Quote:
Originally Posted by HistoricNewspapers
Wrong because you are picking Koufax based on those statistics resulting from the low run scoring environment, not based on his abilities.
You also forget the key measurement from those years, ERA+
Johnson 187
Koufax 172
So again, Johnson had a better peak, a longer peak, and a vastly better career. Johnson was also better in every physical measurement and tool. Mentally better too because he didn't quit. Johnson was better. Period.
For example, the environment in the NL in 1965 created a league where the league average ERA was 3.54. Compared to 2001 where it was 4.36.
So what you are saying is that half the pitchers in the league in 1965 were better than every National League pitcher in 2001, except for the 12 in 2001 who who were able to have an ERA below 3.54(the league average of the NL in 1965)?
I guess Vern Law with his 2.15 ERA that year was ALSO better than Randy Johnson and his 2.49 ERA in 2001?
Also the dozens of pitchers with more complete games were better than Johnson too??
From 1964-1968 Joe Horlen had 2.32 ERA. Hmmm.
Seems like there are plenty of choices of low ERA's from that time to choose from, other than Koufax. Can't quite be that dominant if several other players offer similar output
Put Horlen in the HOF I guess.
It is the environment creating those statistics..
Also, Dodger Stadium was responsible for 15-20% of those numbers from Koufax. Again, the environment.
Just because the league was easy to pitch in in the 1960's doesn't make you better. If you flip that around and compare the hitters from the era's without understanding the context, then you are going to get a lot of Colorado players with better peaks than several Hall of Famers from the 1960's.
Vinny Castilla, Hall of Fame, here we come I guess.
Vinny Castilla 162 game average from 1996-1999
41 HR
120 RBI
.301 BA
Ellis Burks 162 game average from 1994-1997
39 HR
110 RBI
.311 BA
Todd Helton 2000-2003
40 HR
133 RBI
.349 BA
Dante Bichette 1995-1999
33 HR
137 RBI
.318 BA
Those guys are in a dead heat with Willie Mays from the 1960's. Mays and Aaron are the only ones from the 1960's that can compete with them.
Nobody else from the 1960's can match those peaks.
So if you are going to hold tight to looking at Koufax without the context of the league or stadium, that is fine.
Just don't forget to do the same with the Colorado group above.
If you are out there selecting a team, please let me know if you have two pitchers with equal mental capacity, and one is ten inches taller than the other, throws 5-7 MPH harder, has better command, better movement, and more physical mental toughness in pitching through pain.
I'll take the taller kid. You can have the other one.
|
Just sayin, Rats has already addressed these arguments:
the 60's has weaker hitting stats because the pitching was so good, although there are incredible hitters that Koufax had to face.
there really isn't a difference between eras, except of course the actual dead ball era, so comparing pitchers is linear post-1920
Don't be bringin' ERA+ or any other of those made-up BS stats, the only ones that count are WHIP, ERA, and strikeouts. Except, of course, when Kershaw is mentioned because he outperforms in all categories (in the vaccuum of "there is no difference between eras"). Then we move on to post-season performance.