Bob Feller Career

[Tomi]

Was looking at pitching careers on baseball reference and came across his stats. Aside from missing 3 full prime seasons to the war and only pitching 9 games in his 1st year back, the guy was pretty incredible.
Just wondering where you guys place him on your list of all time great pitchers.
Top 5,10,15 etc. Overrated, underrated, right where he belongs. His name rarely comes up with the greats at the top of the list but was a hell of a pitcher in his day. Just blown away with how many complete games he has.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tomi

Was looking at pitching careers on baseball reference and came across his stats. Aside from missing 3 full prime seasons to the war and only pitching 9 games in his 1st year back, the guy was pretty incredible.
Just wondering where you guys place him on your list of all time great pitchers.
Top 5,10,15 etc. Overrated, underrated, right where he belongs. His name rarely comes up with the greats at the top of the list but was a hell of a pitcher in his day. Just blown away with how many complete games he has.

I never understood why metrics don't like him. 51st by JAWS? Come on.

[rats60]

I have him 13th.

[cgjackson222]

The heater from Van Meter had some very dominant years, but the 2nd half of his career was not very productive.

I place him around 29, a little behind Nolan Ryan. Both were extreme power pitchers that also walked a lot of batters.

In his prime though, he may be top 10-15.

[Leon]

Every thread needs a card..or blotter..

[Hankphenom]

Who was the best pitcher in the A.L. for the decade of the 1940s, or for the 15 years 1937-52? Answer: Bob Feller. Any pitcher with that kind of dominance on their resume has to be in the truly great category. Fill in Feller's war years with his prime numbers and you've got the proper perspective. Top 10 or 15 all time.

[ClementeFanOh]

270+ career complete games, 3 no hitters, first ballot HOF. I'd call
that outstanding, but just wait- some sophist will insist he is somehow
"overrated". Wait for it... Trent King

[Peter_Spaeth]

His strikeouts really fell off dramatically after 1946, like he lost a foot on his fastball or something.

[Jay Wolt]

He signed at a ton of card shows, always a dignified man

Here's some of his personally owned cards

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

His strikeouts really fell off dramatically after 1946, like he lost a foot on his fastball or something.

Pretty impressive before the strikeouts fall off that he led the league in strikeouts 4 years in a row, went to the military for 3 years, came back and pitched only 9 games the following year and then led the league in strikeouts 3 more years in a row after that. Just imagine those 4 full prime seasons.
Does anyone know if there was an injury in the later half of his career or did he just naturally decline?

[G1911]

I have him around 25. He's got the flashy highlights, but I think no-hitters are not a good metric for a career, and K's are balanced by walks, of which he gave up an absolute ton. 122 ERA+ over 3,800 innings is very good, and closer to his real value.

[Tomi]

My only 2 Feller cards but thrilled to have them with this eye appeal.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I have him around 25. He's got the flashy highlights, but I think no-hitters are not a good metric for a career, and K's are balanced by walks, of which he gave up an absolute ton. 122 ERA+ over 3,800 innings is very good, and closer to his real value.

Interesting cross between a lot of resemblance to Nolan Ryan, and a career trajectory sort of like Pujols.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tomi

Pretty impressive before the strikeouts fall off that he led the league in strikeouts 4 years in a row, went to the military for 3 years, came back and pitched only 9 games the following year and then led the league in strikeouts 3 more years in a row after that. Just imagine those 4 full prime seasons.
Does anyone know if there was an injury in the later half of his career or did he just naturally decline?

I think he just faded out. Interestingly, I've read that Al Lopez refused to start him in the 1954 WS, and when asked why not, said something to the effect of why the hell would I?

[Jason19th]

I always thought he was a bit overrated with a lot of walks and high era and whip. When you look at his leaderboard stats however you see his was really good. I never realized how high eras in the AL were in the early 50’s - he was top 5 with eras around 3.5

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Interesting cross between a lot of resemblance to Nolan Ryan, and a career trajectory sort of like Pujols.

Similar type pitchers. Ryan's ERA is terrible for somebody in talks about the greats, but 5,300 innings is a lot to be 12% over the league over. A pitchers primary job is to not give up runs, not to get flashy K's. If you get a good highlight reel and walk runs in, it doesn't help your team anymore.

Feller was really only bad in 2 seasons, 1952 (after which he regained form and was an aid to his club) and his final season like most players. Pujols was a detriment to his team for like 7 years. Feller is great until he's 29, then he's good until he's done at 37. Pretty normal trajectory, but he gets a higher rating because he started and was good at such an unusually young age.

