Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Joe Horlen was a good pitcher, but not in the class of Koufax.

Look at Horlen's innings pitched, complete games, and strikeout totals from 1964 - 1968.

IP:

210.2
219
211
258
223.2

CG:

9
7
4
13
4

SO:

138
125
124
103
102


Compare these totals to Koufax's stats from 1962 - 1966:

IP:

184
311
223
335
323


CG:

11
20
15
27
27


SO:

216
306
223
382
317


And Horlen's W-L record for 1964 - 1968 was:

13-8
13-13
10-13
19-7
12-14


Koufax's from 1962 - 1966:

14-7
25-5
19-5
26-8
27-9


The clubs Horlen was on were largely good too. The White Sox position in the standings from 1964 - 1968 were:

2nd
2nd
4th
4th
9th

All first division clubs except for 1968, and they finished one game behind the Yankees in 1964 and only 3 behind the Red Sox in 1967.

Horlen's E.R.A.'s were great for that 5 year run, but his other stats don't come near challenging what Koufax achieved - by a long shot.

Also if you're looking at lifetime statistics, it's no contest between the two, with Koufax coming out way on top.

Again, Koufax best years were the result of his home park. He was still a great pitcher on the road, but he wasn't "KOUFAX!!!!!". He only was "KOUFAX!!!!!" because of his video game numbers in his home park from 1962-1966.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

Tom- this is laughable. Why not ask or read comments from former players batting against Koufax.. 3 Cy Youngs in 4 years?

HOME. FIELD.

Larry Walker was a similar player with similar video game numbers at home for 6 of his 8 years in Colorado. Yet noone looks at him as one of the greatest left handed hitters of all time. Why? Everyone talks about how his home park affected his numbers. NOONE talks about that with Koufax, but it is just as true.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Koufax video game numbers were a product of his home park.

Period.

If he was "the best in baseball" over a five year period, he doesn't get into the Hall. He just doesn't and I don't see how that is debatable. Take away his home numbers from 1962-1966 and just double his road numbers and there is no way that career gets him into the Hall. I don't even see how that can be questioned. He would have been Gary Peters but with a lot more strikeouts from 1962-1966.

If Peters isn't a Hall of Famer...

False. Koufax was by far the best pitcher in MLB on the road over that 5 years. He still wins 3 Cy Youngs, 2 WS MVPs and 4 rings and is a first ballot HOFer.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by rats60

False. Koufax was by far the best pitcher in MLB on the road over that 5 years. He still wins 3 Cy Youngs, 2 WS MVPs and 4 rings and is a first ballot HOFer.

2 Cy Youngs. Not three. Two. 1963 his road numbers doubled give you:

28-8 2.31 ERA 324 k

This edges out Dick Ellsworth, though it is fairly close:

22-10 2.11 ERA 185 k

1966 his road numbers doubled are:

28-8 1.96 ERA 314 k

That beats Juan Marichal but again it is somewhat close:

25-6 2.23 ERA 222 K

However

In 1965 Koufax road numbers doubled are:

14-6 2.93 ERA 198k

Marichal destroys him.

22-13 2.13 ERA 240k


So that gives him 2 Cy Youngs, 2 WS MVPs and 4 rings. And career numbers that aren't close to what they are when Chavez Ravene gets entered into the equation. Maybe a borderline HOFer because he is so likebale and people feel sorry for him having to quit at such a young age? Maybe?

Best lefty ever though? Please.

[btcarfagno]

Boy I botched that up pretty good.

1965 is a toss up for Cy Young.

Koufax road numbers doubled are:

24-10 2.72 ERA 348 k

Juan Marichal:

22-13 2.13 ERA 240 k

And for 1965 if we go to WAR for pitchers, Koufax INCLUDING HIS HOME GAMES is at 8.1 which was third in the league behind Marichal at 10.3 and Maloney at 8.2.

But just looking at the "traditional" stats they would have used back then a good argument could be made for either one.

If Koufax gets this third Cy I would agree he would be a HOFer in the traditionalist sense. If the third Cy instead goes to Marichal (as WAR says it should have anyway) then if Koufax gets into the Hall he squeaks in with a lot of help from a friendly BBWAA.

[howard38]

.

