Future HOFers

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As for Koufax, his three best WARs were 10.7 10.3 and 8.1. Kershaw's best is 7.8. Numbers don't tell the whole story, and certainly not one number, but that's a pretty good barometer of relative dominance. Koufax at his peak was even better.

Was he?

I think WAR is good for comparing players within the same era. I think it is far less useful when comparing players from different eras.

Let's look at the last five years of both pitchers. 1962 to 1966 for Koufax, and 2011 to 2015 for Kershaw (which is not yet completed, but it's close enough).

One thing we have to remember is that a pitcher's wins, or more specifically, his win percentage, is a component of WAR. A pitcher can pitch great, and yet if his team doesn't score runs in support of his efforts, he might not get a win. Earlier I referenced what a shame it is that Kershaw doesn't win more. It's obviously not because he doesn't pitch well. I would imagine it's a lack of run support, in part. Let's compare some numbers.

You said that Kershaw's best WAR is 7.8. Koufax has three seasons better from a WAR standpoint: in 1963 (10.7), 1966 (10.3), and 1965 (8.1). In those three seasons, Koufax won 25, 27 and 26 games. In the five year period, Koufax was 111-34, a .766 win pct. He averaged more wins per season (22) than Clayton Kershaw's best win total in any of his five years (21 in both 2011 and 2014). Kershaw, in his near five years, is 82-32, a .719 win pct, and an average of 16 wins a season. Kershaw has started 151 games to Koufax's 176.

When individual metrics are compared side by side, I don't see anything else that would explain the huge difference in WAR.

ERA:
Koufax 1.95
Kershaw 2.14

Strikeouts per 9 IP:
Koufax 9.4
Kershaw 9.8

Walks per 9 IP:
Koufax 2.1
Kershaw 1.9

Strikeout to BB ratio:
Koufax 4.57
Kershaw 5.04

WHIP:
Koufax 0.926
Kershaw 0.942

Hits per 9 IP:
Koufax 6.3
Kershaw 6.5

ERA +:
Koufax 167
Kershaw 171

Home runs allowed per 9 IP:
Koufax 0.6
Kershaw 0.5

Their numbers are really, really close, aren't they? They give up about the same number of hits and walks per game, Kershaw strikes out batters slightly more often often. Koufax has a better ERA, but relative to the rest of the league at the time they played, Kershaw's ERA + is slightly better.

The difference in WAR? Koufax pitched at a time when complete games were far more common (100 for him, only 18 for Kershaw). That leads to a huge discrepancy in innings pitched:

Koufax 1,377
Kershaw 1,072.

By the time this season is done, Koufax will still have thrown about 250 more innings, which breaks down to about 50 per year. So, while Koufax was allowed to stay in, and pitch a whole game, Kershaw gets pulled out, and his it is the responsibility of his bullpen to preserve the lead, and ultimately get Kershaw the win. Poor bullpen performance means ultimately fewer wins for the pitcher, affecting the starter's winning percentage, and WAR.

Look at Kershaw's 2013 season. He started 33 games, had a 1.83 ERA (best in the NL), and won only 16 games. Look at some of the dominant starts he had where he didn't get a win:

May 3rd vs San Francisco, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-1.
May 8th vs Arizona, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 3-2.
June 10th vs Arizona, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 5-4.
June 15th vs Pittsburgh, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers win 5-3.
July 31st vs New York Yankees, 8 IP, 0 earned runs allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 3-0.
September 8th vs Cincinnati, 7 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-3.

6 starts, 43 innings pitched, 6 earned runs allowed. Kershaw had a 1.26 ERA across these six starts, and got nothing to show for it. The Dodgers scored 11 runs. Kershaw, on average, got 1.83 runs support per game. The Dodger bullpen? They gave up 12 runs in 14 innings.

Then there are some of the games he lost:

August 6th vs St. Louis, 6 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. Dodgers lose 5-1.
August 27th vs Chicago Cubs, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. Dodgers lose 3-2.
September 13th vs San Francisco, 7 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. Dodgers lose 4-2.

Clayton Kershaw should have won 20 games easily in 2013, if not more. But his bullpen was awful in the games he started, and he didn't get any run support in many of his games.

Compare Kershaw's 2013 season to Sandy Koufax's 1963 season. Koufax won 25 games, and again, Kershaw won 16.

Kershaw had 33 starts. Koufax 40. Kershaw's ERA was 1.83. Koufax's ERA was 1.88.

