Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

League-wide batting average in the 1940's was .275, 1950's .276, 1960's .272, 1970's .272 and 1980's .273.

This myth that the 1960's was a desert of great hitting league wide is just that. There was, in essence, one anomalous year, at which time Koufax was already retired (can you imagine what he would've done that year???)

I'm not saying this makes Koufax the greatest lefty of all time. I am merely pointing out a fallacy that seems to persist for some reason not even remotely backed up by facts.

All of this isn't true. I'm looking at the data on baseball reference right now, and the highest major league BA for any year in the 1960s was .258. The stretch from 1963-1972 had the lowest runs scored in the league for any time period in the entire live ball era.

It's not a myth that offense was at a low point in the '60s.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

All of this isn't true. I'm looking at the data on baseball reference right now, and the highest major league BA for any year in the 1960s was .258. The stretch from 1963-1972 had the lowest runs scored in the league for any time period in the entire live ball era.

It's not a myth that offense was at a low point in the '60s.

don't know where that graph I looked at was pulling it's info but you are closer to correct than I am. Still not exactly a dearth of great hitters, just your league average was lower.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

All of this isn't true. I'm looking at the data on baseball reference right now, and the highest major league BA for any year in the 1960s was .258. The stretch from 1963-1972 had the lowest runs scored in the league for any time period in the entire live ball era.

It's not a myth that offense was at a low point in the '60s.

Could it be that the pitching was superior? I can’t believe all the naysayers out there. Koufax was the most dominant pitcher of his time. His election to hall At such an early age proves that.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by cammb

Could it be that the pitching was superior? I can’t believe all the naysayers out there. Koufax was the most dominant pitcher of his time. His election to hall At such an early age proves that.

He was elected at an early age is because he retired young and was elected in his first year of eligibility.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by Jim65

He was elected at an early age is because he retired young and was elected in his first year of eligibility.

You are proving my point. If all you complain about is longevity why did the HOF committee elect him on first year of eligibility. There are a lot of players out there with several great seasons on their resume and are still waiting. The man was getting better every year until his injury. They recognized it, it's a shame a lot of you guys don't.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by cammb

You are proving my point. If all you complain about is longevity why did the HOF committee elect him on first year of eligibility. There are a lot of players out there with several great seasons on their resume and are still waiting. The man was getting better every year until his injury. They recognized it, it's a shame a lot of you guys don't.

Koufax career is very unique in the way it ended. The 4 years of dominance were still very fresh in voters minds when he was elected in his first year. If you flip his career and put those 4 dominant years at the beginning and his bad years at the end, he doesn't sniff the HOF and is the pitchers version of Don Mattingly.

[Mark17]

https://sabr.org/bioproj/person/lefty-grove/

Lefty Grove may have been baseball’s greatest all-time pitcher. He was certainly its most dominant. No one matched his nine ERA titles, and his .680 winning percentage (300-141) is the highest among 300 game winners (eighth best overall). After winning 111 games in a minor-league career that delayed his major-league debut until he was 25, Grove led the American League in strikeouts his first seven years, pitched effectively in hitters’ parks (Shibe Park, Fenway Park) and starred in three World Series....

Moreover, Grove routinely struck out between 10 and 14 major leaguers in exhibition games (they may have been reluctant to dig in against him), told Babe Ruth “I’m not afraid of you,” and made good his boast by whiffing the Bambino in nine of 11 exhibition at-bats.

Grove was also elected to the HOF his first year of eligibility (unlike Spahn.)

[timn1]

No lefthander competes seriously with Grove.

Originally Posted by Mark17

https://sabr.org/bioproj/person/lefty-grove/

Lefty Grove may have been baseball’s greatest all-time pitcher. He was certainly its most dominant. No one matched his nine ERA titles, and his .680 winning percentage (300-141) is the highest among 300 game winners (eighth best overall). After winning 111 games in a minor-league career that delayed his major-league debut until he was 25, Grove led the American League in strikeouts his first seven years, pitched effectively in hitters’ parks (Shibe Park, Fenway Park) and starred in three World Series....

Moreover, Grove routinely struck out between 10 and 14 major leaguers in exhibition games (they may have been reluctant to dig in against him), told Babe Ruth “I’m not afraid of you,” and made good his boast by whiffing the Bambino in nine of 11 exhibition at-bats.

Grove was also elected to the HOF his first year of eligibility (unlike Spahn.)

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Koufax career is very unique in the way it ended. The 4 years of dominance were still very fresh in voters minds when he was elected in his first year. If you flip his career and put those 4 dominant years at the beginning and his bad years at the end, he doesn't sniff the HOF and is the pitchers version of Don Mattingly.

Mattingly's legacy may be a bigger testament to Yankee lore than any of his legendary predecessors there (which is obviously saying something).

A very good lefty line-drive .300 hitter with gap pop and a shortened career. Whose splits show that Yankee Stadium turned plenty of doubles into short porch homers (he likely wouldn't reached 200 lifetime HRs playing anywhere else).

Sure he was one of the best few hitters in the league for a few years, but even then his numbers didn't dominate anywhere near like Koufax's prime did. The fact that many people consider him an "almost" HOF guy, and that he got 28% of the vote at first, is pretty unreal.