[Koufax32fan]

Found this on SB Nation - looking at WAR/200 innings pitched (https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/20...-rate-stat-top) [he lists the % of games started because he broke out relievers in another table]


Rank Name Innings WAR WAR/200 IP GS%
1 Pedro Martinez 2827.5 75.9 5.37 85.92
2 Roger Clemens 4916.6 128.4 5.22 99.72
3 Lefty Grove 3940.6 98.3 4.99 74.19
4 Johan Santana 1709.7 42.1 4.92 75.48
5 Sandy Koufax 2324.4 54.5 4.69 79.09
6 Roy Halladay 2046.6 47.4 4.63 91.69
7 Randy Johnson 4135.4 91.8 4.44 97.57
8 Brandon Webb 1319.7 29.2 4.43 99.5
9 Bob Gibson 3884.4 85.6 4.41 91.29
10 Tom Seaver 4782.6 105.3 4.40 98.63
11 Roy Oswalt 1803.4 39.5 4.38 95.76
12 Walter Johnson 5914.7 127.7 4.32 83.04
13 Curt Schilling 3261 69.7 4.27 76.63
14 Bret Saberhagen 2562.6 54.7 4.27 92.98
15 Mike Mussina 3562.8 74.8 4.20 99.81
16 Teddy Higuera 1379.9 28.3 4.10 96.24
17 Harry Brecheen 1907.4 38.8 4.07 75.47
18 Kid Nichols 5056.3 102.3 4.05 90.48
19 Pete Alexander 5189.9 104.9 4.04 86.06
20 Dizzy Dean 1967.3 39.6 4.03 72.56
21 Kevin Brown 3256.3 64.8 3.98 97.94
22 Tim Hudson 2059.5 40.9 3.97 99.68
23 Cy Young 7354.8 146.0 3.97 89.96
24 David Cone 2898.8 57.5 3.97 93.11
25 C.C. Sabathia 1889.4 37.3 3.95 100

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by howard38

You're still making a fundamental error though. You can't simply double his road stats to get an approximation because that assumes he made the same number of starts at home & away every year. It works out in 1965 & 1966 but in 1963 doubling his road stats gives him 46 starts for the season when, in fact, he made only 40 starts combined which knocks down his expected wins to about 24. You also have to consider that there was only one Cy Young award per season at that time so in addition to Dick Ellsworth he'd also have to contend w/24 game winner Whitey Ford.

True. I figured it was generally fairly even, or that it might give Koufax a slight bump even as you mentioned.

Camilo Pascual was likely better than Ford in 1963, with a record of 21-9 2.46 ERA and league leading 202k. Neither of them was as good as "road" Koufax or Ellsworth in 1963 though I don't think.

Sam McDowall was likely the best in the AL in 1965 but at 17-11 he would fall short even conceding his league best ERA of 2.18 and league best strikeouts of 325.

I would still give the Cy to the "road" Koufax in 1963 and 1966. 1962 and 1964 forget it. 1965 still a Koufax/Marichal toss up, though advanced metrics choose Marichal in 1965 over even the actual Koufax.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Below, is something I wrote in a post on page 3 after posting Koufax's stats. I think it's important to consider. Again, I am not saying that Chavez wasn't a factor. My argument is that Koufax began to improve prior to the move to Chavez, and if he hadn't, we wouldn't be discussing him right now.

What I said on page 3:

If your argument is that Chavez Ravine, largely created the phenomenon that was Sandy Koufax, look at his away E.R.A's. You'll notice that from 1955 - 1959, they were really quite high. He brought things down a bit in 1960, but obviously with an 8-13 Won/Loss Record, and an overall 3.91 E.R.A. for the year, it wasn't exactly a banner year.

Then look at 1961, which was a year before Koufax and the Dodgers played at Chavez. Koufax' away E.R.A. is down below 3.00 for the first time, at 2.77. His Won/Loss Record goes up to 18-13.

Interestingly, in the spring of that year, catcher Norm Sherry spoke with Koufax about his control. In an interview, he said:

'It was 1961 in Orlando, where we went to play the Twins in an exhibition game. We’d talked on the plane going over there, and he said, “I want to work on my change-up and my curveball.” We went with a very minimal squad because one of our pitchers missed the plane. Gil Hodges went as our manager. [Koufax] couldn’t throw a strike, and he ended up walking the first three guys. I went to the mound and said, “Sandy, we don’t have many guys here; we’re going to be here a long day. Why don’t you take something off the ball and just put it in there? Don’t try to throw it so hard. Just put it in there and let them hit it.”'

''I went back behind the plate. Good God! He tried to ease up, and he was throwing harder than when he tried to. We came off the field, and I said, “Sandy, I don’t know if you realize it, but you just now threw harder than when you were trying to.” What he did was that he got his rhythm better and the ball jumped out of his hand and exploded at the plate. He struck out the side. It made sense to him that when you try to overdo something, you do less. Just like guys who swing so hard, they can’t hit the ball. He got really good.'


Koufax himself said, 'I became a good pitcher when I stopped trying to make them miss the ball and started trying to make them hit it.'

Now if you look at his record going forward, the next year, yes, the Dodgers moved to Chavez, and his record improved. But his away record improved also. The 3.53 E.R.A he posted on the road in 1962, is misleading. His last legitimate start was on July 12th where he pitched 7 innings beating the Mets 1-0. However, by this point, the pain in his pitching due to a crushed artery in his left palm, put him on the disabled list after a one-inning outing at Crosley Field on July 17th, a game in which he was tagged for the loss, and was credited with an 18.00 E.R.A.