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I think he just faded out. Interestingly, I've read that Al Lopez refused to start him in the 1954 WS, and when asked why not, said something to the effect of why the hell would I?

He did pitch a TON of innings. If no injury I would think that would be the biggest reason.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I think he just faded out. Interestingly, I've read that Al Lopez refused to start him in the 1954 WS, and when asked why not, said something to the effect of why the hell would I?

He went 13-3 with a 3.09 ERA, 20% better than the league in 1954. Wynn was 35% over league, Garcia 40%, Lemon 36%. Houtemann, the other starter, was 10% above. The Indians had such deep pitching that wasn't a bad call, but its not like Feller was trash that year.

[e6phillips]

Rapid Robert

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Similar type pitchers. Ryan's ERA is terrible for somebody in talks about the greats, but 5,300 innings is a lot to be 12% over the league over. A pitchers primary job is to not give up runs, not to get flashy K's. If you get a good highlight reel and walk runs in, it doesn't help your team anymore.

Feller was really only bad in 2 seasons, 1952 (after which he regained form and was an aid to his club) and his final season like most players. Pujols was a detriment to his team for like 7 years. Feller is great until he's 29, then he's good until he's done at 37. Pretty normal trajectory, but he gets a higher rating because he started and was good at such an unusually young age.

I would have though most pitchers in the top 20-30 or so of all time were great quite a few years longer than age 29? Seems early to go from great to good/OK.

[BobC]

Unfortunately, Feller gave up almost four full seasons at the absolute prime of his career to enlist in the Navy and serve as a gun captain aboard the USS Alabama. He was the very first professional athlete, not just a baseball player, to voluntarily enlist in the service after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. He remained in the Navy till after the Japanese unconditionally surrendered on August 14, 1945, and was officially discharged on August 22, 1945. And in typical Feller fashion, just two days later he took the mound for the Indians on August 24 and pitched a complete game, 12 strikeout, 4-2 win over the season's eventual World Series champs, the Tigers.

In 1941, his last full season before he enlisted in the Navy, he led all the majors in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced. He additionally led just the AL in games pitched in, shutouts, hits given up, and SO per 9 innings. He pitched 28 complete games with an ERA of 3.15 on 343.0 innings pitched, and per Baseball Reference had a WAR of 8.2, which was actually a somewhat down year for him as he had a 9.9 and 9.2 WAR for the previous 1940 and 1939 seasons, respectfully.

Then in his first full season back in 1946, he led all the majors again in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced, and added also leading the majors in total games pitched in, shutouts, and hits given up. And I can already hear all the trolls and naysayers chomping at the bit to jump on and put him down for giving up all those hits and walks, but that year he did so with an ERA of 2.18. Or are all the sabremetric and statistical nerds going to argue he was the luckiest pitcher alive and must have had one of the greatest and luckiest defenses in baseball behind him, over the entire season? In that first year back, he pitched 36 complete games, out of a total of 42 that he started, 10 of which were shut outs, with 348 strikeouts over 371.1 innings pitched. He literally pitched less than every fourth day for the entire season. And he ended up per Baseball Reference with a 10.0 WAR for that year.

I couldn't find or figure out on Baseball Reference how to get a listing of total WAR for all players by season back then, it kept wanting to give me listings for just offensive or position player WAR. So over on FanGraph I found some total WAR listings for all MLB players which showed that Bob Feller ranked #1 in WAR for all of baseball in 1939 and 1940, was #6 in 1941, and then came back to rank #2 in WAR for 1946, second only to Ted Williams. And don't forget, Feller has three no-hitters, including the only Opening Day no-hitter in MLB history back in 1940, the same year he also won the AL's Pitching Triple Crown.

Now, go back and fill in the four seasons that Feller lost due to WW II, based on how he was doing before he left and after he came back, and then tell everyone where he should rank. Oh, and maybe keep in mind that Feller actually didn't have to go into the service and was eligible for a deferment due to his father's health. Stats and metrics are okay, but there is so much they can't/don't take into account. Feller was probably top 2-3 in his era. I don't see the waste of time in arguing who is this or that over all time because of the differences in the game, context, rules, equipment, and everything else. And then top it off with all the statistics-centric people that view the modern game and players as being so much better than everyone before them.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I would have though most pitchers in the top 20-30 or so of all time were great quite a few years longer than age 29? Seems early to go from great to good/OK.

