Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
You go right on advocating for a guy with a 4.04 ERA then. You're doing a great job of convincing us that the voters of the last 70 years just didn't know what to look for. Where does Bill James rank him by the way, that would be interesting, I thought I had his book handy but can't find it.
|
Good question, Peter. Bill James ranks Ferrell #40 among pitchers, and EVERY pitcher ahead of him except Carl Mays at #38 is already in the HOF. (Mays might well be in there too if not for that little incident...) Ferrell is ranked just above a bunch more guys who are also in the HOF.
I don't argue that Ferrell was an efficient pitcher (neither was Nolan Ryan). He gave up lots of hits and walks in an era where almost everybody did, and still managed to post a .600 PCT and go 65 games over .500 while never pitching for a pennant winner. His strikeouts were probably league average or above for the era, and he gave up very few HRs. Oh, and the three years he led the league in hits allowed he also led in IP, so let's don't go crazy over that stat.
Do you realize how many HOF pitchers are NOT 65 games over par, even with many more decisions? And how few of them are at .600? (Look at Drysdale, for cryin out loud. That gaudy ERA and pitching for strong teams in Dodger Stadium didn't help him get more than 43 games over.)
Don't even get me started on some of these guys.... Marquard? - 24 games over .500 while playing for pretty good teams. Basically a .500 pitcher who had one good hot streak. His PW (Player Wins) rating is actually below 0!! Koufax's PW is at 22, as is Dizzy Dean's. Ferrell is at 31 (again, probably the highest of almost any 20th-century pitcher not in HOF).
To explain Ferrell as having 8 years of unbroken good luck makes little sense to me. The guy knew how to win.