He attempted to pitch again in September and October, getting into four games. Three out of those four were on the road. His E.R.A for the month of September was 8.22 and for October, ws 27.00. He only pitched a total of 8.2 innings in September and October. And if you add the inning he pitched on July 17th, that's a total of 9.2 innings. Four out of five of those games were on the road. If you eliminate the E.R.A.'s from those games, his away E.R.A. goes down significantly. It would be interesting to calculate that. Maybe we could do that in a bit.

Then you go on the 1963 -1966 run. And we all know what Koufax did there. His E.R.A.'s on the road respectively are 2.31, 2.93, 2.72, 1.96.'

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Koufax's E.R.A. improved on the road, as compared to the early part of his career. The downward trend began before the expansion of the strike zone and before the move to Chavez.

We're not disagreeing on there being outside factors that coincided with Koufax's great run. We're just disagreeing on your saying that those factors were the only thing that made the pitcher. I say, without the change Koufax made in his approach to pitching, he would not have made his push to greatness.

And I think there are other factors beyond the numbers that factor into greatness. Koufax pitched through pain much of the time during the height of his career, pitching complete games. Add to this, his rising to the moment in the 1963 and 1965 World Series.

The above was addressed several pages ago with full year by year breakdowns. The numbers do not support that Sandy was such a legend on the road. His ERA scaled down as the leagues did when he wasn’t pitching in Chavez. It was very good in 1966, but you have to ignore the other years. Again, no amount of mythologizing nostalgia is going to overcome verifiable facts for those looking for a logical case.

If his 1962 away ERA is “misleading” due to injury, then so are his home ERA’s. Or was he injured only for road games and a single inning in which he gave up 2 runs (based on your 18 ERA in a single inning outing statement) solely responsible? How could he possibly have such a gap off this single performance amidst a year he pitched 182 innings? This makes no sense. It obviously makes no sense.

How about a couple years later when his road ERA is 300% of his home ERA? I guess the huge, abnormal gap in his splits and for all the other Dodger pitches is just random chance or the key must still be this change that does not align with the figures.

By this point, it seems clear that no argument based in math and verifiable fact will be made for Koufax, as all there is myth making and denying verifiable facts. If there is such a case for Koufax rooted in facts and not myth, it will not be made.

[btcarfagno]

To summarize:

"Road Koufax" was the best pitcher in baseball twice (1963 and 1966) and he was also either best or (more likely) second best one year (1965). "Road Koufax" doesn't sniff the top 20 in any other year. "Road Koufax" had gaudy strikeout numbers for the most part, although 1962 (196) and 1964 (198) are a bit pedestrian.

The real Sandy Koufax did have four World Series rings. One of which (1955) he did little to earn. One of which (1959) he was a back of the rotation starter/reliever and two of which he was the ace of the staff and series MVP. In his 7 career World Series starts he put up gaudy numbers even with a pedestrian record of 4-3.

Knowing that the above player had such a short career, is he a Hall Of Famer? If you use the Kirby Puckett "what could have been had he not gotten hurt" method then absolutely yes. But is the above player the GREATEST left handed pitcher of all time?

The thought is laughable.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

To summarize:

"Road Koufax" was the best pitcher in baseball twice (1963 and 1966) and he was also either best or (more likely) second best one year (1965). "Road Koufax" doesn't sniff the top 20 in any other year. "Road Koufax" had gaudy strikeout numbers for the most part, although 1962 (196) and 1964 (198) are a bit pedestrian.

The real Sandy Koufax did have four World Series rings. One of which (1955) he did little to earn. One of which (1959) he was a back of the rotation starter/reliever and two of which he was the ace of the staff and series MVP. In his 7 career World Series starts he put up gaudy numbers even with a pedestrian record of 4-3.

Knowing that the above player had such a short career, is he a Hall Of Famer? If you use the Kirby Puckett "what could have been had he not gotten hurt" method then absolutely yes. But is the above player the GREATEST left handed pitcher of all time?

The thought is laughable.

What is laughable is to think he is not a hofer. we went from an opinion that he was the best left hander to does he belong in the Hall of Fame.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by cammb

What is laughable is to think he is not a hofer. we went from an opinion that he was the best left hander to does he belong in the Hall of Fame.

"road Koufax" is barely a Hall Of Famer. Chavez Ravine aided Koufax is a legend. Try to keep up.

[packs]

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

Because there is value in being good to very good for a ridiculously long period of time. In their prime it isn't close. Starting probably in each of their tenth best seasons on down, Niekro was far better. It isn't sexy but it's true. That gives him value.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

"road Koufax" is barely a Hall Of Famer. Chavez Ravine aided Koufax is a legend. Try to keep up.

