Quote:
Originally Posted by 999Tony
If Babe Ruth's pitching career hadn't been tragically cut short at about age 24, wouldn't he have been the best lefty ever? Incredible post season performances, and he would have had a great number more. He contributed a bunch of extra value from his hitting during his pitching years, and likely would have continued to do so even if he remained primarily a pitcher, whereas somebody like Koufax for example of course is famous for his absolutely terrible hitting (gotta subtract a bit for his lifetime 097 average).
Of course, Ruth is sadly a what might have been, I realize he cannot be in the discussion except for one of the best single pitching years ever --1916 --when factoring in batting and world series performance. And since it was Ruth who insisted on playing every day, he is not blameless in this tragic decision that may have deprived everyone of the greatest lefthanded pitcher in history.
|
Based on the statistical methods put forth by the Koufax camp, Ruth already is a better lefty than Koufax....don't even have to deal in what if.
ERA
Ruth 2.28
Koufax 2.76
Winning Percentage
Ruth .671
Koufax .655
World Series
Ruth 3-0 with a 0.87 ERA
Koufax 4-3 with a 0.95 ERA
Innings or career length don't matter in the Koufax statistical camp method. Nor does context of ballpark or league scoring environment.
Therefore, based on the methods put forth by the Koufax camp, Ruth already is a better left handed pitcher.