Most undervalued HOFers

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Yes! Ultimately, everyone wants the win, but it's certainly not solely on the shoulders of any one player to achieve that. The pitcher may get credit for the decision, but there are lots of other players and factors that determine the outcome. Therefore, I will never solely be transfixed with W-L.

Every manager wants strikeouts from his pitchers. While there are other obvious requests, "Get that guy out" has to be the big one.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

Yes! Ultimately, everyone wants the win, but it's certainly not solely on the shoulders of any one player to achieve that. The pitcher may get credit for the decision, but there are lots of other players and factors that determine the outcome. Therefore, I will never solely be transfixed with W-L.

Every manager wants strikeouts from his pitchers. While there are other obvious requests, "Get that guy out" has to be the big one.

Yep. A win or a loss depend half on how good the pitcher was, half on how much run support he got. Thus, people win Cy Youngs with mediocre W-L records. IIRC Ryan himself had a season where he lost twice as many as he won, but led the league in ERA.

[robw1959]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yep. A win or a loss depend half on how good the pitcher was, half on how much run support he got. Thus, people win Cy Youngs with mediocre W-L records. IIRC Ryan himself had a season where he lost twice as many as he won, but led the league in ERA.

Maybe the pitching factor is only one-third of a team's success; the other two-thirds being hitting and defense. Defense is a very underrated factor of success in baseball.

[Kutcher55]

Wasn't Gaylord Perry a blatant cheater who once got caught with a tub of vaseline inside his baseball cap? And you're comparing him to the Ryan express? Guy, guy, c'mon guy.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

Wasn't Gaylord Perry a blatant cheater who once got caught with a tub of vaseline inside his baseball cap? And you're comparing him to the Ryan express? Guy, guy, c'mon guy.

This is a perfect example, guy. I said that Perry and Ryan are "pretty similar" in regards to their career values. Let's see.

Ryan: 324-292, 112 ERA+, 5,386 IP, 1.247 WHIP, 83.6 WAR

Perry: 314-265, 117 ERA+, 5,350 IP, 1.181 WHIP, 90.0 WAR

Well, looks like they are, in fact, pretty similar in regards to their actual career values.

They produced similar careers and values, but Ryan had the highlight reel, the press, the flashy K's (and forgotten walks) and the dedicated fanbase while Perry did not. I understand that many people are not interested in using the math or value or anything like that, and follow an emotion or who they like or who had the PR, or the highlight reel, or single game accomplishments. I do not understand why many of these people object that other people use math to evaluate instead.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Ryan has the all-time records for Ks and BBs. Cy Young holds the records for both wins and losses. It seems like they both get a lot of grief for the negatives in these online discussions.

Connie Mack, of course, is the managerial record holder for both wins and losses, and "only" 5 World Series titles in the 48 seasons he managed when the World Series existed. For not being a Yankee manager, that's actually not half bad. For being the manager of the mostly lowly A's, it's extra impressive. So, looking only at the losses, I suppose Connie wasn't a great manager... /s

Comparing Ryan to Perry...sure, some stats certainly line up, but isn't selectively omitting the other stats/accomplishments just catering to your own viewpoint? These other major factors differ greatly between the two men. Those differences are why he was given the extra attention and adulation. It only makes sense. Ryan's 7 no-hitters to Perry's one. More than twice the strikeouts than Perry in just a few more seasons of play (and yes, more than twice the walks, but I guess I'm fine with being more forgiving).

Why do the people who come down hard on Ryan like to be so dismissive of his most important records? Like I've already said, he was a different kind of pitcher and was great in his own way. Seaver was great in another way, as was Walter Johnson, etc.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

Ryan has the all-time records for Ks and BBs. Cy Young holds the records for both wins and losses. It seems like they both get a lot of grief for the negatives in these online discussions.

Connie Mack, of course, is the managerial record holder for both wins and losses, and "only" 5 World Series titles in the 48 seasons he managed when the World Series existed. For not being a Yankee manager, that's actually not half bad. For being the manager of the mostly lowly A's, it's extra impressive. So, looking only at the losses, I suppose Connie wasn't a great manager... /s

Comparing Ryan to Perry...sure, some stats certainly line up, but isn't selectively omitting the other stats just catering to your own viewpoint? Other stats/accomplishments differ greatly between the two men. Those differences are why he was given the extra attention and adulation. It only makes sense. Ryan's 7 no-hitters to Perry's one. More than twice the strikouts than Perry in just a few more seasons of play (and yes, more than twice the walks, but I guess I'm fine with being more forgiving).

Why do the people who come down hard on Ryan like to be so dismissive of his most important records? Like I've already said, he was a different kind of pitcher and was great in his own way. Seaver was great in another way, as was Walter Johnson, etc.

K's and BB's are not dismissed, in fact I very directly acknowledged them in the written text. For the third time, what I said is that Perry and Ryan are "pretty similar" in regards to their career value. Ryan got there with the flashy K's, as I said very specifically. Perry had the more balanced route to basically the same value. Again, as I said, "Striking out tons of people and then walking in runs doesn't really help a team anymore than a more conventional stat line that adds up to the same run performance." When it comes to objective value over large sample sizes, it doesn't really matter how a pitcher gives up runs, it matters that he gives them up or does not give them up.

It is not coming down hard on Ryan to look at his objective value, it just does not reach the desirable conclusion. I said he had a heck of a valuable career. It is not insulting to look at his actual career numbers. I really do not care about emotional arguments.

[Kutcher55]

Originally Posted by G1911

This is a perfect example, guy. I said that Perry and Ryan are "pretty similar" in regards to their career values. Let's see.

Ryan: 324-292, 112 ERA+, 5,386 IP, 1.247 WHIP, 83.6 WAR

Perry: 314-265, 117 ERA+, 5,350 IP, 1.181 WHIP, 90.0 WAR

Well, looks like they are, in fact, pretty similar in regards to their actual career values.

They produced similar careers and values, but Ryan had the highlight reel, the press, the flashy K's (and forgotten walks) and the dedicated fanbase while Perry did not. I understand that many people are not interested in using the math or value or anything like that, and follow an emotion or who they like or who had the PR, or the highlight reel, or single game accomplishments. I do not understand why many of these people object that other people use math to evaluate instead.

My career is based around math. Analysis is part art and part science. You referenced a group of similar numbers and say they are basically the same guy. Clearly when you look at factors beyond the W/L and WAR, they aren’t.

[Kutcher55]

And Bobby Grich and Derek Jeter are the same guy because they have the same WAR, Right?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

My career is based around math. Analysis is part art and part science. You referenced a group of similar numbers and say they are basically the same guy. Clearly when you look at factors beyond the W/L and WAR, they aren’t.

Then if you object to my claim on math grounds, counter that claim that their overall career values are pretty similar with math instead of emotion.