My top 3 living pitchers are Koufax, Maddux and Martinez. Big Unit was a great pitcher, too. When those guys were pitching you expected them to win every time.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Considering he led in ERA+ just twice* in those five years, perhaps the gap over the rest of pitchers isn't quite as large as perceived.

* - yes, leading twice is really, really good. Let's be real clear on that.

I voted for Ohtani. But Bonds, Griffey, and Randy Johnson all have a pretty strong case as well in my eyes.

The next time I get into an argument on this forum, I will try to remind myself that 14 people here voted for Johnny Bench and 16 people voted for Mike Schmidt.

Obviously that helped, but it hardly did EVERYTHING or every average pitcher who came to the Dodgers would've become Koufax. It doesn't explain the precipitous drop in his walk rate. I mean Koufax didn't become Claude Osteen, or even Don Sutton or Don Drysdale, He became KOUFAX. When every hitter in the league this side of Hank Aaron talks about practically giving up when they face him that can't all just be hype and a good stadium.

Willie Stargell - trying to hit Koufax was like “trying to drink coffee with a fork."

Pete Rose - "I couldn't hit my weight against Koufax" (he was 10 for 57 for his career)

Of all the players to single out, and you are going with Bench and Schmidt?

Bench is arguably the greatest catcher ever.

Schmidt is the greatest 3rd basemen ever. He was an elite fielder--and has a career WAR over 100. He won MVP 3x, and finished in the top 10 five other times. His career OPS+ of 148 is in the top 50 ever. He is one of 3 players (with Griffey Jr. and Mays) to win at least 10 Gold Gloves and hit 500 Home Runs. And you are singling out Mike Schmidt as a bad choice?

I agree that Bench and Schmidt are 2 surprising choices to complain about. If I had to pick the result that I found most surprising, it would be the number of votes for Pete Rose. Regardless of his gambling issues, I agree he was a great player, but power hitters usually get thought of more than singles hitters when you talk about the greatest players in baseball.

He is not on the ballot, but Clayton Kershaw's stats compare favorably to many of those who are.

He has the fifth highest winning percentage of any pitcher (210-92, .695), and the players above him either have well under 200 wins (120 at most) or compiled their stats in the National Association. His ERA is the lowest (2.48) of any player in the live-ball era except Mariano Rivera (who pitched half the number of innings). He is fourth all-time in adjusted ERA+ (157) with over 1200 more innings than the three players above him, fifth in WHIP, 3rd in hits per inning pitched, has won three Cy Young awards, and an MVP.

His 162-game average is similar (if not better) than other pitchers with votes:
Kershaw 17-7, 2.48 ERA, 236 strikeouts, 157 ERA+.
Martinez 17-8, 2.93 ERA, 242 strikeouts, 154 ERA+
Koufax 16-8, 2.76, 229 strikeouts, 131 ERA+
Johnson 17-9, .3.29, 279 strikeouts, 135 ERA+
Maddux 16-10, 3.16, 154 strikeouts, 132 ERA+
Clemens 17-9, 3.12, 224 strikeouts, 144 ERA+.

It is better than Ryan's 14-13, 3.19, 246 strikeouts, 112 ERA+.

So, what's the problem? He has been an average (or below average) pitcher in the post-season, so much so that it seems to preclude him from any of these discussions, despite regular season statistics that should put him in the argument for greatest living pitcher (if not player).

I am not saying the post-season should be discounted. He has pitched almost the equivalent of a full season with a 13-13 record and a 4.49 ERA. Not being great in the post-season did not hurt Willie Mays or Ted Williams when we discuss all-time greats, but the sample size is not large for those guys.

I just think that if he had been at least pretty good in the post-season, he would be talked about in far different terms.

The post season absolutely has hurt Kershaw's image -- and rightly so IMO.

I am hard pressed to think of anyone who has been hurt more than Kershaw by their post-season performance.

193 IP with a 4.49 ERA, the consistency of his mediocrity is through a pretty large sample size.

I totally get it as well. Kind of a shame because he really has been great in the regular season. I think if he had just been normal good but not great (say like Verlander 17-12 3.58) it would not be held against him that much.

