is the fact that, for the most part mind you, he did not have a team behind him that could give him a lot of runs. I recall the term, "small ball", being associated with Koufax & Drysdale. The Dodgers had Frank Howard, but even mighty Hondo struggled in their home parks. They had Tommy Davis, who put up spectacular numbers in '62, and won a pair of batting titles, if I recall correctly. Their biggest warrior was the dynamic Maury Wills. I know expressing this won't convince you, probably. Nevertheless, as someone who grew up during Sandy's string of banner years, I well remember the press being mighty impressed with Mr. Koufax because he did not have a team of sluggers and better hitters behind him, yet was the most invincible hurler in MLB.
The same could be said for Nolan Ryan and Sam McDowell on that count. Cheers----Brian Powell |
Quote:
If you never watched Pedro pitch I understand your indifference. Talking about what YOU saw is a big part of passing down the game to people who didn't see a person play. You can analyze Bernie Williams's stats all you want and deduce he wasn't an elite player. But Yankee fans will always consider him a legend because they watched him play. There is room in discussion for these things. |
Quote:
I caught a knuckleball pitcher in my sophomore year in college, and one of his floaters that hit the dirt late bent back my index fingernail on my throwing hand which made me miss a few games. So I have a lot of respect for how hard it is to hit those things, or even track and block them when they suddenly dive. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
When someone like me says Grove was the best, that isn't saying Koufax was a bum. Although, actually, Koufax WAS a bum: |
At age 45, Phil Niekro threw 215 innings with a 3.09 ERA. His ERA+ was 123 that season. It isn't just about value, its about ability. How many players have the ability to be a better than average MLB player after age 40??
It doesn't mean he is better than Pedro in their prime, but while Niekro was showing the ability to be successful in MLB at age 45. Pedro was no better a MLB player than either you or I at that time. Pedro's last 314 innings in MLB produced an ERA of 4.58 and ERA+ of 94. He was done being an effective MLB pitcher by age 34. No longer employable by age 37. From age 40-48, Phil Niekro was capable of pitching 1,977 innings as MLB pitcher. His ERA+ during that time was 103, which means he was actually more effective than the average MLB pitcher during that time, and while averaging 220 innings per year in that span. Pedro Martinez was only able to throw over 220 innings in a season just two times in his career. Yet somehow Niekro gets penalized for this ability? Would Niekro be viewed as a better pitcher had he just stopped pitching after his first 2,216 innings...kind of like Koufax did? After Niekro's first 2,216 innings, Niekro's ERA sat at 2.91 with a 127 ERA+. That isn't too far off from Koufax when he retired after 2,324 innings and his ERA sat at 2.76 with a 131 ERA+. At what point does Niekro then get positive credit for being able to throw ANOTHER 3,181 innings at a rate better than a league average pitcher?? In fact, in his next 3,000+ innings, Nikero's ERA+ was 109. For comparison, Catfish Hunter had 3,449 career innings with an ERA+ of 104(worse than Niekro's). So in essence, Niekro had TWO careers, the first part nearly equal to Koufax's lifetime rate, and the second part better than Catfish Hunter's lifetime rate. That's two HOF careers rolled into one for Niekro. Give Niekro his due. It doesn't make him better than Pedro in his prime...but it is an ABILITY to do what Niekro did and it provided a VALUE to MLB and the teams he played on. |
Quote:
Lol. You know, I think we better notify MLB and Cooperstown. Imagine this ruse being perpetrated for over 50 years! This whole thing has caused me to revisit a number of topics. It seems that Superstorm Sandy wasn't really that bad of a storm, because once it made landfall, it's maximum sustained winds were only around 75 mph. And conscious changes to approach just don't matter. Grant and Sherman's more aggressive pursuit of the South had nothing to do with bringing the Civil War to a successful conclusion for the North. |
Quote:
Nice strawman. Koufax would have been a marginal HOFer had his home park not been Dodger Stadium. Obviously that is the same as saying he was a bum. If he doesn't have the injury and is able to have a few more really good years, even without Dodger Stadium helping him he is a first ballot HOFer. The fact is that he was greatly helped by his home field AND he had an unfortunately too short prime due to injury. Even with his shortened career, "Road Only Koufax" still likely would have been a marginal HOFer. So with everything going against him he still likely would have been in. But that's not the debate of this thread. The debate here is greatest lefty ever. Koufax road stats tell me even in his prime you cannot make that case, let alone the fact that his prime was so tragically short. Now go find another strawman to argue against. And don't let your dumb show so easily it's unbecoming. |
I`m going with Grove basically from what`s been written and the praising of him from some of the greatest hitters of all time. Koufax had one of the greatest stretches ever, but there has to be something said about longevity. On a side note the 2 "must see" hurlers over my past 50 years of being a fan, Ryan and Pedro. When Pedro had a start here in Boston it was must see T V.
