Bob Feller Career

[BobC]

Unfortunately, Feller gave up almost four full seasons at the absolute prime of his career to enlist in the Navy and serve as a gun captain aboard the USS Alabama. He was the very first professional athlete, not just a baseball player, to voluntarily enlist in the service after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. He remained in the Navy till after the Japanese unconditionally surrendered on August 14, 1945, and was officially discharged on August 22, 1945. And in typical Feller fashion, just two days later he took the mound for the Indians on August 24 and pitched a complete game, 12 strikeout, 4-2 win over the season's eventual World Series champs, the Tigers.

In 1941, his last full season before he enlisted in the Navy, he led all the majors in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced. He additionally led just the AL in games pitched in, shutouts, hits given up, and SO per 9 innings. He pitched 28 complete games with an ERA of 3.15 on 343.0 innings pitched, and per Baseball Reference had a WAR of 8.2, which was actually a somewhat down year for him as he had a 9.9 and 9.2 WAR for the previous 1940 and 1939 seasons, respectfully.

Then in his first full season back in 1946, he led all the majors again in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced, and added also leading the majors in total games pitched in, shutouts, and hits given up. And I can already hear all the trolls and naysayers chomping at the bit to jump on and put him down for giving up all those hits and walks, but that year he did so with an ERA of 2.18. Or are all the sabremetric and statistical nerds going to argue he was the luckiest pitcher alive and must have had one of the greatest and luckiest defenses in baseball behind him, over the entire season? In that first year back, he pitched 36 complete games, out of a total of 42 that he started, 10 of which were shut outs, with 348 strikeouts over 371.1 innings pitched. He literally pitched less than every fourth day for the entire season. And he ended up per Baseball Reference with a 10.0 WAR for that year.

I couldn't find or figure out on Baseball Reference how to get a listing of total WAR for all players by season back then, it kept wanting to give me listings for just offensive or position player WAR. So over on FanGraph I found some total WAR listings for all MLB players which showed that Bob Feller ranked #1 in WAR for all of baseball in 1939 and 1940, was #6 in 1941, and then came back to rank #2 in WAR for 1946, second only to Ted Williams. And don't forget, Feller has three no-hitters, including the only Opening Day no-hitter in MLB history back in 1940, the same year he also won the AL's Pitching Triple Crown.

Now, go back and fill in the four seasons that Feller lost due to WW II, based on how he was doing before he left and after he came back, and then tell everyone where he should rank. Oh, and maybe keep in mind that Feller actually didn't have to go into the service and was eligible for a deferment due to his father's health. Stats and metrics are okay, but there is so much they can't/don't take into account. Feller was probably top 2-3 in his era. I don't see the waste of time in arguing who is this or that over all time because of the differences in the game, context, rules, equipment, and everything else. And then top it off with all the statistics-centric people that view the modern game and players as being so much better than everyone before them.

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by BobC

Unfortunately, Feller gave up almost four full seasons at the absolute prime of his career to enlist in the Navy and serve as a gun captain aboard the USS Alabama. He was the very first professional athlete, not just a baseball player, to voluntarily enlist in the service after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. He remained in the Navy till after the Japanese unconditionally surrendered on August 14, 1945, and was officially discharged on August 22, 1945. And in typical Feller fashion, just two days later he took the mound for the Indians on August 24 and pitched a complete game, 12 strikeout, 4-2 win over the season's eventual World Series champs, the Tigers.

In 1941, his last full season before he enlisted in the Navy, he led all the majors in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced. He additionally led just the AL in games pitched in, shutouts, hits given up, and SO per 9 innings. He pitched 28 complete games with an ERA of 3.15 on 343.0 innings pitched, and per Baseball Reference had a WAR of 8.2, which was actually a somewhat down year for him as he had a 9.9 and 9.2 WAR for the previous 1940 and 1939 seasons, respectfully.

Then in his first full season back in 1946, he led all the majors again in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced, and added also leading the majors in total games pitched in, shutouts, and hits given up. And I can already hear all the trolls and naysayers chomping at the bit to jump on and put him down for giving up all those hits and walks, but that year he did so with an ERA of 2.18. Or are all the sabremetric and statistical nerds going to argue he was the luckiest pitcher alive and must have had one of the greatest and luckiest defenses in baseball behind him, over the entire season? In that first year back, he pitched 36 complete games, out of a total of 42 that he started, 10 of which were shut outs, with 348 strikeouts over 371.1 innings pitched. He literally pitched less than every fourth day for the entire season. And he ended up per Baseball Reference with a 10.0 WAR for that year.