28-32 is when males typically start to leave physical peak. Tons of pitchers fall in this age range, it's pretty normal. It's abnormal for the exceptional, for the top 20, because they are exceptional. Feller makes it into that category because he was great starting at a far younger age than normal, and so ends up similarly.

[G1911]

My favorite Feller is also the '53:

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

I always thought he was a bit overrated with a lot of walks and high era and whip. When you look at his leaderboard stats however you see his was really good. I never realized how high eras in the AL were in the early 50’s - he was top 5 with eras around 3.5

That's because back then batters weren't concerned with exit velocities and launch angles, and striking out much more often while trying to hit home runs all the time. They wanted to get the ball in play and get on base. Also, back then pitchers tried to complete every game they started. Nowadays managers start getting antsy thinking about opposing hitters seeing their starting pitcher for the third time in a game, and call in the bullpen. Different time and different game.

Quite frankly, I'm not so sure many of today's star pitchers would have fared well at all back in those days. If their arms didn't fall off first, how much would they have to scale back in the early innings of games to hopefully have enough left to complete them? Meanwhile, think of telling a Walter Johnson or Bob Feller to not worry about pacing themselves, we only need about 5-6 innings out of you, and then you can rest for 5 days before having to pitch again.

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by BobC

Unfortunately, Feller gave up almost four full seasons at the absolute prime of his career to enlist in the Navy and serve as a gun captain aboard the USS Alabama. He was the very first professional athlete, not just a baseball player, to voluntarily enlist in the service after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. He remained in the Navy till after the Japanese unconditionally surrendered on August 14, 1945, and was officially discharged on August 22, 1945. And in typical Feller fashion, just two days later he took the mound for the Indians on August 24 and pitched a complete game, 12 strikeout, 4-2 win over the season's eventual World Series champs, the Tigers.

In 1941, his last full season before he enlisted in the Navy, he led all the majors in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced. He additionally led just the AL in games pitched in, shutouts, hits given up, and SO per 9 innings. He pitched 28 complete games with an ERA of 3.15 on 343.0 innings pitched, and per Baseball Reference had a WAR of 8.2, which was actually a somewhat down year for him as he had a 9.9 and 9.2 WAR for the previous 1940 and 1939 seasons, respectfully.

Then in his first full season back in 1946, he led all the majors again in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced, and added also leading the majors in total games pitched in, shutouts, and hits given up. And I can already hear all the trolls and naysayers chomping at the bit to jump on and put him down for giving up all those hits and walks, but that year he did so with an ERA of 2.18. Or are all the sabremetric and statistical nerds going to argue he was the luckiest pitcher alive and must have had one of the greatest and luckiest defenses in baseball behind him, over the entire season? In that first year back, he pitched 36 complete games, out of a total of 42 that he started, 10 of which were shut outs, with 348 strikeouts over 371.1 innings pitched. He literally pitched less than every fourth day for the entire season. And he ended up per Baseball Reference with a 10.0 WAR for that year.

I couldn't find or figure out on Baseball Reference how to get a listing of total WAR for all players by season back then, it kept wanting to give me listings for just offensive or position player WAR. So over on FanGraph I found some total WAR listings for all MLB players which showed that Bob Feller ranked #1 in WAR for all of baseball in 1939 and 1940, was #6 in 1941, and then came back to rank #2 in WAR for 1946, second only to Ted Williams. And don't forget, Feller has three no-hitters, including the only Opening Day no-hitter in MLB history back in 1940, the same year he also won the AL's Pitching Triple Crown.

Now, go back and fill in the four seasons that Feller lost due to WW II, based on how he was doing before he left and after he came back, and then tell everyone where he should rank. Oh, and maybe keep in mind that Feller actually didn't have to go into the service and was eligible for a deferment due to his father's health. Stats and metrics are okay, but there is so much they can't/don't take into account. Feller was probably top 2-3 in his era. I don't see the waste of time in arguing who is this or that over all time because of the differences in the game, context, rules, equipment, and everything else. And then top it off with all the statistics-centric people that view the modern game and players as being so much better than everyone before them.

Well said. I guess he will be another "what could have been" player due to missing time even though he had a great career anyway. It's just sad pitchers back in the day who were elite were pitching a lot of innings but today's pitchers are being babied by the analytics managers and are even being pulled from games that are no hitters with only 80 or so pitches thrown.