|
Exactly!!
"The debate here is greatest lefty ever. Koufax road stats tell me even in his prime you cannot make that case, let alone the fact that his prime was so tragically short."
NO ONE has said Koufax wasn't an amazing pitcher in his prime. Greatest ever, that's a completely different kettle o' fish. |
Quote:
Because of course. |
Quote:
What's with the attitude and why make things personal? First of all, he wasn't quoting you and his post came after a number of other posts, some of which were supporting the idea of numbers over "feelings". No one was saying you called Koufax a bum. But it's disingenuous to say that you're not knocking Koufax when you use say things like his "video game numbers were a product of his park" and "Chavez Ravine aided Koufax is a legend". While Koufax's contemporaries (Drysdale, Podres, etc.) may have had home/away splits that show they did better at home, they don't come close to his numbers. He had to be a damn good pitcher to post those numbers. I have argued on this thread that he changed his approach and style before he pitched in Chavez, and that if he hadn't done that, he would not have done as well as he did at home or on the road during the 1963-1966 run. |
Quote:
|
It's Grove
This just absolutely seals it for me. It's Grove. Also glad to see Plank made the top 5.
Quote:
|
Sandy Koufax first year HOF eligible he got 86.9% of the vote
Randy Johnson first year HOF eligible he got 97.3% of the vote The Big Unit baby!!!! |
Quote:
It's ok to knock someone without disagreeing that the player was tremendous. If bringing up facts "knocks" a player so be it. Koufax was a very good pitcher regardless of where he pitched. Quite possibly the best in baseball over that five year period even after adjusting for park factors. That said, the park is the reason he isn't just thought of as a borderline HOFer. That is simply a statistical fact. He put up really good numbers away from Dodger Stadium. Maybe the best in the sport over that period. But when you add his Dodger Stadium numbers he became other worldly. He did put up video game numbers at home over this period. His splits are insane. It's a statistical fact that is rarely brought up with him for some reason. He must have figured something out. Even away from Chavez he became likely the best in the sport for the next five year period. That is also statistical fact. It is possible to understand that, and to understand that he likely would have been a HOFer even if his home games weren't where they were, while also understanding that he isn't the untouchable demi-god statistically that everyone wants him to be. He was a better pitcher than his Dodger teammates. Over that five year period he probably was the best in the sport just doubling his road numbers. But his home road splits are what they are and I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and pretend they don't make any difference at all. Because they absolutely do. |
Quote:
While his home ERA was 0.85. That is not a typo. 2.93 vs 0.85 But sure. Nothing to see here. |
You guys lost me at Phil Niekro.
