I think Pedro's probably the best starting pitcher of my lifetime. I don't know how it's possible that he won 20 games in a season only twice. Between 1997 and 2003, he had a composite 213 ERA +. That's filthy.

Thanks, Raymond. And sorry. :D

Just wait until I have a better command of Sabermetrics. Then I'll make your head explode.

At his peak of a few years, I would agree. But I'm not sure that makes him the "best" pitcher. I would value the overall career more, and take Clemens, Maddux and Randy Johnson over Pedro.

Parker doesn't do so well on the sabremetrics as I recall.

Between 1997 and 2003, seven seasons and 199 games started, Martinez was 118-36 (.766 winning pct) with a 2.20 ERA. In 1,408 innings pitched, he struck out 1,761 batters against 315 walks. 93 home runs given up in 5,542 batters faced. Led the league in ERA five times, ERA +, FIP and WHIP five times each.

His 162 game averages: 21-7, 2.20 ERA, 240 IP, 300 SO, 54 BB.

Dwight Gooden's 1985 season is often mentioned as one of the best of the modern era. His ERA + was 229.
Roger Clemens had three individual seasons over 200 with a high of 226.
Sandy Koufax's career best ERA + was 190.
Bob Gibson, on the tall mound, had a 258 ERA + in 1968. Never over 200 before or after.

Pedro had a 213 ERA + over the course of seven seasons.

The best career ERA + in history belongs to Mariano Rivera (205).
The second best, and best by a starter, is Clayton Kershaw's 160.
Pedro is third with a 154 ERA +, but he's started over 111 more games.

In that seven seasons, Pedro won three Cy Youngs, was runner up twice, and finished third once. He didn't place in the voting in 2001 because he only started 18 games.

His 2000 season, by ERA +, is the second greatest in history. Only Tim Keefe's 293 (in 1880!) bests Pedro's 291.

In 2000, Pedro was 18-8 with a 1.74 ERA (league average was 4.92) across 217 innings. He struck out 284, walked 32, and only gave up 128 hits. He led the league in ERA, shutouts (4), strike outs, FIP (2.17), WHIP (0.737), hits/9 IP (5.3), HR/9 IP (0.7), strikeouts/9 IP (11.8) and K:BB (8.88).

Oh, and by the way. The second best ERA in the American League in 2000? Roger Clemens at 3.70. Pedro's 1.74 was almost 2 full runs better than any other pitcher in the league.

For sheer dominance over that period of time, Pedro was absolutely spectacular.

Just saw this.

Mike Trout's career WAR is 59.6 in the equivalent of six seasons (6.10 to be precise, 988 games).

He has already passed Yogi Berra, a three time MVP winner who also played a premium position, catcher. He was both a strong offensive and defensive catcher. Per BBR, Berra was worth 59.4 WAR. Fangraphs has Trout at 60 WAR. Fangraphs has Berra at 63.7. That still seems off to me.

I don't care how good Mike Trout is. Something is rotten in Denmark when Mike Trout in 988 games is more valuable than Yogi Berra in 2,120 games.

Oh, and before the season's end, Trout will have passed Mike Piazza, Harmon Killebrew, Jackie Robinson and Shoeless Joe Jackson.

:rolleyes:

Trout and WAR seem to be the perfect couple.

What I don't get is why Pedro, with that incredible stretch, is only 22nd all time in WAR7. It's not a perfect metric but it must mean something.

The short answer, Peter? Pedro pitched less per season than the guys ahead of him. Here are his seven best seasons by WAR

2000 11.7
1999 9.8
1997 9.0
2003 8.0
1998 7.3
2005 7.0
2002 6.5

When I look at these seasons, the first thing that jumps out at me is his starts per season. Typically, a starter of the last few decades will get 33 or 34 starts in a full season. Pedro, for whatever reason, didn't. Here's his seven best WAR seasons with the number of starts.

2000 11.7 (29 starts)
1999 9.8 (29 starts)
1997 9.0 (31 starts)
2003 8.0 (29 starts)
1998 7.3 (33 starts)
2005 7.0 (31 starts)
2002 6.5 (30 starts)
59.3 WAR7

Look at his 2001 season, too. He had a 5.1 WAR, but only started 18 games. I don't recall the injury, and one would not usually assume he'd maintain the same level of dominance across 33 starts....but Pedro had 202 and 211 ERA + the next two seasons. Take that 5.1 WAR across 33 starts, everything else being constant. His WAR ends up being about a 9.4.

When I look at Clemens, he averaged 34 starts per 162 games for his career. Martinez averaged 31. Considering Clemens' career length, what he did was amazing. But then again, he was 6'4" 205 lbs. Pedro wasn't built for a long career. He's 5'11" 170 lbs. Johnson was 6'10" 225 when he played. Seaver and Gibson were both 6'1" and 190 lbs approximately.

Look at his seasonal WARs for those seven seasons if he averages 33 games started each year.

2000 11.7 (29 starts) (33 starts WAR is 13.3)
1999 9.8 (29 starts) (33 starts WAR is 11.2)
1997 9.0 (31 starts) (33 starts WAR is 9.6)
2003 8.0 (29 starts) (33 starts WAR is 9.0)
1998 7.3 (33 starts) (WAR does not change; he made 33 starts)
2005 7.0 (31 starts) (33 starts WAR is at 7.5)
2002 6.5 (30 starts) (33 starts WAR is 7.2)

Martinez gains another 19 starts, about 2/3 of his regular season work load. His WAR7 increases from 59.3 to 65.1. That moves him up to 13th, a half game behind Lefty Grove's 65.6. Grove and Clemens would be the only pitchers who started their career in the live ball era with higher WAR7.