The Dodgers scored 125 runs, or 3.79 RPG, for Kershaw's 33 starts.
The Dodgers scored 172 runs, or 4.30 RPG, for Koufax's 40 starts.

The Dodgers scored 2 or fewer runs in 17 of Kershaw's 33 starts (51.5%)
The Dodgers scored 2 or fewer runs in 12 of Koufax's 40 starts (30.0%)

What am I driving at? We're becoming conditioned to look at WAR as the be-all, end-all metric for comparing players (not you, specifically, Peter, I'm speaking in the abstract). If we accept this, Sandy Koufax was a much better pitcher than Clayton Kershaw is now. After all, Koufax's best WAR seasons of 1963, 10.7, is much better than Kershaw's best season of 7.8 in 2013, a difference of nearly 3 wins. But the truth is, the discrepancy in their WAR figures can be accounted for by the very fact that Koufax won more, and pitched more games/innings. He also got a half more run support per game, had fewer instances where the offense scored 2 or fewer runs in his starts, and didn't have to suffer at the hands of an inept bullpen. Now, Koufax should have a higher WAR. Yes, starters back in the 1960s did throw more innings per start, and Koufax held his level of excellence through higher pitch counts. But was he better than Clayton Kershaw on an inning by inning basis? No. The numbers do not support this assertion.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Was he?

I think WAR is good for comparing players within the same era. I think it is far less useful when comparing players from different eras.

Let's look at the last five years of both pitchers. 1962 to 1966 for Koufax, and 2011 to 2015 for Kershaw (which is not yet completed, but it's close enough).

One thing we have to remember is that a pitcher's wins, or more specifically, his win percentage, is a component of WAR. A pitcher can pitch great, and yet if his team doesn't score runs in support of his efforts, he might not get a win. Earlier I referenced what a shame it is that Kershaw doesn't win more. It's obviously not because he doesn't pitch well. I would imagine it's a lack of run support, in part. Let's compare some numbers.

You said that Kershaw's best WAR is 7.8. Koufax has three seasons better from a WAR standpoint: in 1963 (10.7), 1966 (10.3), and 1965 (8.1). In those three seasons, Koufax won 25, 27 and 26 games. In the five year period, Koufax was 111-34, a .766 win pct. He averaged more wins per season (22) than Clayton Kershaw's best win total in any of his five years (21 in both 2011 and 2014). Kershaw, in his near five years, is 82-32, a .719 win pct, and an average of 16 wins a season. Kershaw has started 151 games to Koufax's 176.

When individual metrics are compared side by side, I don't see anything else that would explain the huge difference in WAR.

ERA:
Koufax 1.95
Kershaw 2.14

Strikeouts per 9 IP:
Koufax 9.4
Kershaw 9.8

Walks per 9 IP:
Koufax 2.1
Kershaw 1.9

Strikeout to BB ratio:
Koufax 4.57
Kershaw 5.04

WHIP:
Koufax 0.926
Kershaw 0.942

Hits per 9 IP:
Koufax 6.3
Kershaw 6.5

ERA +:
Koufax 167
Kershaw 171

Home runs allowed per 9 IP:
Koufax 0.6
Kershaw 0.5

Their numbers are really, really close, aren't they? They give up about the same number of hits and walks per game, Kershaw strikes out batters slightly more often often. Koufax has a better ERA, but relative to the rest of the league at the time they played, Kershaw's ERA + is slightly better.

The difference in WAR? Koufax pitched at a time when complete games were far more common (100 for him, only 18 for Kershaw). That leads to a huge discrepancy in innings pitched:

Koufax 1,377
Kershaw 1,072.

By the time this season is done, Koufax will still have thrown about 250 more innings, which breaks down to about 50 per year. So, while Koufax was allowed to stay in, and pitch a whole game, Kershaw gets pulled out, and his it is the responsibility of his bullpen to preserve the lead, and ultimately get Kershaw the win. Poor bullpen performance means ultimately fewer wins for the pitcher, affecting the starter's winning percentage, and WAR.

Look at Kershaw's 2013 season. He started 33 games, had a 1.83 ERA (best in the NL), and won only 16 games. Look at some of the dominant starts he had where he didn't get a win:

May 3rd vs San Francisco, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-1.
May 8th vs Arizona, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 3-2.
June 10th vs Arizona, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 5-4.
June 15th vs Pittsburgh, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers win 5-3.
July 31st vs New York Yankees, 8 IP, 0 earned runs allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 3-0.
September 8th vs Cincinnati, 7 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-3.