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk |
Randy Johnson
1 Attachment(s)
His numbers AFTER his 35th birthday:
103-49 with a 2.65 ERA Like a fine wine, he got better with age.......not fall apart. Ya'll can stop arguing, The Unit takes it! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
As far as 1965, Koufax 2.04 ERA Marichal 2.13, Koufax 26 wins, Marichal 22, W/L% Koufax .765% Marichal .629, WHIP Koufax .855 Marichal .914, H/9 Koufax 5.792 Marichal 6.826, K/9 Koufax 10.242 Marichal 7.314, IP 335.2 Marichal 295.1, Ks Koufax 382 Marichal 240 CG Koufax 27 Marichal 24 K/BB Koufax 5.380 Marichal 5.217 FIP Koufax 1.93 Marichal 2.59. All led the NL. Marichal led in shutouts 10-8, BB/9 1.402 -1.904 and your favorite ERA+ 169-160. This is pretty obvious in Koufax’s favor thus Koufax was the unanimous Cy Young winner. Even the Giants writers voted Koufax. Koufax also led in fWAR 10.0 to Marichal 6.8 although somehow bWAR had Marichal led 10.3 to 8.1 showing how worthless WAR really is. In 1965 Marichal leads Koufax by 169-160 in ERA+ and that translates into 10.3-8.1 spread in bWAR despite Koufax pitching more inning, setting a record for strikeouts in a season, having a better WHIP, FIP, etc. Yet in 1964 Koufax leads Drysdale in ERA+ 186-147, 41% as well as WHIP and FIP, but Drysdale pitches more innings and has more strikeouts so he has a higher b WAR 7.8-7.3. These stats are just made up, there is no transparency and they makes absolutely no sense. I have been asking for years for someone to give a scientific explanation and I get nothing. I am not a sheep. I think for myself. I am not going to accept something just because someone says trust me. The only stats that are reliable are ones based in math and scientific method, the ones that have reason and can be calculated. That is why I go by ERA, WHIP and FIP. They say Koufax is the best lefty and the only one close is Kershaw. If he was even decent in postseason, one could make a case, but his dreadful 9 postseason history make it impossible to pick him. Some might want longevity of an above average pitcher,l but I am taking Koufax’s 12 years with 5-6 years of brilliance and championships over 20+ of good but never great and not winning because of it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
/
|
Quote:
BR has his home/road ERA splits as 0.85 vs 2.93 so I am sticking with that. Just about every advanced metric has Marichal ahead. RA9 2.38 vs 2.41. RAopp 3.98 vs 3.99. RA9def -0.02 vs 0.30 (Koufax had a much better defense behind him that year), PPFg 102.5 vs 93 (Here is that dreaded park factor. Koufax benefitted greatly, Marichal was hurt by his), RA9avg 4.17 vs 3.49 (What an average pitcher would do against these opponents, in these parks, with these defenses...massive massive stat), RAA 58 vs 40, WAA 7.4 vs 4.9, RAR 86 vs 72, waaWL% .690 vs .613. Marichal was better. I understand the writers wouldn't have known this back in the day. Most don't know it now. But it's simply true. Koufax had an obscene park factor in 1965 coupled with a well above average performing defense that year. Marichal had a park detriment that year and a very slightly below average performing defense behind him. Edit: I see you meant Chance splits not Koufax. My bad. The fact that Chance played in Koufax home ballpark, however, does help to prove my point though. Thanks for that. |
Quote:
|
Billy Wagner..
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'd agree that Lefty Grove is probably the best of all time but I can't believe that Whitey Ford has hardly had a mention.
- Ten-time MLB All-Star - 6 World Series titles - Cy Young Award and the World Series MVP in 1961 He was the number 1 pitcher for the Yankees for years in a team filled with stars. He was absolutely a pitcher you'd want in a high-pressure game. I'd certainly have Whitey Ford way above Randy Johnson in my rankings and tied with Sandy Koufax My top 5 Lefties list is: 1. Lefty Grove 2. Sandy Koufax/Whitey Ford 3. Warren Spahn 4. Steve Carlton |
Quote:
It has been noted that Drysdale and Podres' pitching splits show that they enjoyed better home E.R.A.'s. However, neither pitcher's E.R.A. were consistently as low as Koufax's. Drysdale posted great home E.R.A.'s, and his amazing run of six shutouts in 1968, four of which were at home, really lowered his home E.R.A. that year. But with the exception of that year, his home E.R.A.'s were all in the 2.00's. Not too shabby, but not challenging what Koufax's were. Podres, while also posting better E.R.A.'s at home in 1962 and 1963, his 1963 E.R.A. split was 3.49/3.60 (home/away). The numbers show that Koufax was one hell of a pitcher, as no Dodger pitcher achieved what he did at Chavez Ravine. You have to be great to pitch as well as he did at Chavez. No other Dodger was posting 0.85. Dean Chance had his great year there in 1964, for sure. Chance's E.R.A.'s at Chavez were always better than on the road. His home E.R.A. pitching split in 1962 was 2.76/3.22. 