Had he not missed so much of the 2001 season, it's more than likely he passes up his 2002 and 2005 tallies, thereby increasing his WAR7 further. This is clearly an estimation, but based on how he'd pitched that season, and the next two seasons, I don't think it's a stretch. Additionally, Clemens pitched 24 seasons to Martinez' 18. But Pedro broke down after the 2005 season.

Just look at the innings pitched by the modern era starters on this WAR7 list.

(IP per 162 games)

Gibson 262
Seaver 250
Gomez 250
Clemens 236
Randy Johnson 230
Martinez 217

Pedro's high IP seasons were 241 and 233. He didn't top 220 in any other season.

Clemens had eight seasons of 240 +, including four of over 260.
Johnson had seven seasons of 240 +, including two over 260.

I looked at Boston's rotation while Pedro was there. In 1998, they had a four man rotation (Martinez, Wakefield, Saberhagen and Steve Avery combined for 120 starts). In 1999, the starts were divided this way:

Pedro Martinez 29 (2.07 ERA)
Mark Portugal 27 (5.51 ERA)
Pat Rapp 26 (4.12 ERA)
Bret Saberhagen 22 (2.95 ERA)
Brian Rose 18 (4.87 ERA)
Tim Wakfield 17 (5.08 ERA)
Jin Ho Cho 7 (5.72 ERA)
Kent Mercker 5 (3.51 ERA)
Ramon Martinez 4 (3.05 ERA)
4 other pitchers with 7 starts

I'd have to do some looking up to be sure, but my impression of why Pedro had fewer starts is a combination of schedule and how he was handled.

The schedule struck me as something like pedro starts, 4 other guys start, then an off day. So instead of starting every 5 he started very 6th day sometimes. But I cold easily be wrong about that.
The handling I think was occasionally sliding him a day or so to get him matched up with the other teams ace. great matchups, and maybe a good overall strategy pairing Pedro with the players who were harder to beat. I'm almost positive that happened at least a couple times a year.

In The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract (2001), James ranked Bobby Grich as the 107th greatest player of all-time. Keep in mind that several of the players on his top 100 either never played in the Major Leagues (their careers came prior to 1942), or they played on a very limited basis:

4. Oscar Charleston
9. Josh Gibson
17. Satchel Paige
25. Turkey Stearnes
43. Mule Suttles
52. Smokey Joe Williams
65. Buck Leonard
67. Cristobal Torriente
76. Cool Papa Bell
86. Willie Wells
95. Martin Dihigo

Therefore, it's clear that of the full-time Major League players, James, as of 2001, anyway, would put Bobby Grich in the top 100 all-time.

He has Grich 12th all-time at second base.

1. Joe Morgan
2. Eddie Collins
3. Rogers Hornsby
4. Jackie Robinson
5. Craig Biggio
6. Nap Lajoie
7. Ryne Sandberg
8. Charlie Gehringer
9. Rod Carew
10. Roberto Alomar
11. Frankie Frisch
12. Bobby Grich
13. Lou Whitaker
14. Billy Herman
15. Nellie Fox

For Peter,

Sorry I'm just now getting around to this. But in reference to your point about Grich's batting average being lower than Alan Trammell's:

The things that a hitter does to help his team can be summarized in two more or less equal groups:

1. Hitting for average
2. Everything else

"Secondary average" is a loose and approximate measure of the "everything else" group-walks, power and stolen bases, per at bat.

Overall secondary averages are almost the same as overall batting averages-but not for middle infielders. Second basemen tend to have secondary averages about 60 points lower than their batting averages, overall. Grich was an exception to that rule: a second baseman who did hit for power and did draw walks. The best secondary averages among second basemen:

1. Joe Morgan, .431
2. Maxie Bishop, .362
3. Rogers Hornsby, .362
4. Jackie Robinson, .355
5. Joe Gordon, .346
6. Davey Lopes, .344
7. Tony Lazzeri, .336
8. Bobby Grich, .330
9. George Grantham, .329
10. Eddie Stanky, .322
11. Eddie Collins, .322

I totally don't get that bit. Does he consider pre 1942 to not be major league?

The players he listed are all Negro Leaguers.

Going back to the Grich question, I think the era that he played in and where he played had a lot to do with it. I don't know how many times I saw Alan Trammell play, but I can comfortably say it was several hundred times. How can I guess this? I had cable TV and access to American League teams starting in the mid 1980's. I saw the Tigers at least 10-15 times per regular season, plus all of the playoff games during Trammell's career. For guys like Garvey, how many times was he on television? The Dodgers were always a hot draw, plus you could see them on WGN or WTBS against the Cubs and Braves. I'd say I saw Garvey play at least 20-30 times per season from the 1977-1985.

Now, what about Grich? Grich played with the Orioles and Angels. Those teams didn't play on WGN or WTBS in the 1970's. For many fans, the only baseball game was the 1 PM NBC Game of the Week, and the ABC Monday Night Baseball game. How many times would you see Grich play in a season? 2-3 at most I would guess. Someone mentioned Rod Carew. He is a good example. Remember watching him with the Twins? No, seriously, do you remember? I don't. I collected his cards and I always saw him near the top of the batting stats, but how many times do I really remember seeing him as a Minnesota Twin? Maybe a couple in 1977 when he was pushing .400, but not before that. From 1973-76, I would bet the Twins were almost NEVER on national television.
So, I say all of this because we vote for who we know. Sportswriters didn't vote for Grich because half of them never saw him play. If you are going to get voted in without being seen, you better put up Rod Carew numbers. Grich didn't.