In your post, #410, YOU posed the question "Is he a hall of famer"?
Try to keep up .

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by rats60

False, Koufax's 5 year road ERA was 2.59. 2.81 was another poster wanting to excluded Koufax's best year. It just goes to show ridiculous the arguments are from the haters. That was by far the best road ERA in MLB by a starting pitcher over that period.

OK, I was going by the 2.81 mentioned.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by cammb

In your post, #410, YOU posed the question "Is he a hall of famer"?
Try to keep up .

Is "Road Koufax" a real HOFer. That's part of that post as well. Reading comprehension.

[timn1]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. .

Well do you think it could be, just maybe, because nobody has seen everybody pitch?

You saw X pitch, I saw Y pitch, and Ted Z saw Eddie Plank pitch What basis does that give us for comparison? Stats are the only measures we have that aren’t completely subjective, and even they have to be massaged. But personal accounts are a joke.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

Because memories are notoriously unreliable. Because guys naturally filter out memories/experiences that don't fit the narrative. Because they focus on a few short years or whatever. Hank Aaron hit .372 with 7 homers against Koufax. Yet Aaron would still about him like he was this unhittable monster.

[packs]

I guess I should say when you’re talking about two players you saw yourself. There has to be some room for knowing what it felt like to watch Pedro pitch and knowing what it felt like to watch Niekro pitch.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Is "Road Koufax" a real HOFer. That's part of that post as well. Reading comprehension.

uh

Oh, I see . You made up an imaginary Koufax and you want to know if the imaginary Koufax is a Hall of famer

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by cammb

uh

Oh, I see . You made up an imaginary Koufax and you want to know if the imaginary Koufax is a Hall of famer

Correct. Showing that Koufax, without the benefit of his home park, might have been a marginal at best HOFer. Yet no one ever mentions this about him. With Larry Walker it's all you hear. But Koufax? His home/road splits during his video game number seasons never comes up...as astounding as the splits truly are.

[brewing]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Because memories are notoriously unreliable. Because guys naturally filter out memories/experiences that don't fit the narrative. Because they focus on a few short years or whatever. Hank Aaron hit .372 with 7 homers against Koufax. Yet Aaron would still about him like he was this unhittable monster.

Exactly. Has there ever been a hitter that hasn't said the pitchers he faced were the greatest?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by packs

I guess I should say when you’re talking about two players you saw yourself. There has to be some room for knowing what it felt like to watch Pedro pitch and knowing what it felt like to watch Niekro pitch.

We are talking about who was best, not feelings and emotions.

Facing a guy like Sam McDowell or Sandy Koufax or Walter Johnson or Nolan Ryan will obviously "feel" different than facing a knuckleball pitcher like Niekro, or a junkball pitcher with brains and control, like Tommy John.

But there are guys who had more success hitting heat rather than butterflies.

[brian1961]

One thing that should be stressed with Sandy Koufax is the fact that, for the most part mind you, he did not have a team behind him that could give him a lot of runs. I recall the term, "small ball", being associated with Koufax & Drysdale. The Dodgers had Frank Howard, but even mighty Hondo struggled in their home parks. They had Tommy Davis, who put up spectacular numbers in '62, and won a pair of batting titles, if I recall correctly. Their biggest warrior was the dynamic Maury Wills. I know expressing this won't convince you, probably. Nevertheless, as someone who grew up during Sandy's string of banner years, I well remember the press being mighty impressed with Mr. Koufax because he did not have a team of sluggers and better hitters behind him, yet was the most invincible hurler in MLB.

The same could be said for Nolan Ryan and Sam McDowell on that count.

Cheers----Brian Powell

[packs]

Originally Posted by Mark17

We are talking about who was best, not feelings and emotions.

Facing a guy like Sam McDowell or Sandy Koufax or Walter Johnson or Nolan Ryan will obviously "feel" different than facing a knuckleball pitcher like Niekro, or a junkball pitcher with brains and control, like Tommy John.

But there are guys who had more success hitting heat rather than butterflies.

I'm talking about a person who used a stat to compare Niekro to Pedro, two pitchers I personally feel are at opposite ends of "greatness" when I think about actually watching them pitch. So, yes, I think that's the feeling I'm talking about. I'm also talking about the feeling YOU got when YOU watched them, not some third party.

If you never watched Pedro pitch I understand your indifference.

Talking about what YOU saw is a big part of passing down the game to people who didn't see a person play. You can analyze Bernie Williams's stats all you want and deduce he wasn't an elite player. But Yankee fans will always consider him a legend because they watched him play. There is room in discussion for these things.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by packs

I'm talking about a person who used a stat to compare Niekro to Pedro, two pitchers I personally feel are at opposite ends of "greatness" when I think about actually watching them pitch. So, yes, I think that's the feeling I'm talking about. I'm also talking about the feeling YOU got when YOU watched them, not some third party.