1963 was 2.96/3.45. And 1965 again, and here it really is significant, his home E.R.A. was 2.33/4/15. Chavez factor duly acknowledged. The Angels move out of Chavez for 1966, and for the first time, his away E.R.A. is higher. So Chavez is a factor. But I argue that Koufax's numbers show that he was great even if there is that factor. No one consistently posted stronger E.R.A.'s at Chavez than Koufax. His strikeout totals also speak to his dominance. And the idea that Koufax was less than stellar on the road, takes a significant hit when you go out with a 1.96 away E.R.A. Koufax was a great pitcher in Chavez Ravine, but not because of Chavez Ravine. |
Quote:
And also nobody is arguing about Koufax vs Drysdale or Podres and that isn't the standard of this thread anyway. This is about best ever. All I am saying is that Koufax was a great pitcher, likely a Hall of Famer simply for his road performance, but that he was GREATLY helped by his home park. Those years you speak of, that legendary five year performance, was a perfect storm of immense talent meeting a way to harness and control said talent coupled with the opening of one of the best pitchers parks in the history of baseball. All three were the reason for those unbelievable seasons but only the first two are ever mentioned. |
Ya know, Tom, I get what you are saying in regard to Sandy Koufax being greatly helped by his home stadium. However, the way you're stressing the issue, you would think Walter O'Malley designed his beautiful ball field with Don and Sandy in mind. Following your line of belief, ANY opposing pitcher would have been greatly helped by pitching in Chavez Ravine. How much do we throw away players' careers then?
Guys have whined that Roger Maris would not have broken Babe Ruth's record if Mickey Mantle was not looming in the on-deck circle. For that matter, Yankee Stadium WAS designed to benefit Babe Ruth. So, do we throw out Babe Ruth too? Ernie Banks had the benefit of batting in the friendly confines of Wrigley Field. So, do we throw him out of the HOF because he had it too easy? All those spitball pitchers that relied on their humid ball when it was perfectly legal----do we throw them out of the HOF because they should not have done such dastardly pitching. The nerve of them!!!!! You guys can isolate all the baseball dope isotope you want, ad nauseam. I fully realize the OP insisted he believes Sandy Koufax was the greatest left-handed pitcher of all time. Well, I seem to remember the eloquent words of the late Vin Skully as he reminesced about Mr. Koufax in Ken Burns history of baseball. Vin convinced me; Koufax was the greatest lefty, period. Maybe he only had six seasons of greatness, but that was enough for Skully, and that's enough for me. --- Brian Powell P.S. I well remember upon the announcement in the spring of 1969 that Mickey Mantle was retiring, the esteemed Chicago Tribune sports editor, Dave Condon, penned a glowing tribute to Mickey, and said he believed that Mantle was the greatest Yankee of all time. It wasn't as if Mr. Condon had only seen Mick play a few times. How much he had seen the Babe play in his prime, I don't know; however, he was fully aware of what he was writing, putting Mick above the Babe. I suppose, in the end, on Net54baseball we have a hot stove league going on 365 days a year! |
Not saying anything gets "tossed out". It's all about context. Larry Walker is now a HOFer. What is the first thing you hear when that gets brought up?
"Yeah but....". And it's true. Context matters. What I am asking is...where's the "yeah but" for Koufax? Statistically speaking, his home/road splits over that five year period might be even more extreme than those of Walker. But there never is a "Yeah but" with him. And there should be. Great talent. Unbelievable pitcher for five years. Obvious HOFer. Strikeout numbers that make your head spin. Yeah but... |
Quote:
As far as the Kirby Puckett allusion, we don't need to know "what if" with Koufax. Yes, it would have been great if he had been able to compete longer. But he established himself as a Hall-of-Famer in the time he played. Given how much better he was at home than his Dodger contemporaries at the time, doubling Koufax's road numbers is unnecessary to justify his induction into the Hall. |
I'll just add to all my other statements on this thread, that while the topic is "Who Was The Greatest Lefty?", during the discussion, I felt Koufax's greatness was being made into a caricature, which is to do this legendary pitcher a disservice.
|
It's ok, Tom. Let's face it, bro, if you put each HOFer under the hot lamp of scrutiny, the far majority of them would have a context that shadows their career.