I couldn't find or figure out on Baseball Reference how to get a listing of total WAR for all players by season back then, it kept wanting to give me listings for just offensive or position player WAR. So over on FanGraph I found some total WAR listings for all MLB players which showed that Bob Feller ranked #1 in WAR for all of baseball in 1939 and 1940, was #6 in 1941, and then came back to rank #2 in WAR for 1946, second only to Ted Williams. And don't forget, Feller has three no-hitters, including the only Opening Day no-hitter in MLB history back in 1940, the same year he also won the AL's Pitching Triple Crown.

Now, go back and fill in the four seasons that Feller lost due to WW II, based on how he was doing before he left and after he came back, and then tell everyone where he should rank. Oh, and maybe keep in mind that Feller actually didn't have to go into the service and was eligible for a deferment due to his father's health. Stats and metrics are okay, but there is so much they can't/don't take into account. Feller was probably top 2-3 in his era. I don't see the waste of time in arguing who is this or that over all time because of the differences in the game, context, rules, equipment, and everything else. And then top it off with all the statistics-centric people that view the modern game and players as being so much better than everyone before them.

Well said. I guess he will be another "what could have been" player due to missing time even though he had a great career anyway. It's just sad pitchers back in the day who were elite were pitching a lot of innings but today's pitchers are being babied by the analytics managers and are even being pulled from games that are no hitters with only 80 or so pitches thrown.

[Exhibitman]

We may all be jaded by Feller's ubiquitous hobby life. The guy literally worked the show circuit for decades and was not bashful about touting his own greatness when he did. Familiarity breeds contempt. We'd all roll eyes when he was announced as a guest and I think that carries over.

I've always thought of three pitchers in the 1930s-1941: Grove, Feller and Hubbell. I'll take those three and another good starter over any other 1-2-3 I can think of in that era.

Oh, card:

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

We may all be jaded by Feller's ubiquitous hobby life. The guy literally worked the show circuit for decades and was not bashful about touting his own greatness when he did. Familiarity breeds contempt. We'd all roll eyes when he was announced as a guest and I think that carries over.

I've always thought of three pitchers in the 1930s-1941: Grove, Feller and Hubbell. I'll take those three and another good starter over any other 1-2-3 I can think of in that era.

Oh, card:

You may have a point. What's the old joke, "The rarest Bob Feller card is the one he didn't sign.". However, he was definitely a great ambassador for the game, and had absolutely no problem interacting and meeting with fans, and especially kids. He would talk with and sign for pretty much anyone and everyone. He didn't charge an arm and a leg to sign, and if I remember, would often just ask for small donations to his museum in return for autographs.

As for touting his own greatness, what's another old saying? "It ain't bragging if you can back it up!". And if that's the worst thing you can think to say about him, I'd say that's pretty darn good for him. Always wondered why he didn't seem to get a similar level of respect at being such an ambassador for the game as say Buck O'Neil. For the longest time he seemed to be a fixture on the hobby circuit almost as much as Feller.

In the end though, I think those lost WWII years cost him more than almost anyone else in baseball. Without those missing years, he probably easily reaches the 300 wins - 3,000 strikeout milestone plateaus for pitchers, and gets the recognition he likely wasn't getting otherwise. Plus, playing his whole career in Cleveland, instead of say New York or Chicago, didn't help his overall popularity either.

And I said earlier, I'd put him in the top 2-3 pitchers for his era, so alongside Hubbell and Grove, I'm with you.

[Collectorsince62]

The whole Bob Feller story is just so compelling . . . and just drips with Americana. Raised on a farm in the heartland. He set records, including striking out 17 in a game, and appeared on the cover of Time, before he even graduated high school! The extensive service to his country during the absolute prime of his career. Three no-hitters, and 12 one-hitters! Forget the statistical rankings and just appreciate him for the wonderful story of his career.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Tomi

Well said. I guess he will be another "what could have been" player due to missing time even though he had a great career anyway. It's just sad pitchers back in the day who were elite were pitching a lot of innings but today's pitchers are being babied by the analytics managers and are even being pulled from games that are no hitters with only 80 or so pitches thrown.

Right back at you, well said as well.

Not saying all modern pitchers wouldn't be able to do well back then, but I can see many that wouldn't necessarily be able to pitch so well given how pitchers were worked in those days.