[Exhibitman]

We may all be jaded by Feller's ubiquitous hobby life. The guy literally worked the show circuit for decades and was not bashful about touting his own greatness when he did. Familiarity breeds contempt. We'd all roll eyes when he was announced as a guest and I think that carries over.

I've always thought of three pitchers in the 1930s-1941: Grove, Feller and Hubbell. I'll take those three and another good starter over any other 1-2-3 I can think of in that era.

Oh, card:

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I would have though most pitchers in the top 20-30 or so of all time were great quite a few years longer than age 29? Seems early to go from great to good/OK.

How many of those great pitchers started pitching full-time in the majors at the age of 17? Hmmmm, 17 to 29 is 13 seasons. I bet a lot of pitchers would be thrilled to be that good for that long. Look at Koufax, he was only great for less than half that time, yet many people consider him up there with the best of all time.

Bob Feller is tied for 46th all-time in career WAR for pitchers with Amos Rusie. Give him the years he missed, and he starts getting close to the top 10.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Tomi

Well said. I guess he will be another "what could have been" player due to missing time even though he had a great career anyway. It's just sad pitchers back in the day who were elite were pitching a lot of innings but today's pitchers are being babied by the analytics managers and are even being pulled from games that are no hitters with only 80 or so pitches thrown.

Right back at you, well said as well.

Not saying all modern pitchers wouldn't be able to do well back then, but I can see many that wouldn't necessarily be able to pitch so well given how pitchers were worked in those days.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

We may all be jaded by Feller's ubiquitous hobby life. The guy literally worked the show circuit for decades and was not bashful about touting his own greatness when he did. Familiarity breeds contempt. We'd all roll eyes when he was announced as a guest and I think that carries over.

I've always thought of three pitchers in the 1930s-1941: Grove, Feller and Hubbell. I'll take those three and another good starter over any other 1-2-3 I can think of in that era.

Oh, card:

You may have a point. What's the old joke, "The rarest Bob Feller card is the one he didn't sign.". However, he was definitely a great ambassador for the game, and had absolutely no problem interacting and meeting with fans, and especially kids. He would talk with and sign for pretty much anyone and everyone. He didn't charge an arm and a leg to sign, and if I remember, would often just ask for small donations to his museum in return for autographs.

As for touting his own greatness, what's another old saying? "It ain't bragging if you can back it up!". And if that's the worst thing you can think to say about him, I'd say that's pretty darn good for him. Always wondered why he didn't seem to get a similar level of respect at being such an ambassador for the game as say Buck O'Neil. For the longest time he seemed to be a fixture on the hobby circuit almost as much as Feller.

In the end though, I think those lost WWII years cost him more than almost anyone else in baseball. Without those missing years, he probably easily reaches the 300 wins - 3,000 strikeout milestone plateaus for pitchers, and gets the recognition he likely wasn't getting otherwise. Plus, playing his whole career in Cleveland, instead of say New York or Chicago, didn't help his overall popularity either.

And I said earlier, I'd put him in the top 2-3 pitchers for his era, so alongside Hubbell and Grove, I'm with you.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

How many of those great pitchers started pitching full-time in the majors at the age of 17? Hmmmm, 17 to 29 is 13 seasons. I bet a lot of pitchers would be thrilled to be that good for that long. Look at Koufax, he was only great for less than half that time, yet many people consider him up there with the best of all time.

Bob Feller is tied for 46th all-time in career WAR for pitchers with Amos Rusie. Give him the years he missed, and he starts getting close to the top 10.

He is 34th in WAR7 so a significant step up from WAR ranking. I thought it would be even better given his incredible start, but maybe he isn't getting credit for his best 7 season stretch because the war intervened after only 6. Certainly an interesting career from several viewpoints.

[Collectorsince62]

The whole Bob Feller story is just so compelling . . . and just drips with Americana. Raised on a farm in the heartland. He set records, including striking out 17 in a game, and appeared on the cover of Time, before he even graduated high school! The extensive service to his country during the absolute prime of his career. Three no-hitters, and 12 one-hitters! Forget the statistical rankings and just appreciate him for the wonderful story of his career.

[jethrod3]

Feller's case always gets me thinking about Ted Williams. Both lost prime years due to the war. How much higher in the key rankings would they have climbed if they hadn't lost those years to serving the greater good? Williams was probably my favorite player that I never actually saw play in live games at a stadium and on TV. Feller may be one of my two favorite pitchers that I never saw play in live games at a stadium or on TV. Feller may have produced numbers putting him squarely in the top 10 all time. I believe Williams may have firmly established himself as the best hitter of all time. Ahh, what might have been!