6 starts, 43 innings pitched, 6 earned runs allowed. Kershaw had a 1.26 ERA across these six starts, and got nothing to show for it. The Dodgers scored 11 runs. Kershaw, on average, got 1.83 runs support per game. The Dodger bullpen? They gave up 12 runs in 14 innings.

Then there are some of the games he lost:

August 6th vs St. Louis, 6 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. Dodgers lose 5-1.
August 27th vs Chicago Cubs, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. Dodgers lose 3-2.
September 13th vs San Francisco, 7 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. Dodgers lose 4-2.

Clayton Kershaw should have won 20 games easily in 2013, if not more. But his bullpen was awful in the games he started, and he didn't get any run support in many of his games.

Compare Kershaw's 2013 season to Sandy Koufax's 1963 season. Koufax won 25 games, and again, Kershaw won 16.

Kershaw had 33 starts. Koufax 40. Kershaw's ERA was 1.83. Koufax's ERA was 1.88.

The Dodgers scored 125 runs, or 3.79 RPG, for Kershaw's 33 starts.
The Dodgers scored 172 runs, or 4.30 RPG, for Koufax's 40 starts.

The Dodgers scored 2 or fewer runs in 17 of Kershaw's 33 starts (51.5%)
The Dodgers scored 2 or fewer runs in 12 of Koufax's 40 starts (30.0%)

What am I driving at? We're becoming conditioned to look at WAR as the be-all, end-all metric for comparing players (not you, specifically, Peter, I'm speaking in the abstract). If we accept this, Sandy Koufax was a much better pitcher than Clayton Kershaw is now. After all, Koufax's best WAR seasons of 1963, 10.7, is much better than Kershaw's best season of 7.8 in 2013, a difference of nearly 3 wins. But the truth is, the discrepancy in their WAR figures can be accounted for by the very fact that Koufax won more, and pitched more games/innings. He also got a half more run support per game, had fewer instances where the offense scored 2 or fewer runs in his starts, and didn't have to suffer at the hands of an inept bullpen. Now, Koufax should have a higher WAR. Yes, starters back in the 1960s did throw more innings per start, and Koufax held his level of excellence through higher pitch counts. But was he better than Clayton Kershaw on an inning by inning basis? No. The numbers do not support this assertion.

I am sorry, but the numbers aren't remotely close. This is something we are just going to have to agree to disagree on. Koufax's last 3 full seasons
Games Started
40
41
41
Complete Games
20
27
27
Innings
311
336
323
Shutouts
11
8
5

Koufax was able to put up his numbers pitching deap into games.Just because Kershaw doesn't have stamina, look at how he was shelled in the 7th inning his last two playoff games, is no reason to downgrade Koufax.
When a pitcher is given more rest, when a pitcher doesn't have to go through a lineup an extra time, when a pitcher doesn't pitch tired, his numbers should be much better. Koufax was a much better pitcher at his peak. It is reflected in the total picture, not cherry picking stats or ratios that favor the pitcher with the light load. It is reflected in the stats you just chose to dismiss like WAR.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

I am sorry, but the numbers aren't remotely close. This is something we are just going to have to agree to disagree on. Koufax's last 3 full seasons
Games Started
40
41
41
Complete Games
20
27
27
Innings
311
336
323
Shutouts
11
8
5

Koufax was able to put up his numbers pitching deap into games.Just because Kershaw doesn't have stamina, look at how he was shelled in the 7th inning his last two playoff games, is no reason to downgrade Koufax.
When a pitcher is given more rest, when a pitcher doesn't have to go through a lineup an extra time, when a pitcher doesn't pitch tired, his numbers should be much better. Koufax was a much better pitcher at his peak. It is reflected in the total picture, not cherry picking stats or ratios that favor the pitcher with the light load. It is reflected in the stats you just chose to dismiss like WAR.

Not only do today's starters have a lighter load (more rest between starts, PLUS rarely finishing), but they also are rarely pitching under the pressure of the 8th and 9th innings when most games are still on the line. You can't blame Kershaw for being a product of his era, but at the same time you can't take away from Koufax by saying things like his WAR is better only because he had more wins, as if somehow that were unimportant.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Since this is a baseball card forum...