Playing for the Yankees turned him from being Magglio Ordonez into one of the most memorable baseball names of a generation. When I get reincarnated into a top baseball prospect, I'm holding out for pinstripes

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Koufax career is very unique in the way it ended. The 4 years of dominance were still very fresh in voters minds when he was elected in his first year. If you flip his career and put those 4 dominant years at the beginning and his bad years at the end, he doesn't sniff the HOF and is the pitchers version of Don Mattingly.

I missed Don Mattingly winning 3 triple crowns, 2 WS MVPs, leading the league in most statistical categories several seasons etc. if Mattingly had been as good as Koufax for a 5-6 year peak, he would have been a first ballot Hofer too. Look at Black Ink, which is a player leading the league in statistical categories. Koufax in his short career has 78 which is almost double what a Hof pitcher has for a career. Mattingly only has 23 which is less than the average a Hof hitter. That is why he is still waiting for the HOF. He just wasn’t that dominant at his peak.

[alaskapaul3]

Can we all at least agree that Ed Morris was the best 19th century lefty ? or is someone going Frank Killen or Matt Kilroy on us ?

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by rats60

I missed Don Mattingly winning 3 triple crowns, 2 WS MVPs, leading the league in most statistical categories several seasons etc. if Mattingly had been as good as Koufax for a 5-6 year peak, he would have been a first ballot Hofer too. Look at Black Ink, which is a player leading the league in statistical categories. Koufax in his short career has 78 which is almost double what a Hof pitcher has for a career. Mattingly only has 23 which is less than the average a Hof hitter. That is why he is still waiting for the HOF. He just wasn’t that dominant at his peak.

C’mon man, there is literally no quantifiable metric to suggest Koufax had the greatest left-handed pitching career. You know the pitching triple crown is far more common than the hitting triple crown (more than 2x as common). The Koufax people in this thread have relied on 2 things only... peak performance and anecdotal evidence. Sorry a pitcher that has the same WAR and almost identical innings pitched as Ron Guidry isn’t gonna get the nod.

[maniac_73]

Originally Posted by jim65

koufax career is very unique in the way it ended. The 4 years of dominance were still very fresh in voters minds when he was elected in his first year. If you flip his career and put those 4 dominant years at the beginning and his bad years at the end, he doesn't sniff the hof and is the pitchers version of don mattingly.

lol

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by cammb

Could it be that the pitching was superior? I can’t believe all the naysayers out there. Koufax was the most dominant pitcher of his time. His election to hall At such an early age proves that.

Yeah, the way I look at it, if the offense was "down" it wasn't because of any shortcomings on the part of the hitters, it was just that the pitching was THAT good. And if any players from other eras had had the chance to hit against the pitching of the 60's they wouldn't necessarily have done any better.

Ultimately, you can't really compare eras, although it's a lot of fun. Would batting averages have been as high as they were during the early days if the fielders back then used modern gloves? Would the pitching of the 1960's have been even more effective if they were using the dead ball of the early days? Would night baseball and traveling had any effect on the earlier generation's numbers? How would the dimensions of the ballparks had an effect on play?

I don't think you can say that Koufax getting the Cy Young awards and his early election to the hall, proves that he was "the greatest". But those honors attest to the universal acclaim and high esteem in which he was held by those who saw him play day to day at that time.

I understand the longevity argument in naming a GOAT. But I think what is missing from some of the analysis on this thread, is a respect for what Koufax actually DID. First of all, it wasn't just his record and his numbers, but it was HOW he attained those numbers. He wasn't a junk ball pitcher who was extremely effective. The guy was a force of nature on the mound. Maybe he could have stuck around longer if he learned the knuckleball, or concentrated on throwing off-speed stuff, thus easing up on his arm. But he continued to pitch the way he pitched. Also, to go out ON TOP as he did, was unheard of. Most athletes have their great years and then begin a slide. What Koufax did reminds me of the home run that Mantle hit which almost went out of the stadium in 1963. It was still rising when it hit the facade. (And yes, I do know that it's possible that Josh Gibson may have actually hit one out of the original Yankee Stadium, and that Frank Howard might have as well one foggy evening.)

I have argued that Koufax's success is largely attributable to his own natural talent and the change he made in his approach to his pitching he made in 1961.

The arguments that I think are most pathetic on this thread are the ones pointing to the first several years of Koufax's career. as some kind of detriment. Koufax left that pitcher behind. Yeah, he had a longer apprenticeship than many of the players we think of as greats. But it shouldn't be used against him. The fact that it was longer, and that after it, he found himself and did achieve greatness, is something that should be in his favor.

Yes, the larger strike zone was beneficial to all the pitchers of the time, and Chavez Ravine was a good park to pitch in. But no other contemporary Dodger pitcher achieved what Koufax achieved. The quotes I've seen by the greatest hitters of that era, don't say that he was the greatest of all time, but the greatest of THAT time. Or if they don't say he was the greatest of that time, they say things that let us know that he was not just another great pitcher. There WAS something special about Koufax.