If you never watched Pedro pitch I understand your indifference.

When I watched games on TV, I could tell Pedro looked very tough. I also thought Dave McNally seldom threw a hittable pitch - always on the corners. I never saw Grove but his stats make it obvious that he was the same way, and for a long career.

I caught a knuckleball pitcher in my sophomore year in college, and one of his floaters that hit the dirt late bent back my index fingernail on my throwing hand which made me miss a few games. So I have a lot of respect for how hard it is to hit those things, or even track and block them when they suddenly dive.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Mark17

When I watched games on TV, I could tell Pedro looked very tough. I also thought Dave McNally seldom threw a hittable pitch - always on the corners. I never saw Grove but his stats make it obvious that he was the same way, and for a long career.

I caught a knuckleball pitcher in my sophomore year in college, and one of his floaters that hit the dirt late bent back my index fingernail on my throwing hand which made me miss a few games. So I have a lot of respect for how hard it is to hit those things, or even track and block them when they suddenly dive.

See, not so hard. That was an interesting anecdote that I'm glad you shared because it offers insight a number doesn't.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by Mark17

We are talking about who was best, not feelings and emotions.

Facing a guy like Sam McDowell or Sandy Koufax or Walter Johnson or Nolan Ryan will obviously "feel" different than facing a knuckleball pitcher like Niekro, or a junkball pitcher with brains and control, like Tommy John.

But there are guys who had more success hitting heat rather than butterflies.

+1

[cammb]

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by cammb

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

The argument is between Grove, Spahn, Randy Johnson, Kershaw, Plank, and maybe a couple others. I haven't heard anybody say Koufax isn't at least in the top 10 of all time.

When someone like me says Grove was the best, that isn't saying Koufax was a bum. Although, actually, Koufax WAS a bum:

[HistoricNewspapers]

At age 45, Phil Niekro threw 215 innings with a 3.09 ERA. His ERA+ was 123 that season. It isn't just about value, its about ability. How many players have the ability to be a better than average MLB player after age 40??

It doesn't mean he is better than Pedro in their prime, but while Niekro was showing the ability to be successful in MLB at age 45. Pedro was no better a MLB player than either you or I at that time. Pedro's last 314 innings in MLB produced an ERA of 4.58 and ERA+ of 94. He was done being an effective MLB pitcher by age 34. No longer employable by age 37.

From age 40-48, Phil Niekro was capable of pitching 1,977 innings as MLB pitcher. His ERA+ during that time was 103, which means he was actually more effective than the average MLB pitcher during that time, and while averaging 220 innings per year in that span. Pedro Martinez was only able to throw over 220 innings in a season just two times in his career.

Yet somehow Niekro gets penalized for this ability?


Would Niekro be viewed as a better pitcher had he just stopped pitching after his first 2,216 innings...kind of like Koufax did?

After Niekro's first 2,216 innings, Niekro's ERA sat at 2.91 with a 127 ERA+. That isn't too far off from Koufax when he retired after 2,324 innings and his ERA sat at 2.76 with a 131 ERA+.

At what point does Niekro then get positive credit for being able to throw ANOTHER 3,181 innings at a rate better than a league average pitcher?? In fact, in his next 3,000+ innings, Nikero's ERA+ was 109.

For comparison, Catfish Hunter had 3,449 career innings with an ERA+ of 104(worse than Niekro's).

So in essence, Niekro had TWO careers, the first part nearly equal to Koufax's lifetime rate, and the second part better than Catfish Hunter's lifetime rate.

That's two HOF careers rolled into one for Niekro. Give Niekro his due. It doesn't make him better than Pedro in his prime...but it is an ABILITY to do what Niekro did and it provided a VALUE to MLB and the teams he played on.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by cammb

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

Lol. You know, I think we better notify MLB and Cooperstown. Imagine this ruse being perpetrated for over 50 years!

This whole thing has caused me to revisit a number of topics. It seems that Superstorm Sandy wasn't really that bad of a storm, because once it made landfall, it's maximum sustained winds were only around 75 mph. And conscious changes to approach just don't matter. Grant and Sherman's more aggressive pursuit of the South had nothing to do with bringing the Civil War to a successful conclusion for the North.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by cammb

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

Because that's exactly what I said.

Nice strawman.

Koufax would have been a marginal HOFer had his home park not been Dodger Stadium. Obviously that is the same as saying he was a bum.

If he doesn't have the injury and is able to have a few more really good years, even without Dodger Stadium helping him he is a first ballot HOFer.

The fact is that he was greatly helped by his home field AND he had an unfortunately too short prime due to injury. Even with his shortened career, "Road Only Koufax" still likely would have been a marginal HOFer. So with everything going against him he still likely would have been in.

But that's not the debate of this thread. The debate here is greatest lefty ever. Koufax road stats tell me even in his prime you cannot make that case, let alone the fact that his prime was so tragically short.

