Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[packs]

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

Because there is value in being good to very good for a ridiculously long period of time. In their prime it isn't close. Starting probably in each of their tenth best seasons on down, Niekro was far better. It isn't sexy but it's true. That gives him value.

[timn1]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. .

Well do you think it could be, just maybe, because nobody has seen everybody pitch?

You saw X pitch, I saw Y pitch, and Ted Z saw Eddie Plank pitch What basis does that give us for comparison? Stats are the only measures we have that aren’t completely subjective, and even they have to be massaged. But personal accounts are a joke.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

Because memories are notoriously unreliable. Because guys naturally filter out memories/experiences that don't fit the narrative. Because they focus on a few short years or whatever. Hank Aaron hit .372 with 7 homers against Koufax. Yet Aaron would still about him like he was this unhittable monster.

[packs]

I guess I should say when you’re talking about two players you saw yourself. There has to be some room for knowing what it felt like to watch Pedro pitch and knowing what it felt like to watch Niekro pitch.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by packs

I guess I should say when you’re talking about two players you saw yourself. There has to be some room for knowing what it felt like to watch Pedro pitch and knowing what it felt like to watch Niekro pitch.

We are talking about who was best, not feelings and emotions.

Facing a guy like Sam McDowell or Sandy Koufax or Walter Johnson or Nolan Ryan will obviously "feel" different than facing a knuckleball pitcher like Niekro, or a junkball pitcher with brains and control, like Tommy John.

But there are guys who had more success hitting heat rather than butterflies.

[brian1961]

One thing that should be stressed with Sandy Koufax is the fact that, for the most part mind you, he did not have a team behind him that could give him a lot of runs. I recall the term, "small ball", being associated with Koufax & Drysdale. The Dodgers had Frank Howard, but even mighty Hondo struggled in their home parks. They had Tommy Davis, who put up spectacular numbers in '62, and won a pair of batting titles, if I recall correctly. Their biggest warrior was the dynamic Maury Wills. I know expressing this won't convince you, probably. Nevertheless, as someone who grew up during Sandy's string of banner years, I well remember the press being mighty impressed with Mr. Koufax because he did not have a team of sluggers and better hitters behind him, yet was the most invincible hurler in MLB.

The same could be said for Nolan Ryan and Sam McDowell on that count.

Cheers----Brian Powell

[G1911]

Originally Posted by brian1961

One thing that should be stressed with Sandy Koufax is the fact that, for the most part mind you, he did not have a team behind him that could give him a lot of runs. I recall the term, "small ball", being associated with Koufax & Drysdale. The Dodgers had Frank Howard, but even mighty Hondo struggled in their home parks. They had Tommy Davis, who put up spectacular numbers in '62, and won a pair of batting titles, if I recall correctly. Their biggest warrior was the dynamic Maury Wills. I know expressing this won't convince you, probably. Nevertheless, as someone who grew up during Sandy's string of banner years, I well remember the press being mighty impressed with Mr. Koufax because he did not have a team of sluggers and better hitters behind him, yet was the most invincible hurler in MLB.

The same could be said for Nolan Ryan and Sam McDowell on that count.

Cheers----Brian Powell

This would affect Koufax's won-loss record, but nobody here is criticizing his won loss record. It has nothing to do with his short peak, absurd road/home performance gap, ERA, none of the criticisms actually made of Koufax in this thread. Further, that even Frank Howard couldn't hit at Chavez would seem further evidence that Chavez is a pitchers paradise, which hurts Koufax's argument.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by brian1961

One thing that should be stressed with Sandy Koufax is the fact that, for the most part mind you, he did not have a team behind him that could give him a lot of runs. I recall the term, "small ball", being associated with Koufax & Drysdale. The Dodgers had Frank Howard, but even mighty Hondo struggled in their home parks. They had Tommy Davis, who put up spectacular numbers in '62, and won a pair of batting titles, if I recall correctly. Their biggest warrior was the dynamic Maury Wills. I know expressing this won't convince you, probably. Nevertheless, as someone who grew up during Sandy's string of banner years, I well remember the press being mighty impressed with Mr. Koufax because he did not have a team of sluggers and better hitters behind him, yet was the most invincible hurler in MLB.