I remember being so furious when the powers that be elected Chicago Cub great Ron Santo to the Hall of Fame about a year after the poor man died. Ron had so wanted to be elected while he was still alive to enjoy it. I penned a strong piece about the matter, as well as my rich memories of Ron, that Sports Collectors Digest ran. The crux of my article was that Ron Santo should have been a first ballot unanimous Hall of Famer due to the fact he played his entire career with Type I blood sugar diabetes. Before I got to see a photo of Santo's HOF plaque, I wrote that his plaque should say loud and clear he played at the all-star level even though he was afflicted with diabetes that required his constant attention and care. Months after I wrote my Santo article, I saw his plaque. They did him right in expressing his "context" in the first sentence. Well done. "YEAH, BUT" ya should've elected Ron Santo when he was alive, stupid! Happy collecting, fellas. Try to keep cool in these dog days of summer.;) --- Brian Powell |
Quote:
He was a great pitcher over those five years regardless of where he pitched. But he is immortal because of the combination of that talent and his home stadium. His home/road splits over that five year period are obscene. They would make Larry Walker blush. And for the millionth time is likely a Hall of Famer even with taking his home park away from his numbers. He was a great pitcher. Yeah but... |
I cannot fathom why the Koufax side is still arguing against strawmans they have made up instead of what has directly and explicitly been argued over and over again. Nobody has said any of Koufax’s teammates were better, or that he is not a HOFer. Not even 1 post has alleged any of this. He is simply not the best lefty all time by any reasonable measure, and his numbers are heavily inflated by time and place in a way few others have been. It is exceptionally difficult to find pitchers who have such drastic road/home gaps. The stars aligned for Koufax, widening the strike zone, expansion creating terrible teams he (and his contemporaries) beat up on, pitching in the most pitcher friendly park in the most pitcher friendly context in the last century of baseball. He still had to deliver, and did so. He had 4 great years that’s not a single person herein denies. There is a difference between not being the best ever and a total bum, as has been pointed out numerous times. This is growing into complete absurdity with increasingly ridiculous strawmans that have absolutely nothing to do with the question of the thread or what those who don’t think 4 years of Koufax triumphs guys with equal peaks and double the longevity have actually said.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Whitey was very good but he wasn't even a first ballot HOFer, 2nd greatest lefty of all time? No way. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I suppose it depends on the criteria you use. Strikeouts or absolute wins are great stats but they I'd argue that wins % is the better stat here. At .690 Ford has the best winning percentage of any lefty in history. I'd argue that winning games is THE most important stat. Ford's stats would have been even better but Casey Stengel used to save Ford for big games. So Ford didn't get as many games in the rotation. So not only did Ford not get as many opportunities, when he did pitch he was pitching against the toughest opposition. That makes his win percentage even more remarkable. Johnson might have more strikeouts but he still allowed runs. That doesn't do the team a lot of good. Whitey Ford would let batters get on first on second but not to home plate. Ford averaged 2.22 hits per game vs Johnson's 2.76 Ford's career ERA of 2.75 is way better than Johnson's 3.29 In a 16 year major league career, Ford posted an ERA under 3.00 in 11 of those seasons. Ford's career 2.75 ERA is the 2nd lowest of starting pitchers in the live-ball era. Ford was consistent throughout his career. Ford had a 1.64 ERA in 1967 (his final season). While Johnson posted a 4.32 ERA in his last 5 seasons. Johnson's. |
/
|
yes
What G1911 said.... +++
Mr Koufax was a great, dominant, Hall of Fame caliber pitcher. He falls just a tad bit short of the Lefty ever. I saw Koufax pitch... and Spahn and R Johnson and A Pettitte and S Carlton... I still think Lefty Grove was the best. Whitey Ford has been mentioned. My understanding (based on what I think I've read, heard and maybe dreamed) was that the Yankee management didn't want him winning 20+ games a season (he only did twice) was because management didn't want his wins thrown out at them as a reason to justify a salary increase. A biproduct was that Jim Turner and Casey Stengel wanted him rested for important games. I think Mr. Ford was a great pitcher, but would you really to pick him to win a game for you if you had Grove, Koufax, Spahn, ro R Johnson rested and ready on the bench? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
RJ blows Whitey off the map. Go back to your tea and crumpets! |
Quote:
Whether I've been corrupted by tea and crumpets or simply suffered long term damage from too many fully loaded hot dogs and pretzels at Yankee Stadium - I can't say. Ford, Koufax and Spahn were just before my time but I was well schooled by my father and uncles. I really love Sandy Koufax but I have to admit that I have a soft spot for Whitey. I think he's hugely under-rated (clearly not everyone agrees). FrankWakefield, I've heard similar stories about Whitey. Based on recordings of old games that I've watched, stats and interviews - my dream team lefty pitching rota would start with Grove, Koufax Ford, Spahn and Carlton long before I'd go to Johnson. |
I don't think Whitey is the greatest, or the second greatest, but he deserves more consideration than he usually gets.