Now go find another strawman to argue against. And don't let your dumb show so easily it's unbecoming.

[TUM301]

I`m going with Grove basically from what`s been written and the praising of him from some of the greatest hitters of all time. Koufax had one of the greatest stretches ever, but there has to be something said about longevity. On a side note the 2 "must see" hurlers over my past 50 years of being a fan, Ryan and Pedro. When Pedro had a start here in Boston it was must see T V.

[timn1]

"The debate here is greatest lefty ever. Koufax road stats tell me even in his prime you cannot make that case, let alone the fact that his prime was so tragically short."

NO ONE has said Koufax wasn't an amazing pitcher in his prime. Greatest ever, that's a completely different kettle o' fish.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by timn1

"The debate here is greatest lefty ever. Koufax road stats tell me even in his prime you cannot make that case, let alone the fact that his prime was so tragically short."

NO ONE has said Koufax wasn't an amazing pitcher in his prime. Greatest ever, that's a completely different kettle o' fish.

Yes pretty much. Yet there are some nimrods who insist that if someone has statistically valid reasons why Sandy Koufax isn't the greatest left hander of all time then that means we must think he was "a bum".

Because of course.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Because that's exactly what I said.

Nice strawman.

Koufax would have been a marginal HOFer had his home park not been Dodger Stadium. Obviously that is the same as saying he was a bum.

If he doesn't have the injury and is able to have a few more really good years, even without Dodger Stadium helping him he is a first ballot HOFer.

The fact is that he was greatly helped by his home field AND he had an unfortunately too short prime due to injury. Even with his shortened career, "Road Only Koufax" still likely would have been a marginal HOFer. So with everything going against him he still likely would have been in.

But that's not the debate of this thread. The debate here is greatest lefty ever. Koufax road stats tell me even in his prime you cannot make that case, let alone the fact that his prime was so tragically short.

Now go find another strawman to argue against. And don't let your dumb show so easily it's unbecoming.

What's with the attitude and why make things personal? First of all, he wasn't quoting you and his post came after a number of other posts, some of which were supporting the idea of numbers over "feelings". No one was saying you called Koufax a bum.

But it's disingenuous to say that you're not knocking Koufax when you use say things like his "video game numbers were a product of his park" and "Chavez Ravine aided Koufax is a legend".

While Koufax's contemporaries (Drysdale, Podres, etc.) may have had home/away splits that show they did better at home, they don't come close to his numbers. He had to be a damn good pitcher to post those numbers. I have argued on this thread that he changed his approach and style before he pitched in Chavez, and that if he hadn't done that, he would not have done as well as he did at home or on the road during the 1963-1966 run.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

"road Koufax" is barely a Hall Of Famer. Chavez Ravine aided Koufax is a legend. Try to keep up.

Koufax did in fact win three cy youngs, 1963, 1965, and 1966....And all were unanimous votes!

[OldOriole]

This just absolutely seals it for me. It's Grove. Also glad to see Plank made the top 5.

Originally Posted by brewing

Jay Jaffe's JAWS averages Career WAR and 7 year peak WAR

Grove 86.1
Randy Johnson 81.3
Spahn 75.8
Carlton 72.2
Plank 71.1
Glavine 62.4
Average HoF 61.6
Kershaw 58.8
Newhouser 57.6
Koufax 47.4


Pitching WAR for best 7 seasons (not consecutive)
Grove 65.6
Johnson 61.5
Carlton 54.3
Newhouser 52.6
Spahn 51.4
Plank 51.1
Average HoF 50.0
Kershaw 49.7
Koufax 46.0
Glavine 44.1

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_P.shtml

Unless the criteria is 4 consecutive years, I don't see the argument that Koufax is the discussion of the greatest all time.

[Shoeless Moe]

Sandy Koufax first year HOF eligible he got 86.9% of the vote

Randy Johnson first year HOF eligible he got 97.3% of the vote



The Big Unit baby!!!!

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by jgannon

What's with the attitude and why make things personal? First of all, he wasn't quoting you and his post came after a number of other posts, some of which were supporting the idea of numbers over "feelings". No one was saying you called Koufax a bum.

But it's disingenuous to say that you're not knocking Koufax when you use say things like his "video game numbers were a product of his park" and "Chavez Ravine aided Koufax is a legend".

While Koufax's contemporaries (Drysdale, Podres, etc.) may have had home/away splits that show they did better at home, they don't come close to his numbers. He had to be a damn good pitcher to post those numbers. I have argued on this thread that he changed his approach and style before he pitched in Chavez, and that if he hadn't done that, he would not have done as well as he did at home or on the road during the 1963-1966 run.

His prior two responses in the thread were directly to me but this one wasn't? It had to do with the point I was making so it was directed to my point at a minimum. And I have little patience for strawman arguments.