As for some folks being jaded by Feller being ubiquitious in the hobby, that's hard to fathom. Much of the money he raised by signing autographs helped support his 2-room museum in Van Meter (which was fantastic by the way) and which helped draw people to the city and supported a few people. When I purchased my autographed material the items were extremely reasonably priced. I don't care about scarcity of the autographs. I just want them at a cost that won't break my bank. And Feller's autograph was the autograph of a superstar HOFer that I wanted and still cherish, even though I know if won't help fund my retirement!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jethrod3

As for some folks being jaded by Feller being ubiquitious in the hobby, that's hard to fathom. Much of the money he raised by signing autographs helped support his 2-room museum in Van Meter (which was fantastic by the way) and which helped draw people to the city and supported a few people. When I purchased my autographed material the items were extremely reasonably priced. I don't care about scarcity of the autographs. I just want them at a cost that won't break my bank. And Feller's autograph was the autograph of a superstar HOFer that I wanted and still cherish, even though I know if won't help fund my retirement!

I agree. I think it's awesome that Feller signed everything a fan put in front of him for like 70 years. I don't get why this would be considered a bad thing.

[jethrod3]

Originally Posted by G1911

I agree. I think it's awesome that Feller signed everything a fan put in front of him for like 70 years. I don't get why this would be considered a bad thing.

I know, right? And I suspect that from the point of view of a collector, it wouldn't be. I feel bad that they were unable to keep his museum open. I visited it twice. Both times I went, I was visiting Des Moines and it was just a short drive from there. And both times, they had pieces on loan from Feller's personal collection or others, including the bat Babe Ruth used to lean on in his final appearance at Yankee Stadium. The breadth of autographed material there when I visited was phenomenal, and extremely reasonable priced, and I was able to purchase some autographed HOF cards and a couple of signed HOF busts for the few bucks I had brought with me in my wallet. I was glad that some of the money was going to support his museum. This was probably 15-16 years ago. Unfortunately I never got to meet him and get an autograph in person. As someone else noted above, he was a great ambassador for the game.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by jethrod3

Feller's case always gets me thinking about Ted Williams. Both lost prime years due to the war. How much higher in the key rankings would they have climbed if they hadn't lost those years to serving the greater good? Williams was probably my favorite player that I never actually saw play in live games at a stadium and on TV. Feller may be one of my two favorite pitchers that I never saw play in live games at a stadium or on TV. Feller may have produced numbers putting him squarely in the top 10 all time. I believe Williams may have firmly established himself as the best hitter of all time. Ahh, what might have been!

As for some folks being jaded by Feller being ubiquitious in the hobby, that's hard to fathom. Much of the money he raised by signing autographs helped support his 2-room museum in Van Meter (which was fantastic by the way) and which helped draw people to the city and supported a few people. When I purchased my autographed material the items were extremely reasonably priced. I don't care about scarcity of the autographs. I just want them at a cost that won't break my bank. And Feller's autograph was the autograph of a superstar HOFer that I wanted and still cherish, even though I know if won't help fund my retirement!

You can add Warren Spahn to that list with Feller and Williams as well. Spahn had just come onto the Braves team in 1942, and pitched in only four games before going off to the war. He didn't pitch again till he came back in 1946. But what Spahn and Williams did was play long enough to both reach superstar plateaus for their positions. Spahn had over 300 wins and Williams over 500 home runs. Meanwhile, Feller missed both the 300 wins and 3,000 strikeouts milestones for pitchers, both of which he would have probably easily reached had he not served during the war. And that's why I said in an earlier thread he probably got hurt the most of any ballplayer because of the time missed in the war.

What's interesting for Spahn is that had he not missed almost four seasons to WWII, he would easily have reached 400 wins, and probably had over 3,000 strikeouts as well.

