Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by rats60

You must not have read my post. Park factor isn't a significant factor. I also never used ERA+ against Marichal, I was giving another poster the benfit of the doubt who was using it, but it is seriously flawed. Its fatal flaw is the assumption that pitching is equal from one era to another which it clearly isn't. People picking deadball era pitchers to compare to Koufax doesn't need a response. I addressed that early in the thread and it should be obvious to any baseball fan why.

ERA+ makes no assumption about eras. People who misuse it do that. ERA+ *only* measures a pitcher against his yearly contemporaries. It's a measure of how great he is relative to his competition.

[HistoricNewspapers]

I also want to point out that Randy Johnson injuries also forced him to miss most of two seasons in the middle of his prime when he won his FIVE CY Youngs and nearly FOUR more.

He also missed most of another season near the end of his career when he was averaging 11.4 K per nine innings.

He also had to retire earlier than his stuff dictated due to injury. He had more years left as he was averaging 8.1 K per nine innings in his last season...and pitching through pain costing him effectiveness as well.

SO if Koufax is getting credit for injuries...don't forget to give that to Randy Johnson as well.

It cost Johnson the all time strikeout record.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by HistoricNewspapers

I also want to point out that Randy Johnson injuries also forced him to miss most of two seasons in the middle of his prime when he won his FIVE CY Youngs and nearly FOUR more.

He also missed most of another season near the end of his career when he was averaging 11.4 K per nine innings.

He also had to retire earlier than his stuff dictated due to injury. He had more years left as he was averaging 8.1 K per nine innings in his last season...and pitching through pain costing him effectiveness as well.

SO if Koufax is getting credit for injuries...don't forget to give that to Randy Johnson as well.

It cost Johnson the all time strikeout record.

Eh, he was still 900 Ks short of the record after pitching to 45. He would have needed another 3 full seasons of top-flight effectiveness to get there and he didn't miss that much time.

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Eh, he was still 900 Ks short of the record after pitching to 45. He would have needed another 3 full seasons of top-flight effectiveness to get there and he didn't miss that much time.

Point is, if you are going to assume with Koufax, you have to do the same with Randy Johnson. Johnson was averaging around 10 K's a game(it's ten for this exercise to make the math easy . He usually started 34 games a year. Just looking at the years where he missed significant time:


1994/95 missed 15 starts due to the strike......150 k's
1996 he only started 8 games................260 K's
2003 he only started 18 games.............160 K's
2007 he only started 10 games..............240 K's

That is 810 K's right there going into his last season.

2009 he only started 17 games.....?

2010 he retired even though he still had elite K ability having pitched through injury while still maintaining 8.1 K per nine innings in his last season.

So who knows how long he could have gone. A healthy Johnson easily had two or three years left after he retired.

Also, if he is within 100 strike outs when he decided to retire in 2010...seems to be a good chance he sticks it out for more seasons.

I personally don't see the need in adding the what if, but just being fair that if you apply it to one player, make sure you apply it to others as well.

[mdube16]

I always feel the complication with these arguments are you have different criteria for "best ever"

Is it the best overall career statically? (think Jerry Rice)
Is it the most accomplished career? (think Tom Brady)
Is it the best at his absolute peak? (Puts Gooden in the best pitcher argument)
Is it the best peak statistical seasons strung together?
Is it the most talented at peak? (Michael Vick was as scary as there was for a time, but is not in any sort of greatest conversation)

Probably most agree it is a combination I think career statistically combined with peak seasons is how we look at baseball players. Football and basketball have more emphasis on most accomplished which is why they count Rings in the arguments.

Based on this, Its very hard to argue against Randy Johnson as he checks all the boxes.

[cammb]

It is hard to argue for Koufax as "best ever" due to his short career. You can say greatest pitcher to dominate a sport during his time which he was. When you talk of legends of the game you can put Koufax in that category. I don't think anyone can consider Johnson a legend. Go to youtube and see for yourself the videos of Koufax , how he was held in high esteem, treated like a movie star. See f how other great players of his time spoke about him. You try to compare Johnson's mediocre injuries to Koufax. Are you kidding. Koufax ended his career. We will never know what kind of stats Koufax would have given if he pitched another five years. you can't play the "what if "game with Grove or Johnson because they played out their careers.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by cammb

Go to youtube and see for yourself the videos of Koufax , how he was held in high esteem, treated like a movie star.

Sounds like you're talking about Bo Belinsky again.

All the things you say about Koufax above are true. What I say about Grove is true. So I think we've pretty much come around to agreeing, generally. Or if not, close. Koufax was dominant for a stretch; Grove was dominant for a full-length career.