Made worse IMO by the fact that Roberts never knew when to pull him.

I agree 100%.

It is amazing to me that Pete Rose has the 3 most number of votes. He was a versatile fielder, but not a particularly good one. And he was a one-dimensional hitter. Let's not forget that in addition to betting on baseball, he was also corking his bat at the end of his career, as he tried to pass Cobb on the all-time hits list.

I think there's an easy explanation for Rose's stature -- he broke one of baseball's most sacred records that was long considered untouchable.

He did break the record but if you're going to pick a player in the same vein as Rose, I think Wade Boggs was infinitely better.

I was not a fan. Purely anecdotal, but it seemed he never got a hit in a meaningful situation. Bases empty up or down five runs, he was awesome lol.

Are you talking about Arod? Because that is what I remember about him. I believe Boggs batted around .360 with runners in scoring position.

Yes, his overtaking Cobb (while corking his bat) is the explanation. It is not a good one.

He has an OPS of .806 or higher in every "clutch" category on baseball reference.

I just don't see a very good player in Pete Rose's stats. He's essentially an Ichiro clone. Their numbers from ages 27 to 45 are strikingly similar. Only 6 people chose Ichiro though and in terms of Ichiro's career, only he and Pete Rose would have accumulated 3,000 hits from age 27 on.

I guess the record explains the disparity, but Ichiro was essentially the same player.

Not an easy stat to find, but finally found it for individual players on baseball-reference.com. Boggs hit .324 with RISP. ARod was .292.

I haven't been able to find a career leaderboard anywhere.

Agreed. Similarly, Koufax should be elevated due to his fantastic postseason stats: 7 World Series starts, 4 complete games, 2 shutouts, 0.95 ERA, .825 WHIP.

I dunno, I think increasing the size of the strike zone might help with reducing walks :)

I appreciate the anecdotes from superstars talking about how hard Koufax was to hit. But Aaron is just being modest, what with his career .362 average and 1.077 OPS against Sandy.

Anecdotes are great but the numbers are the numbers.

double post

Are you saying you don't think either Rose or Ichiro were at least very good players? That's hard to agree with.

Jay, a player's batting average with runners in scoring position is definitely an interesting stat. The top 2 best seasons for a player were:

1. Freddie Lindstrom, Giants, 1930 --- .480 (59 for 123)

2. George Brett, Royals, 1980 --- .469

Jay, check RETROSHEET, which is either part of SABR or Baseball-Reference.com Hope this helps, friend. --- Brian Powell

No, I think they were great at one thing, I'm just not sure that one thing has enough value to elevate them to greatest living player.

It's impossible to ignore a player like Ichiro's peak, but when you look at his entire career and compare his final stats to other HOFers, I do think you're looking at a low-tier HOFer and I would say the same is true of Rose.

Ichiro: 757 career OPS with an OPS+ of 107
Rose: 784 OPS with an OPS+ of 118

All that to say I'm a big Ichiro fan and I loved watching him play. I just don't think he has a case for greatest living player and I don't think there's all that much separating him from Rose, so I have a hard time seeing Rose in the conversation. I think Wade Boggs was better than both of them and is probably the greatest living hitter from a batting title / average perspective. I think it was always Gwynn then Boggs as long as Gwynn was still alive.

Politics aside Barry Bonds for me. Sandy for pitchers
.

I swear I never saw him get a clutch hit and I saw a lot of him. Memory may be distorted by my dislike of his attitude and obsession with his own stats.

OK, I understand what you're saying. It was just the way your previous post was worded that I was confused by.

I think you also have to include Rod Carew in the conversation when you're talking about batting title and average for greatest living hitter. I agree that I wouldn't include him, Rose, Boggs or Ichiro as my pick for greatest living player, though.

Brain, I don't see anything on RetroSheet either about all time leaders in RISP.

My fault. In my head I was discussing them amongst the greatest living players and high-tier HOFers when I said "not very good". They were elite compared to everyone else.

People said the same thing in Philly about Bobby Abreu, but somehow he hit .311 in his career with RISP so some of that had to happen with the Phillies.