And for Williams it is even possibly more insane. Unlike Feller and Spahn, Williams played the entire 1942 season, and only missed 3 seasons to WWII, not the almost 4 seasons that Feller and Spahn lost. However, what a lot of people forget, or never knew to begin with, was that Williams went back into the service during the Korean War. He only played in 6 games in the beginning of the 1952 season before heading off to the Korean War, and came back in late 1953 to play in 37 games to finish out that season. So, Williams basically lost almost 5 years fighting in wars. Had he not gone off to fight, he most likely would have gone from #7 to #1 on the all-time career offensive WAR list, surpassing both Ruth and Cobb, easily top 3,000 career hits and actually go towards 4,000, likely take the all-time MLB walks record from Barry Bonds, easily top 600 home runs and probably close in on 700, likely take the all-time RBI crown from Aaron, and the all-time runs scored record from Henderson, while probably keeping his all-time OBP record. And lord knows what all other records could have become his, or if he could have had a 3rd batting triple crown (or even more), or possibly even another .400 average season.

Lot of what ifs for these guys who went off to war.

[ClementeFanOh]

I'll also point out these factoids:

1) Feller was 266-162 in wins over his career, 104 over .500. By
comparison, Tom Seaver was at 106 (and some of you love to gush
over Seaver).

2) Although Feller would have topped 300 wins for a career with war years
converted into baseball years, his 266 was still outstanding.

3) No less an authority than Ted Williams himself, called Feller the best
pitcher he ever faced. Since Williams was an actual warrior instead of a
keyboard one, I think I'll trust his evaluation.

4) No-hitters most certainly are a fine metric for determining a pitcher's
quality, when placed in context- which I (and others) have done. Feller
threw his 3(!) over an 11 year time span, which of course is a much
longer time than many pitchers are able to sustain in the first place.

Short version is any team would gladly have taken Feller in their rotation-
any team. That's a great pitcher (and no, I'm not a Cleveland fan or a
Feller collector). Trent King

[rats60]

Originally Posted by BobC

You can add Warren Spahn to that list with Feller and Williams as well.Spahn had just come onto the Braves team in 1942, and pitched in only four games before going off to the war. He didn't pitch again till he came back in 1946. But what Spahn and Williams did was play long enough to both reach superstar plateaus for their positions. Spahn had over 300 wins and Williams over 500 home runs. Meanwhile, Feller missed both the 300 wins and 3,000 strikeouts milestones for pitchers, both of which he would have probably easily reached had he not served during the war. And that's why I said in an earlier thread he probably got hurt the most of any ballplayer because of the time missed in the war.

What's interesting for Spahn is that had he not missed almost four seasons to WWII, he would easily have reached 400 wins, and probably had over 3,000 strikeouts as well.

And for Williams it is even possibly more insane. Unlike Feller and Spahn, Williams played the entire 1942 season, and only missed 3 seasons to WWII, not the almost 4 seasons that Feller and Spahn lost. However, what a lot of people forget, or never knew to begin with, was that Williams went back into the service during the Korean War. He only played in 6 games in the beginning of the 1952 season before heading off to the Korean War, and came back in late 1953 to play in 37 games to finish out that season. So, Williams basically lost almost 5 years fighting in wars. Had he not gone off to fight, he most likely would have gone from #7 to #1 on the all-time career offensive WAR list, surpassing both Ruth and Cobb, easily top 3,000 career hits and actually go towards 4,000, likely take the all-time MLB walks record from Barry Bonds, easily top 600 home runs and probably close in on 700, likely take the all-time RBI crown from Aaron, and the all-time runs scored record from Henderson, while probably keeping his all-time OBP record. And lord knows what all other records could have become his, or if he could have had a 3rd batting triple crown (or even more), or possibly even another .400 average season.

Lot of what ifs for these guys who went off to war.

The bolded is not true. Spahn pitched 4 games in the majors in 1942 at age 21 and was sent back to the minors. Spahn won zero games and had 5.74 ERA in the majors. At the A level, he pitched 33 games going 17-12 with a 1.96 ERA. Spahn went to the military the next year.

Spahn has said the best thing for his major league career was serving in the military. It gave him a chance to mature and he was better equipped to pitch in the majors when he returned at age 25. Ted Williams won the triple crown in 1942 after hitting .406 in 1941. Feller finished 3rd in MVP voting behind DiMaggio and Williams in 1941 before enlisting. Williams and Feller lost prime years to WWII service. Spahn did not. It is only speculation how much Spahn would have even pitched in the majors in 1943-1945 given his 1942 performance.

[jingram058]

Signed MCI Ambassadors of Baseball card, USS Independence CV-62, 1993 I believe. Johnny Vander Meer also, post card size photo.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by BobC

Think of telling a Walter Johnson or Bob Feller to not worry about pacing themselves, we only need about 5-6 innings out of you, and then you can rest for 5 days before having to pitch again.