[mdube16]

Originally Posted by cammb

It is hard to argue for Koufax as "best ever" due to his short career. You can say greatest pitcher to dominate a sport during his time which he was. When you talk of legends of the game you can put Koufax in that category. I don't think anyone can consider Johnson a legend. Go to youtube and see for yourself the videos of Koufax , how he was held in high esteem, treated like a movie star. See f how other great players of his time spoke about him. You try to compare Johnson's mediocre injuries to Koufax. Are you kidding. Koufax ended his career. We will never know what kind of stats Koufax would have given if he pitched another five years. you can't play the "what if "game with Grove or Johnson because they played out their careers.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...ped-batter-box

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by cammb

It is hard to argue for Koufax as "best ever" due to his short career. You can say greatest pitcher to dominate a sport during his time which he was. When you talk of legends of the game you can put Koufax in that category. I don't think anyone can consider Johnson a legend. Go to youtube and see for yourself the videos of Koufax , how he was held in high esteem, treated like a movie star. See f how other great players of his time spoke about him. You try to compare Johnson's mediocre injuries to Koufax. Are you kidding. Koufax ended his career. We will never know what kind of stats Koufax would have given if he pitched another five years. you can't play the "what if "game with Grove or Johnson because they played out their careers.

If you open the 'what if' game, you can play it with anyone.

For instance, in a 12 year stretch, Johnson won five cy Young awards, finished second three other times, third, and 7th.

THat stretch itself is more dominating than anything Koufax every did.

However, if we play the 'what if' game....what if Johnson wasn't injured for two of those seasons during that stretch?

Randy Johnson is best lefty of all time and is in serious discussion for best pitcher of all time as well.

Had Johnson gone the Koufax route and put everything he had into a five year stretch, with no concern for his future, he would be putting up 420 strikeouts per year while pitching another 60+ innings a year. However, he didn't do that. He didn't need to do that...but still had a greater peak than Koufax.

Instead, Johnson was still able to throw a perfect game at age 40, win five Cy Young awards, and finish second three more times.

You know what is crazy?

If you remove those FIVE years where Johnson won the Cy Young award, he still has more career wins than Koufax; 204-165.


Best ERA+ seasons:
Johnson....Koufax.....Grove
197........190............217
195........186............189
193........160............185
188........159............185
184........143............175
181........122............165
176........105............160
152........101............160
135.........93
135.........Not good enough to pitch enough innings to qualify
118.........Not good enough to pitch enough innings to qualify
112.........Not good enough to pitch enough innings to qualify


Johnson had unrivaled physical tools. No pitcher in MLB history can match his physical tools. He was six foot eleven and threw over 100 MPH with a ridiculous slider....WITH COMMAND(after a few year learning curve). Some pitchers had one or two of those tools, but nobody had ALL of those tools like he did.

Let me explain why the physical tools are of such importance. Why would you take another pitcher over Johnson if the other pitcher was ten inches shorter, threw three miles an hour slower, had lesser command, and similar or less breaking pitches? The only other factor would be mental make up. Do they have the ability to handle being a professional player? Johnson obviously answered that question. Do they have the mental ability to thrive for a long time? Johnson answered that question YES.

Environments a player plays in severely muddles or hides statistical measurements, but the tools are concrete. The tools are a known. A lot of the statistical measurements are unknowns because environment muddles them. An environment can give false perceptions of ones true ability. Six foot eleven cannot be muddled. 100 MPH cannot be muddled. Nasty slider cannot be muddled. Command cannot be muddled. The only other obstacle is mental make up and thrive to succeed. He obviously passed that only unknown hurdle.

So when you are weighing all this, the physical tools play a vital role in solving the dilemma of cross era comparison.


He had the results to back it up.

He was umpire proof. He didn't need the inches off the plate like Maddux and Glavine often did to excel to the levels they did.

He was era proof. He didn't need lineups in the league where numbers six through nine were zero threats and hit basically zero power...like which occurred in other eras where scoring was depressed, or era's like the 30's where only the elite few were legit power threats.

In fact, he pitched in probably the toughest era to be a pitcher, with the live ball, DH, and steroids. Any pitcher that can handle the toughest environment to pitch in, surely would have no problem in the eras where it was pitcher friendly.

He didn't need a dead ball to excel or last a long time.

He was stadium proof. He didn't need to rely on a certain stadium to make him dominant.

He had peak dominance and longevity dominance.

He was the guy that if you lined all these historic pitchers up at a local baseball field standing shoulder to shoulder, then watched him unleash what he had, he would be the guy every single coach would pick. Coaches would be drooling.