It's ok to knock someone without disagreeing that the player was tremendous. If bringing up facts "knocks" a player so be it. Koufax was a very good pitcher regardless of where he pitched. Quite possibly the best in baseball over that five year period even after adjusting for park factors. That said, the park is the reason he isn't just thought of as a borderline HOFer. That is simply a statistical fact. He put up really good numbers away from Dodger Stadium. Maybe the best in the sport over that period. But when you add his Dodger Stadium numbers he became other worldly. He did put up video game numbers at home over this period. His splits are insane. It's a statistical fact that is rarely brought up with him for some reason.

He must have figured something out. Even away from Chavez he became likely the best in the sport for the next five year period. That is also statistical fact. It is possible to understand that, and to understand that he likely would have been a HOFer even if his home games weren't where they were, while also understanding that he isn't the untouchable demi-god statistically that everyone wants him to be. He was a better pitcher than his Dodger teammates. Over that five year period he probably was the best in the sport just doubling his road numbers. But his home road splits are what they are and I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and pretend they don't make any difference at all. Because they absolutely do.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

Koufax did in fact win three cy youngs, 1963, 1965, and 1966....And all were unanimous votes!

Statistically Marichal was better in 1965. 63 and 66 were no brainers though. And the only reason he didn't win in 1964 was...wait for it...his road ERA that year was 2.93.

While his home ERA was 0.85.

That is not a typo.

2.93 vs 0.85

But sure. Nothing to see here.

[Hxcmilkshake]

You guys lost me at Phil Niekro.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[Shoeless Moe]

His numbers AFTER his 35th birthday:

103-49 with a 2.65 ERA

Like a fine wine, he got better with age.......not fall apart.

Ya'll can stop arguing, The Unit takes it!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

I don't think you actually read the post.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by brian1961

One thing that should be stressed with Sandy Koufax is the fact that, for the most part mind you, he did not have a team behind him that could give him a lot of runs. I recall the term, "small ball", being associated with Koufax & Drysdale. The Dodgers had Frank Howard, but even mighty Hondo struggled in their home parks. They had Tommy Davis, who put up spectacular numbers in '62, and won a pair of batting titles, if I recall correctly. Their biggest warrior was the dynamic Maury Wills. I know expressing this won't convince you, probably. Nevertheless, as someone who grew up during Sandy's string of banner years, I well remember the press being mighty impressed with Mr. Koufax because he did not have a team of sluggers and better hitters behind him, yet was the most invincible hurler in MLB.

The same could be said for Nolan Ryan and Sam McDowell on that count.

Cheers----Brian Powell

This would affect Koufax's won-loss record, but nobody here is criticizing his won loss record. It has nothing to do with his short peak, absurd road/home performance gap, ERA, none of the criticisms actually made of Koufax in this thread. Further, that even Frank Howard couldn't hit at Chavez would seem further evidence that Chavez is a pitchers paradise, which hurts Koufax's argument.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Statistically Marichal was better in 1965. 63 and 66 were no brainers though. And the only reason he didn't win in 1964 was...wait for it...his road ERA that year was 2.93.

While his home ERA was 0.85.

That is not a typo.

2.93 vs 0.85sssz

But sure. Nothing to see here.

Wrong. The reason he didn’t win in 1964 was 20-9, 1.65 ERA, 11 shutouts 2.39 FIP all lead the league by Dean Chance. He also had a 1.07 ERA at home and 2.25 on the road. Koufax probably wins if there was a CY Young award in each league. Also, Koufax had an ERA+ of 186. That led the league by 28%. So there is nothing to see here.

As far as 1965, Koufax 2.04 ERA Marichal 2.13, Koufax 26 wins, Marichal 22, W/L% Koufax .765% Marichal .629, WHIP Koufax .855 Marichal .914, H/9 Koufax 5.792 Marichal 6.826, K/9 Koufax 10.242 Marichal 7.314, IP 335.2 Marichal 295.1, Ks Koufax 382 Marichal 240 CG Koufax 27 Marichal 24 K/BB Koufax 5.380 Marichal 5.217 FIP Koufax 1.93 Marichal 2.59. All led the NL.

Marichal led in shutouts 10-8, BB/9 1.402 -1.904 and your favorite ERA+ 169-160.

This is pretty obvious in Koufax’s favor thus Koufax was the unanimous Cy Young winner. Even the Giants writers voted Koufax. Koufax also led in fWAR 10.0 to Marichal 6.8 although somehow bWAR had Marichal led 10.3 to 8.1 showing how worthless WAR really is.