I think his .690 winning percentage is a poor argument, because it is largely a reflection that he played on a team that was, by several miles, the best in the league for most of his career. However, Ford's 2.75 ERA, a 133 ERA+ over 3,100 innings is quite impressive and has nothing to do with his team. In fact, if the stories are true that Stengel really did tend to save Ford to face the better teams in the league (I haven't done an in depth check of the game logs), his ERA is hurt by this and still exceptional. 133 ERA+ is 29th all time, and many of those ahead are relief pitchers that I would argue should be considered in a separate category. Even in his waning years, his ERA is fantastic. He posts a 3.24 in his last full season, his poorest showing as this looks excellent but was only 5% better than the league that year, and then his last 2 partial seasons he posts 135 and 192 ERA+'s. His peak years are great, though his famous 1961 is actually one of his worst seasons, 25-4 is amazing but his percentages are not. Again, pitching for a team that annihilated the league with ease makes his record highly misleading. 3,170 innings is not very many in the context of all-time rankings and hurts him greatly, I think. At his best, he is equal to Spahn and his averages are a good deal better in many ways, but Spahn must rank over him for pitching 2,000 more innings and doing so very effectively. Johnson should rank better, Plank is probably ahead on innings. Grove and Hubbell are ahead, I think. I'm not sure I'd take Carlton over Ford with Carlton's inconsistency and Ford's clocklike consistency. I have a very difficult time seeing why he barely squeaked into the Hall. He is not the best ever, but he has always appeared as an obvious hall of famer to me. Easy top 10 lefty, I think. |
Quote:
ERA+: Johnson - 135 Ford - 133 I don't much care about winning % since it's a team stat and Ford pitched for loaded teams. I mean, his winning % went down from 65-67... The "Casey held him back for big games" also doesn't hold much water to me. If anything, that's a negative against Ford. That's Stengel saying "yeah, this guy isn't durable enough to pitch regularly." The "he was saving Ford" argument also loses weight when you realize that Ford had multiple relief appearances almost every season until Houk came along. Johnson pitched 1000 more innings than Ford, while simultaneously maintaining a higher ERA+. He led his league in ERA+ 6 times, Ford just once. Johnson also won 4 ERA titles to 2 for Ford. If you like WAR - I'm not exactly a fan - then Ford's BEST season would be Randy's EIGHTH best. Ford's postseason heroics are often cited but he had an ERA over 4.00 in over half (6 of 11) his postseasons. Randy was over 4.00 in 5 of his 11. Randy also had a lower FIP (3.19) than Ford (3.26), while leading the league 6 times to Ford's 1. I honestly don't see much of a case for Ford over Johnson. Randy had a higher peak, pitched 1000 innings more, dominated more, and had a higher ERA+. |
"If anything, that's a negative against Ford. That's Stengel saying "yeah, this guy isn't durable enough to pitch regularly."
This is a reach. Ford proved his durability as soon as the Yankees let Stengel go. In Ford's first & third seasons w/o Stengel as his manager he led the league in IP & over his last five seasons he led in total IP. |
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlcpDVlsJjg 40 years old.....97 mph.....Perfect! Tally Ho! |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:47 PM. |