I agree that Rose and Ichiro were similar offensively. I do give the edge to Rose because he led the League in doubles 5x and walked more.

But I think Ichiro was more well-balanced player. He stole more than twice as many bases and was a better fielder. Ichiro won 10 Gold Gloves. Rose won just 2 Gold Gloves.

I’m not a big Pete Rose fan but he was great .
4256 hits is a big number , He hit .321 in 301 postseason at bats,
Played in six World Series and won three of them ,
MVP in ‘75 series -
was part of the big red machine and he had some kind of hitting streak

All true, and no question he was one of the greatest ever. But I don’t see how someone can think he is the best living player.

It’s hard to avoid Rose’s record when talking about him and it’s hard to exclude Cobb from thought by extension. Cobb was just so much better than Rose that it’s hard to see them always paired up.

I would even suggest that it’s because Rose broke Cobb’s record and Cobb’s name carries the weight it deserves to that Rose even enters the conversation. But Cobb was a mile ahead of Rose in every other way. If the hit record was held by someone other than Cobb I think Rose loses his shine. Which is to say I don’t think it’s the hit king status that vaults Rose, but the fact that it was Cobb that he topped.

Thanks for finding that. I had just rewatched Boggs 3000th hit game a few days ago and would have sworn I seen that stat when he was up to bat. I just rewatched his at bats and Wade hit .361 lifetime with the bases loaded according to his second at bat stats they displayed.

Here's how to find it for individual players on baseball-reference.com. After going to a player's page, scroll toward the bottom where it lists More Pages. Under Batting Splits, you can choose Career or an individual season. On the next page, open the listing for Show Bases Occupied.

Barry Bonds juicing himself to the gills with PEDS is not bad politics---it's called cheating. It's called desecrating the integrity of the game's record book. Keep the bum out of the Baseball Hall of Fame. Always keep him in the elite hall of shame.

Yes, Barry had a definite HOF career going, just like Joe Jackson. Jackson's misdeeds came in a controversial World Series; how much Joe threw his part of the Series is still argued about back and forth. Bonds's misdeeds came after McGwire and Sosa wowed everybody in 1998, and Barry decided he was going to get some of that stuff, and make everybody forget the former record-holders. What a lousy mess. Furthermore, the juicers influenced young players to use PEDS. I've read of some tragic stories.... --- Brian Powell

Jackson was banned for participating to some degree in throwing a World Series - he was great, but he's out of the discussion. Great stats, all for nothing.

Rose was banned for gambling. He knew clearly what he was doing, and was banned. Great stats, all for nothing.

Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, et al, all blatantly thumbed their collective noses at the no PEDs rules. They knew what they were doing. They aren't banned, but they aren't going into the HoF anytime soon. Great stats, meaningless, all for nothing. Very wealthy, but that's as far as it goes.

Collectors go all gaga over certain cards, and spout meaningless, subjective or otherwise arguments about their stats and greatness. In the end, it means absolutely nothing.

Succinctly well-said, James Ingram. -- Brian Powell

Did it decrease all pitchers' walks by the amount that Koufax's decreased? I'm not going to do the math and am just going to bet you $1 that it didn't.

As for the anecdotes, that's why I said "this side of Aaron" that means - not including Aaron.

Me too, except I rate them Ruth-Bonds-Mays-Aaron. Maybe I am biased from having this card since 1973:

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...0HR%20LDRS.jpg

Or I just like every excuse I can get to show a childhood obsession card.

As for pitchers, I go with either Clemens or Johnson.

I feel like I’m in the twilight zone when I see Bonds name mentioned with Ruth-Mays-Aaron. Do people really not understand that Bonds cheated and his numbers are inflated due to PED use? UGH!

Yes but many people go out of their way to shrug it off.

Man that’s a good card

A reading of the posts will show that everyone appears to be well aware that Bonds used steroids from 1999 or 2000 through sometime between 2003 and 2007. It is not complete ignorance the issue even exists that is the debate.