[packs]

I don't know if there's any merit to arguing about whether or not Kershaw is good. He IS good. But he is not a HOFer today. That much we can be sure about.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Not only do today's starters have a lighter load (more rest between starts, PLUS rarely finishing), but they also are rarely pitching under the pressure of the 8th and 9th innings when most games are still on the line. You can't blame Kershaw for being a product of his era, but at the same time you can't take away from Koufax by saying things like his WAR is better only because he had more wins, as if somehow that were unimportant.

But, I can blame him for not being more valuable. Recent WARs, Halliday 8.9, Greinke 10.4. Going back a few years, R. Johnson 10.9, P. Martinez 11.7, Clemens 11.9. Trying to justify Kershaw's lower WAR is just an excuse. I blame him for not pitching no hitters 4 years in a row. I blame him for not pitching back to back shutouts in the postseason , instead getting shelled twice. I can blame him for being the reason his team lost instead of carrying his team, see Madison Bumgarner. Kershaw may be the best of today, but he doesn't compare well to the best of other eras at this point in his career.

[tschock]

In comparison, one thing Kershaw and Koufax do have in common. Neither of them can/could hit.

Bumgarner had 4 HRs last year and 5 already this year? And a ..250-ish BA the past 2 seasons? Not sure if that makes late inning decisions harder or easier. Pitching comparison? Not quite there yet, but definitely a much bigger stud in the post season.

[packs]

Koufax was his own pitcher. There will never be another pitcher like him. Numbers don't tell you everything about a person. The man was pitching with an arm that no major league team would even let a pitcher toss batting practice with today. And he still dominated the game.

You can't say that about anyone else.

[wolf441]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Was he?

I think WAR is good for comparing players within the same era. I think it is far less useful when comparing players from different eras.

Let's look at the last five years of both pitchers. 1962 to 1966 for Koufax, and 2011 to 2015 for Kershaw (which is not yet completed, but it's close enough).

One thing we have to remember is that a pitcher's wins, or more specifically, his win percentage, is a component of WAR. A pitcher can pitch great, and yet if his team doesn't score runs in support of his efforts, he might not get a win. Earlier I referenced what a shame it is that Kershaw doesn't win more. It's obviously not because he doesn't pitch well. I would imagine it's a lack of run support, in part. Let's compare some numbers.

You said that Kershaw's best WAR is 7.8. Koufax has three seasons better from a WAR standpoint: in 1963 (10.7), 1966 (10.3), and 1965 (8.1). In those three seasons, Koufax won 25, 27 and 26 games. In the five year period, Koufax was 111-34, a .766 win pct. He averaged more wins per season (22) than Clayton Kershaw's best win total in any of his five years (21 in both 2011 and 2014). Kershaw, in his near five years, is 82-32, a .719 win pct, and an average of 16 wins a season. Kershaw has started 151 games to Koufax's 176.

When individual metrics are compared side by side, I don't see anything else that would explain the huge difference in WAR.

ERA:
Koufax 1.95
Kershaw 2.14

Strikeouts per 9 IP:
Koufax 9.4
Kershaw 9.8

Walks per 9 IP:
Koufax 2.1
Kershaw 1.9

Strikeout to BB ratio:
Koufax 4.57
Kershaw 5.04

WHIP:
Koufax 0.926
Kershaw 0.942

Hits per 9 IP:
Koufax 6.3
Kershaw 6.5

ERA +:
Koufax 167
Kershaw 171

Home runs allowed per 9 IP:
Koufax 0.6
Kershaw 0.5

Their numbers are really, really close, aren't they? They give up about the same number of hits and walks per game, Kershaw strikes out batters slightly more often often. Koufax has a better ERA, but relative to the rest of the league at the time they played, Kershaw's ERA + is slightly better.

The difference in WAR? Koufax pitched at a time when complete games were far more common (100 for him, only 18 for Kershaw). That leads to a huge discrepancy in innings pitched:

Koufax 1,377
Kershaw 1,072.

By the time this season is done, Koufax will still have thrown about 250 more innings, which breaks down to about 50 per year. So, while Koufax was allowed to stay in, and pitch a whole game, Kershaw gets pulled out, and his it is the responsibility of his bullpen to preserve the lead, and ultimately get Kershaw the win. Poor bullpen performance means ultimately fewer wins for the pitcher, affecting the starter's winning percentage, and WAR.