The same could be said for Nolan Ryan and Sam McDowell on that count.

Cheers----Brian Powell

. Wrong. Do you even bother to check the facts before you post. Frank Howard played in Dodger Stadium from 1962-1964. His BA/OBP/SLG were all higher at home than on the road every year. He did hit a few more HRs on the road, but clearly Frank preferred hitting in Dodger Stadium over the average road park. This is typical of most players. Could you say that for any Rockies pitcher?

[packs]

Originally Posted by Mark17

We are talking about who was best, not feelings and emotions.

Facing a guy like Sam McDowell or Sandy Koufax or Walter Johnson or Nolan Ryan will obviously "feel" different than facing a knuckleball pitcher like Niekro, or a junkball pitcher with brains and control, like Tommy John.

But there are guys who had more success hitting heat rather than butterflies.

I'm talking about a person who used a stat to compare Niekro to Pedro, two pitchers I personally feel are at opposite ends of "greatness" when I think about actually watching them pitch. So, yes, I think that's the feeling I'm talking about. I'm also talking about the feeling YOU got when YOU watched them, not some third party.

If you never watched Pedro pitch I understand your indifference.

Talking about what YOU saw is a big part of passing down the game to people who didn't see a person play. You can analyze Bernie Williams's stats all you want and deduce he wasn't an elite player. But Yankee fans will always consider him a legend because they watched him play. There is room in discussion for these things.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by packs

I'm talking about a person who used a stat to compare Niekro to Pedro, two pitchers I personally feel are at opposite ends of "greatness" when I think about actually watching them pitch. So, yes, I think that's the feeling I'm talking about. I'm also talking about the feeling YOU got when YOU watched them, not some third party.

If you never watched Pedro pitch I understand your indifference.

When I watched games on TV, I could tell Pedro looked very tough. I also thought Dave McNally seldom threw a hittable pitch - always on the corners. I never saw Grove but his stats make it obvious that he was the same way, and for a long career.

I caught a knuckleball pitcher in my sophomore year in college, and one of his floaters that hit the dirt late bent back my index fingernail on my throwing hand which made me miss a few games. So I have a lot of respect for how hard it is to hit those things, or even track and block them when they suddenly dive.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Mark17

When I watched games on TV, I could tell Pedro looked very tough. I also thought Dave McNally seldom threw a hittable pitch - always on the corners. I never saw Grove but his stats make it obvious that he was the same way, and for a long career.

I caught a knuckleball pitcher in my sophomore year in college, and one of his floaters that hit the dirt late bent back my index fingernail on my throwing hand which made me miss a few games. So I have a lot of respect for how hard it is to hit those things, or even track and block them when they suddenly dive.

See, not so hard. That was an interesting anecdote that I'm glad you shared because it offers insight a number doesn't.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by Mark17

We are talking about who was best, not feelings and emotions.

Facing a guy like Sam McDowell or Sandy Koufax or Walter Johnson or Nolan Ryan will obviously "feel" different than facing a knuckleball pitcher like Niekro, or a junkball pitcher with brains and control, like Tommy John.

But there are guys who had more success hitting heat rather than butterflies.

+1

[cammb]

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by cammb

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

The argument is between Grove, Spahn, Randy Johnson, Kershaw, Plank, and maybe a couple others. I haven't heard anybody say Koufax isn't at least in the top 10 of all time.

When someone like me says Grove was the best, that isn't saying Koufax was a bum. Although, actually, Koufax WAS a bum:

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by cammb

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

Lol. You know, I think we better notify MLB and Cooperstown. Imagine this ruse being perpetrated for over 50 years!