In 1965 Marichal leads Koufax by 169-160 in ERA+ and that translates into 10.3-8.1 spread in bWAR despite Koufax pitching more inning, setting a record for strikeouts in a season, having a better WHIP, FIP, etc. Yet in 1964 Koufax leads Drysdale in ERA+ 186-147, 41% as well as WHIP and FIP, but Drysdale pitches more innings and has more strikeouts so he has a higher b WAR 7.8-7.3. These stats are just made up, there is no transparency and they makes absolutely no sense. I have been asking for years for someone to give a scientific explanation and I get nothing. I am not a sheep. I think for myself. I am not going to accept something just because someone says trust me. The only stats that are reliable are ones based in math and scientific method, the ones that have reason and can be calculated. That is why I go by ERA, WHIP and FIP.

They say Koufax is the best lefty and the only one close is Kershaw. If he was even decent in postseason, one could make a case, but his dreadful 9 postseason history make it impossible to pick him. Some might want longevity of an above average pitcher,l but I am taking Koufax’s 12 years with 5-6 years of brilliance and championships over 20+ of good but never great and not winning because of it.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by brian1961

One thing that should be stressed with Sandy Koufax is the fact that, for the most part mind you, he did not have a team behind him that could give him a lot of runs. I recall the term, "small ball", being associated with Koufax & Drysdale. The Dodgers had Frank Howard, but even mighty Hondo struggled in their home parks. They had Tommy Davis, who put up spectacular numbers in '62, and won a pair of batting titles, if I recall correctly. Their biggest warrior was the dynamic Maury Wills. I know expressing this won't convince you, probably. Nevertheless, as someone who grew up during Sandy's string of banner years, I well remember the press being mighty impressed with Mr. Koufax because he did not have a team of sluggers and better hitters behind him, yet was the most invincible hurler in MLB.

The same could be said for Nolan Ryan and Sam McDowell on that count.

Cheers----Brian Powell

. Wrong. Do you even bother to check the facts before you post. Frank Howard played in Dodger Stadium from 1962-1964. His BA/OBP/SLG were all higher at home than on the road every year. He did hit a few more HRs on the road, but clearly Frank preferred hitting in Dodger Stadium over the average road park. This is typical of most players. Could you say that for any Rockies pitcher?

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by rats60

Wrong. The reason he didn’t win in 1964 was 20-9, 1.65 ERA, 11 shutouts 2.39 FIP all lead the league by Dean Chance. He also had a 1.07 ERA at home and 2.25 on the road. Koufax probably wins if there was a CY Young award in each league. Also, Koufax had an ERA+ of 186. That led the league by 28%. So there is nothing to see here.

As far as 1965, Koufax 2.04 ERA Marichal 2.13, Koufax 26 wins, Marichal 22, W/L% Koufax .765% Marichal .629, WHIP Koufax .855 Marichal .914, H/9 Koufax 5.792 Marichal 6.826, K/9 Koufax 10.242 Marichal 7.314, IP 335.2 Marichal 295.1, Ks Koufax 382 Marichal 240 CG Koufax 27 Marichal 24 K/BB Koufax 5.380 Marichal 5.217 FIP Koufax 1.93 Marichal 2.59. All led the NL.

Marichal led in shutouts 10-8, BB/9 1.402 -1.904 and your favorite ERA+ 169-160.

This is pretty obvious in Koufax’s favor thus Koufax was the unanimous Cy Young winner. Even the Giants writers voted Koufax. Koufax also led in fWAR 10.0 to Marichal 6.8 although somehow bWAR had Marichal led 10.3 to 8.1 showing how worthless WAR really is.

In 1965 Marichal leads Koufax by 169-160 in ERA+ and that translates into 10.3-8.1 spread in bWAR despite Koufax pitching more inning, setting a record for strikeouts in a season, having a better WHIP, FIP, etc. Yet in 1964 Koufax leads Drysdale in ERA+ 186-147, 41% as well as WHIP and FIP, but Drysdale pitches more innings and has more strikeouts so he has a higher b WAR 7.8-7.3. These stats are just made up, there is no transparency and they makes absolutely no sense. I have been asking for years for someone to give a scientific explanation and I get nothing. I am not a sheep. I think for myself. I am not going to accept something just because someone says trust me. The only stats that are reliable are ones based in math and scientific method, the ones that have reason and can be calculated. That is why I go by ERA, WHIP and FIP.

They say Koufax is the best lefty and the only one close is Kershaw. If he was even decent in postseason, one could make a case, but his dreadful 9 postseason history make it impossible to pick him. Some might want longevity of an above average pitcher,l but I am taking Koufax’s 12 years with 5-6 years of brilliance and championships over 20+ of good but never great and not winning because of it.

You must have missed my earlier post, please explain why bWAR is "made up" but you use fWAR to make a point. Also, why would you use ERA+ in a comparison when it helps Koufax, but say it doesn't count when it doesn't have him come out ahead? You keep saying that Grove is obviously better than Koufax because of all the strikeouts and shutouts, but when someone has more strikeouts, you want to look at other stats?