Look at Kershaw's 2013 season. He started 33 games, had a 1.83 ERA (best in the NL), and won only 16 games. Look at some of the dominant starts he had where he didn't get a win:

May 3rd vs San Francisco, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-1.
May 8th vs Arizona, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 3-2.
June 10th vs Arizona, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 5-4.
June 15th vs Pittsburgh, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. No decision. Dodgers win 5-3.
July 31st vs New York Yankees, 8 IP, 0 earned runs allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 3-0.
September 8th vs Cincinnati, 7 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-3.

6 starts, 43 innings pitched, 6 earned runs allowed. Kershaw had a 1.26 ERA across these six starts, and got nothing to show for it. The Dodgers scored 11 runs. Kershaw, on average, got 1.83 runs support per game. The Dodger bullpen? They gave up 12 runs in 14 innings.

Then there are some of the games he lost:

August 6th vs St. Louis, 6 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. Dodgers lose 5-1.
August 27th vs Chicago Cubs, 7 IP, 1 earned run allowed. Dodgers lose 3-2.
September 13th vs San Francisco, 7 IP, 2 earned runs allowed. Dodgers lose 4-2.

Clayton Kershaw should have won 20 games easily in 2013, if not more. But his bullpen was awful in the games he started, and he didn't get any run support in many of his games.

Compare Kershaw's 2013 season to Sandy Koufax's 1963 season. Koufax won 25 games, and again, Kershaw won 16.

Kershaw had 33 starts. Koufax 40. Kershaw's ERA was 1.83. Koufax's ERA was 1.88.

The Dodgers scored 125 runs, or 3.79 RPG, for Kershaw's 33 starts.
The Dodgers scored 172 runs, or 4.30 RPG, for Koufax's 40 starts.

The Dodgers scored 2 or fewer runs in 17 of Kershaw's 33 starts (51.5%)
The Dodgers scored 2 or fewer runs in 12 of Koufax's 40 starts (30.0%)

What am I driving at? We're becoming conditioned to look at WAR as the be-all, end-all metric for comparing players (not you, specifically, Peter, I'm speaking in the abstract). If we accept this, Sandy Koufax was a much better pitcher than Clayton Kershaw is now. After all, Koufax's best WAR seasons of 1963, 10.7, is much better than Kershaw's best season of 7.8 in 2013, a difference of nearly 3 wins. But the truth is, the discrepancy in their WAR figures can be accounted for by the very fact that Koufax won more, and pitched more games/innings. He also got a half more run support per game, had fewer instances where the offense scored 2 or fewer runs in his starts, and didn't have to suffer at the hands of an inept bullpen. Now, Koufax should have a higher WAR. Yes, starters back in the 1960s did throw more innings per start, and Koufax held his level of excellence through higher pitch counts. But was he better than Clayton Kershaw on an inning by inning basis? No. The numbers do not support this assertion.

The best thing on Baseball-Reference? Kershaw's #1 pitching comp is Babe Ruth. I can see it now:

"Kershaw sold to Yankees for $1.25 Billion, Yanks will move him to outfield full time"

[Kenny Cole]

Leaving aside all the statistical analysis and parsing of numbers, Koufax pitched the first game I can remember ever seeing in person, at Dodger Stadium in 1966. I was 5. He hooked me on baseball and immediately became my hero. Maybe its just the childhood memory, but as far as I am concerned, he was the best.

[Tabe]

Kershaw is the only pitcher to lead the majors in ERA four years in a row. Just throwing that out there.

[packs]

Actually Kershaw is one of two players to lead the league 4 times in a row. Lefty Grove is the second.

By the way, the record is 5 seasons in a row. It is held by a man named Sandy Koufax.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

Actually Kershaw is one of two players to lead the league 4 times in a row. Lefty Grove is the second.

By the way, the record is 5 seasons in a row. It is held by a man named Sandy Koufax.

Chris said the majors, not the league.

EDIT TO CORRECT MISTAKE ON OTHER POINT.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Chris said the majors, not the league.

I did indeed. Thanks Peter.

[darwinbulldog]

You're both correct. It's also worth noting that it's considerably easier, since the advent of the DH, to lead the majors in ERA if you're in the NL, especially so if you pitch half of your games in Dodger Stadium.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

You're both correct. It's also worth noting that it's considerably easier, since the advent of the DH, to lead the majors in ERA if you're in the NL, especially so if you pitch half of your games in Dodger Stadium.

Absolutely true. Since 1973, the AL Leader has led the majors in ERA just 12 times - or just 28.6% of the time.