Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark17
If you go with Koufax, you have to put up with 7 years of mediocrity (54-53 record, which averages fewer than 8 wins a year.) Johnson gives you 5 years of non-greatness. But if you take Grove or Spahn, you have a 20-game winner in their 3rd season, and quality and longevity from then on.
I know Koufax, in his prime, was dominant, but the Dodgers needed the rest of the staff to carry him for the first 7 years of his career. That's a long time to be average, for a guy some want to call the best ever.
|
This! And many others who have said basically the same thing. If you want to say the best ever (with no qualifiers), you
imply their entire career. Otherwise why is the assumed cutoff to be 5 years (of 10+)? Why not 4, or 3? If you want to debate who had the best 5 year span, that's an entirely different question.
If you are looking at the entire career, Koufax was not the best ever. And as someone else has said here. Case closed!