The Bonds vote proves the value of an anonymous ballot. Looks to me that a lot more people are voting for Bonds than are willing to risk the opprobrium of others for admitting that they voted for Bonds. I admit it, I voted for him. He was a surefire first-ballot HOFer with three MVPs before the PEDs and the greatest force ever seen while juicing. I can't ignore what he did on the field regardless of what I think of him. I won't support him for the HOF; his punishment for doping is that the only way he gets in is with a ticket. I have a similar view about Joe Jackson. No way can I ignore his accomplishments on the field when discussing great players despite my belief that he knowingly took money to throw the World Series and deserves to be banned forever. It is possible to hold a mixed view. I loved Pete Rose as a player; cruddy human being.

I was just about to compliment you on the use of "contumely" but you changed it lol.

I thought "opprobrium" was more apropos. Either would have been bitchen. :)

I appreciate your explanation and reasoning. In reference to the HOF, I have always said that all PED users from that era should be in the HOF. My reasoning is, once they let one in, all should be in. Pudge Rodriguez and others have been voted in, so for me, all get in. Don’t need a positive test or a smoking needle to know if someone used. My only issue with Bonds is that his use took two HR records away from deserving players who didn’t use.

Josh Gibson broke Cobb's lifetime ML batting average and he didn't need to do anything except have an outstanding career.

Well, that, an incomplete sample of 602 games, and a political movement almost every large corporate body in America virtue signaled for over 70 years after his death.

Orwellian.

Ichiro hit .445 as a rookie with RISP, including .546 with the bases loaded.

Picked Bonds as well.....but surprised that AROD only has 2 votes....if picking a player for a team.....all other things aside....and you can grab a good SS that hits almost 700HR.....sign me up!

Right? The number of people who think not only that they like Jeter more but who sincerely believe he was a better baseball player than A-Rod still surprises me.

Officially, he is. Because he didn't illegally juice. Why do you guys pretend that it never happened?

Alex Rodriguez, along with Mookie Betts and Steve Carlton, are currently the only players in the poll to have 0 votes.

Brian

Koufax
 

For anyone that saw Koufax pitch he will always be the greatest pitcher they ever saw. Nobody can change that.

However, no one had more circumstances or advantages that favored him than probably anyone in history including Bonds.

He was a very good pitcher up until 1961 who happened to pitch in a lousy home park in the Coliseum. In 1962 the Dodgers moved to Dodger Stadium the greatest pitchers park in history. In 1963 the strike zone was made larger both up (a huge advantage for fastball pitchers that worked up in the zone) and down. In 1962 mound heights were virtually ignored and when Koufax pitched in Dodger Stadium he was pitching down hill. At home Koufax walked 2.1 men per nine on the road 3.5 men per nine. Check out the perfect game by Koufax when a complete unknown named Bob Hendley threw a one hitter in the same game. The mound height was crazy high.

The best example of the mound height and the influence in Dodger Stadium is in 1964 when Dean Chance of the Angels (who happened to be playing their home games in Dodger Stadium until Anaheim stadium was built) won the CY Young award by posting a 1.07 era at Dodger Stadium.

Evaluating Koufax is really hard, if you just look at the raw numbers he has a place in the discussion for greatest ever but if you look at the circumstances it sways the decision. I don't know where to put him, but you would likely be better off trying to convince people that the world is flat than Koufax wasn't an elite pitcher.

Probably because most are naming a player that they are totally overlooking their PED use because it didn't happen in the so called steroid era.. LOL, seriously Roger Maris was named as a clean player in this thread. The same guy that played 12 years and hit 22% of his total HRs in one season. If he played in the steroid era with those exact same numbers is there anyone who would believe that was a PED free season?

Of course there is no comparison, but Jeter was everything intangible that ARod was not -- clean, modest, team oriented, and at least perceived to be a clutch hitter. The perfect foil to the ultimate prima donna.

Norm Cash had an insane 1961 too.

Would take Jeter over Arod hands down, especially in the playoffs.

Roger Maris won the 1960 MVP award. His 1961 season was not an aberration, he was already the reigning MVP.

If he hit 61 homers in 2023 he wouldn't have been under anymore scrutiny than Aaron Judge was. He was 26 years old in 1961, typically a player's physical peak. I don't see anything to speculate about.

