[molenick]

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.