The mind boggles. And in Walter's case during his incredible prime years, you'll never have to come in for relief in between starts, we have ten guys in the bullpen for that. He might never have lost a game!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

You can add Warren Spahn to that list with Feller and Williams as well. Spahn had just come onto the Braves team in 1942, and pitched in only four games before going off to the war. He didn't pitch again till he came back in 1946. But what Spahn and Williams did was play long enough to both reach superstar plateaus for their positions. Spahn had over 300 wins and Williams over 500 home runs. Meanwhile, Feller missed both the 300 wins and 3,000 strikeouts milestones for pitchers, both of which he would have probably easily reached had he not served during the war. And that's why I said in an earlier thread he probably got hurt the most of any ballplayer because of the time missed in the war.

What's interesting for Spahn is that had he not missed almost four seasons to WWII, he would easily have reached 400 wins, and probably had over 3,000 strikeouts as well.

And for Williams it is even possibly more insane. Unlike Feller and Spahn, Williams played the entire 1942 season, and only missed 3 seasons to WWII, not the almost 4 seasons that Feller and Spahn lost. However, what a lot of people forget, or never knew to begin with, was that Williams went back into the service during the Korean War. He only played in 6 games in the beginning of the 1952 season before heading off to the Korean War, and came back in late 1953 to play in 37 games to finish out that season. So, Williams basically lost almost 5 years fighting in wars. Had he not gone off to fight, he most likely would have gone from #7 to #1 on the all-time career offensive WAR list, surpassing both Ruth and Cobb, easily top 3,000 career hits and actually go towards 4,000, likely take the all-time MLB walks record from Barry Bonds, easily top 600 home runs and probably close in on 700, likely take the all-time RBI crown from Aaron, and the all-time runs scored record from Henderson, while probably keeping his all-time OBP record. And lord knows what all other records could have become his, or if he could have had a 3rd batting triple crown (or even more), or possibly even another .400 average season.

Lot of what ifs for these guys who went off to war.

Not that DiMaggio would have threatened any milestones, but he missed three prime years.

[jingram058]

DiMaggio will be remembered for hitting consecutively in 56 games, as well he should be, even by this generation. 1941 is looked on by historians for two almost incomprehensible milestones...those 56 consecutive games, and IMO more importantly, Ted Williams' .406 batting average. DiMaggio flirted with .400 in 1939, winding up at .381. Several others have flirted with it since, only to falter in the end, showing just how hard it is to do. I do not see it happening even more so today because of specialized pitching being what it is; starting, middle, late and closing. If DiMaggio had those 3 years, who knows, but I doubt it.

[Tomi]

Very impressive that Dimaggio had 8 more lifetime strikeouts than homeruns. Sad that players today will strikeouts more in 2 seasons than Dimaggio in his career.

[Yoda]

I once took a beloved '54 Bowman to a show for Bob to sign. When my turn came, he looked up and said, "Oh, the water cooler shot, one of my favorites."
Since he seemed in a very relaxed mood, I asked him if Herb Score was ever as fast as he was. He gave me a wink and replied, "Only in Spring Training." A sacred memory.

[Kzoo]

When Bob signed this for me a couple years before his passing, his response was 'Oh wow, it's an original one'. Everybody else at the small local show was getting balls and 8x10s signed.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by rats60

The bolded is not true. Spahn pitched 4 games in the majors in 1942 at age 21 and was sent back to the minors. Spahn won zero games and had 5.74 ERA in the majors. At the A level, he pitched 33 games going 17-12 with a 1.96 ERA. Spahn went to the military the next year.

Spahn has said the best thing for his major league career was serving in the military. It gave him a chance to mature and he was better equipped to pitch in the majors when he returned at age 25. Ted Williams won the triple crown in 1942 after hitting .406 in 1941. Feller finished 3rd in MVP voting behind DiMaggio and Williams in 1941 before enlisting. Williams and Feller lost prime years to WWII service. Spahn did not. It is only speculation how much Spahn would have even pitched in the majors in 1943-1945 given his 1942 performance.

Rats, thank you, I stand somewhat corrected. I forgot about the stint back to the minors. And I had heard somewhere about Spahn crediting his military service for helping his career as well. But something tells me that because of the type of person he was, and with the talent and ability he had, he would have gotten it figured out long before he turned 25 and been a star pitcher for a few more years in his career had he not lost the years he did. And with 363 career wins and 2,583 career strike outs otherwise, he didn't need 3 or 4 superstar level seasons to reach those 400 win, 3,000 strikeout plateaus.