The only reason 1961 is such a large portion of his total production is because he went through physical and mental hell just to complete the year that took an obvious toll on him in every way.

To the bold part. We need the rolling on the floor laughing emoji.

Arron Judge is a 6'7" beast that looks like a body builder without his shirt on. Pretty sure he is PED free also.:rolleyes:

Except in 2009: Alex Rodriguez batted.365 with 19 hits, 6 home runs, 18 RBIs and 15 runs scored in 15 games in the 2009 postseason.

Do you not believe that there are 6 foot 7 people in the world? How much do you think the average 6 foot 7 person weighs? What do you think the average 6 foot 7 NBA player looks like with his shirt off? I don't know what you're suggesting.

Roger Maris led the AL in slugging and RBIs in 1960. His OPS+ that year was 160. In 1961, his OPS+ after hitting 61 home runs was 167.

He essentially had the same season twice, with the caveat that he hit 61 home runs the second time. And if you don't believe Roger went through hell that season, I have several books and articles I could suggest that might shine a light on what he went through.

I do truly believe Roger did go through hell that season. As for PEDs we have way different beliefs. Do you really think the NBA guys are PED free?

I honestly don't get people that think professional athletes are PED free. Drug test are way more of an IQ test than a drug test. Just look at how many times Lance Arrmstrong tested positive. Oh that's right he never failed an IQ, I mean drug test.

I just don't know what you're suggesting about being tall. There are a lot of tall people in the world. These are professional athletes who have been training their whole lives. Why would they not be in great shape regardless of using PEDs? I don't think it's unusual for an athlete to be in great shape.

Ryan Ludwick had by far his two Best years batting in front of the 2008 MVP and the 2009 MVP - when he went to San Diego in 2010 his batting average dropped from 281 to 211 . He never had another year remotely close to those seasons in his career .
Roger Maris clearly benefited batting in front of a switchhitting monster

Oops - looking at some box scores it appears Ludwick was batting forth behind Pujols 😐 for some reason I remember different

I know this is a thread where ascertainable facts are an annoyance, but I can never resist the use of provable facts to support an argument.

Koufax posted an ERA+ of 100 through 1960. He performed at exactly league average, not "very good".

For the second time, not a single poster in this thread has argued the steroid era did not happen or pretended it did not. They just do not come to your blacklist conclusion, which is entirely different.

Officially? Jeter is officially better than A-Rod? What is this official proclamation? Who issued it? Where can I find it?

:) I think we have all done that. I did it yesterday with a stat from by far my all-time favorite player.

I will admit I only hate 2 players in baseball and A-Rod is one of them. I can't say Jeter was better. I will say I have never seen anyone in baseball play/try to win harder every single game than Jeter.:)

I guess you never saw Pete Rose play.

There is a story probably true. Rose goes 6 for 8 in a double header. Afterwards, he persuaded someone to keep the lights on and someone to pitch to him, and is taking batting practice. Someone asks him what the hell he is doing, he went 6 for 8 that day. Rose says, they got me out twice.

Quote definitely true: "I'd walk through hell in a gasoline suit to play baseball."

It's a total shame his gambling addiction undid him.

That is precisely the difference that is ignored by most posts. Who one likes more and who is better at the sport are completely unrelated things. A-Rod is obnoxious, but he's one of the 2 best shortstops ever. Barry Bonds publicly acts like an enormous jackass and used steroids, but that doesn't change that only Babe Ruth dominated the game offensively like he did. Jeter had a likable and positive public persona and PR, but that doesn't change actual performance.


I don't really understand a concept of 'liking' a person I don't know or hating a person I don't know (I mean, I guess I could hate Mel Hall or John Wetteland...), but wherever one leans emotionally has nothing to do with objective and honest evaluation. Claims to fact should not be made if those claims are untrue just because they support a preferred candidate.

Normally I would agree with this but for me taking Jeter over Arod is about more than just stats. I can firmly say I believe he is the greater player over ARod with his clubhouse presence and other intangibles, including just seeking to have a killer instinct at exactly the right moment. Arod seemed like a self-centered jerk who caused distractions and was suspended for cheating. I think my fictional team with Jeter beats a team with Arod over the long run.