This whole thing has caused me to revisit a number of topics. It seems that Superstorm Sandy wasn't really that bad of a storm, because once it made landfall, it's maximum sustained winds were only around 75 mph. And conscious changes to approach just don't matter. Grant and Sherman's more aggressive pursuit of the South had nothing to do with bringing the Civil War to a successful conclusion for the North.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by cammb

After reading the last couple of threads I have changed my mind. I don't think he was the best left handler in baseball, but rather a mediocre pitcher who happened to pitch in a park that only made him great and only him great and all of the players and sportswriters of his time must have eyesight trouble and they raised the pitchers mound for him and expanded baseball teams just so he can dominate them. You're right he's a bum.

Because that's exactly what I said.

Nice strawman.

Koufax would have been a marginal HOFer had his home park not been Dodger Stadium. Obviously that is the same as saying he was a bum.

If he doesn't have the injury and is able to have a few more really good years, even without Dodger Stadium helping him he is a first ballot HOFer.

The fact is that he was greatly helped by his home field AND he had an unfortunately too short prime due to injury. Even with his shortened career, "Road Only Koufax" still likely would have been a marginal HOFer. So with everything going against him he still likely would have been in.

But that's not the debate of this thread. The debate here is greatest lefty ever. Koufax road stats tell me even in his prime you cannot make that case, let alone the fact that his prime was so tragically short.

Now go find another strawman to argue against. And don't let your dumb show so easily it's unbecoming.

[HistoricNewspapers]

At age 45, Phil Niekro threw 215 innings with a 3.09 ERA. His ERA+ was 123 that season. It isn't just about value, its about ability. How many players have the ability to be a better than average MLB player after age 40??

It doesn't mean he is better than Pedro in their prime, but while Niekro was showing the ability to be successful in MLB at age 45. Pedro was no better a MLB player than either you or I at that time. Pedro's last 314 innings in MLB produced an ERA of 4.58 and ERA+ of 94. He was done being an effective MLB pitcher by age 34. No longer employable by age 37.

From age 40-48, Phil Niekro was capable of pitching 1,977 innings as MLB pitcher. His ERA+ during that time was 103, which means he was actually more effective than the average MLB pitcher during that time, and while averaging 220 innings per year in that span. Pedro Martinez was only able to throw over 220 innings in a season just two times in his career.

Yet somehow Niekro gets penalized for this ability?


Would Niekro be viewed as a better pitcher had he just stopped pitching after his first 2,216 innings...kind of like Koufax did?

After Niekro's first 2,216 innings, Niekro's ERA sat at 2.91 with a 127 ERA+. That isn't too far off from Koufax when he retired after 2,324 innings and his ERA sat at 2.76 with a 131 ERA+.

At what point does Niekro then get positive credit for being able to throw ANOTHER 3,181 innings at a rate better than a league average pitcher?? In fact, in his next 3,000+ innings, Nikero's ERA+ was 109.

For comparison, Catfish Hunter had 3,449 career innings with an ERA+ of 104(worse than Niekro's).

So in essence, Niekro had TWO careers, the first part nearly equal to Koufax's lifetime rate, and the second part better than Catfish Hunter's lifetime rate.

That's two HOF careers rolled into one for Niekro. Give Niekro his due. It doesn't make him better than Pedro in his prime...but it is an ABILITY to do what Niekro did and it provided a VALUE to MLB and the teams he played on.

[brewing]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Because memories are notoriously unreliable. Because guys naturally filter out memories/experiences that don't fit the narrative. Because they focus on a few short years or whatever. Hank Aaron hit .372 with 7 homers against Koufax. Yet Aaron would still about him like he was this unhittable monster.

Exactly. Has there ever been a hitter that hasn't said the pitchers he faced were the greatest?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

I genuinely do not understand how someone can disregard personal accounts of people who saw someone pitch. Someone said before that Phil Niekro was almost as valuable as Pedro Martinez because of some stat they rattled off. Anyone who saw either guy pitch would never think twice about Phil Niekro.

I don't think you actually read the post.