And that partially missed fourth season I incorrectly attributed to his being in the service, you can probably still count that as he shouldn't have missed it because it is a known fact that in '42 Spahn got into it with then Braves manager Casey Stengel who had ordered him to intentionally throw at a batter, Pee Wee Reese, and in an exhibition game no less. And as I mentioned, being the kind of person he was, Spahn refused to intentionally throw at a batter, especially in an exhibition game, and for that Stengel sent him back to the minors. I believe Stengel was even quoted as admitting at one time much later on that that was the worst managing mistake that he ever made. So the correct statement should be Spahn missed three full seasons to WWII, and much of a fourth to Casey Stengel.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by jethrod3

Feller's case always gets me thinking about Ted Williams. Both lost prime years due to the war. How much higher in the key rankings would they have climbed if they hadn't lost those years to serving the greater good? Williams was probably my favorite player that I never actually saw play in live games at a stadium and on TV. Feller may be one of my two favorite pitchers that I never saw play in live games at a stadium or on TV. Feller may have produced numbers putting him squarely in the top 10 all time. I believe Williams may have firmly established himself as the best hitter of all time. Ahh, what might have been!

As for some folks being jaded by Feller being ubiquitious in the hobby, that's hard to fathom. Much of the money he raised by signing autographs helped support his 2-room museum in Van Meter (which was fantastic by the way) and which helped draw people to the city and supported a few people. When I purchased my autographed material the items were extremely reasonably priced. I don't care about scarcity of the autographs. I just want them at a cost that won't break my bank. And Feller's autograph was the autograph of a superstar HOFer that I wanted and still cherish, even though I know if won't help fund my retirement!

That museum was very nice and had a lot of really cool stuff in it. We stopped there on the way back from a Alice Cooper concert in Des Moines not long before it closed.

Originally Posted by G1911

I agree. I think it's awesome that Feller signed everything a fan put in front of him for like 70 years. I don't get why this would be considered a bad thing.

Ever try to find a old ball to get autographed that didn't already have a Bob Feller auto on it?

[jethrod3]

Originally Posted by BobC

And for Williams it is even possibly more insane. Unlike Feller and Spahn, Williams played the entire 1942 season, and only missed 3 seasons to WWII, not the almost 4 seasons that Feller and Spahn lost. However, what a lot of people forget, or never knew to begin with, was that Williams went back into the service during the Korean War. He only played in 6 games in the beginning of the 1952 season before heading off to the Korean War, and came back in late 1953 to play in 37 games to finish out that season. So, Williams basically lost almost 5 years fighting in wars.

I agree. He left the game certainly with his name in the argument for greatest hitter ever, and had he played during those missed years and stayed healthy, it's likely that he would have been at the top or very near the top of ALL of the categories you mentioned. I've read a couple of Williams biographies. He was not a perfect man, but major props to him for re-enlisting. That was a sacrifice that was above and beyond the call of duty for all but a few players of their day.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I've seen this estimate.

The statisticians tell us that Williams, who was obsessed with personal achievements, would have compiled a .342 career average, 3,452 hits, 2,380 RBI and 663 home runs had he played without war-time interruption.

I think that's still second to Ruth -- God would have finished second to Ruth -- but obviously remarkable.

[bbcard1]

Gotta share my Feller story...in the late 1970s...I'd guess 1978...he came to Watt Powell Park in Charleston WV. For the sum of $2 you could take a cut off Rapid Robert...remember he had to be in his 60s then. All proceeds benefitted the American Cancer Society. It was the pregame to a minor league baseball game. I blooped a single over second finishing 1-1 against hall of famers. After he took a shower and signed autographs for anyone who wanted.

Late in his life he was one of the first victims of cancel culture that I recall. He said something that was probably slightly behind the time and some POS announcer accused him of being a racist. I don't think any serious study of Feller's life would support that.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I've seen this estimate.

The statisticians tell us that Williams, who was obsessed with personal achievements, would have compiled a .342 career average, 3,452 hits, 2,380 RBI and 663 home runs had he played without war-time interruption.

I think that's still second to Ruth -- God would have finished second to Ruth -- but obviously remarkable.

Ruth's numbers will forever wow me, and what's even more absurd is that we were arguably robbed of an even better career if he started out playing a position instead of pitching.