Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[cammb]

It’s funny how you continue to ignore the suspicion of steroid use. From ages 36 to 39 head pitching like Koufax (the peak of steroid use) He began to decline soon after with sky high eras, coincidence?

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by cammb

It’s funny how you continue to ignore the suspicion of steroid use. From ages 36 to 39 head pitching like Koufax (the peak of steroid use) He began to decline soon after with sky high eras, coincidence?

If you have credible evidence, I'm all ears.

Currently, you are the only person I've ever heard accusing Randy Johnson of steroid use. But I like your idea of giving Randy Johnson two more Cy Young awards because Clemens was doing steroids. Me personally, I still don't want to knock Clemens, because if like you said, "they all did steroids", then they all played on the same level playing field.

If you have something solid, put it forward.

Then where do you draw the line with Koufax getting elbow injections etc...? Who is to say if there were steroids in those injections? Seems like a slippery slope.

Your statement above doesn't make a lot of sense though. Please rephrase it. After age 36-39 you are saying he had sky high ERA's?

Are his ERA's supposed to stay the same until age 60?

Age 40 his ERA was 2.60.

He went back to the American League after that, which will cause a jump in his raw ERA.

From age 41-45 his ERA in the AL was 4.28. ERA+ 104.


Nothing sky high there, it was better than average.

Actually, the natural decline would show the OPPOSITE of steroid use. When you eclipse age 40, your skills tend decline soon. He was also injured in those years.

But I like your premise saying that injuries cost Randy Johnson elite ERA's until age 60. That makes his case even better as the best ever. That makes him the best athlete ever.

You are grasping...but if you believe Randy Johnson did steroids, put forth the evidence. More power to you.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by cammb

It’s funny how you continue to ignore the suspicion of steroid use. From ages 36 to 39 head pitching like Koufax (the peak of steroid use) He began to decline soon after with sky high eras, coincidence?

It's funny how you ignore my requests that you tell us which of Grove's stats are "questionable."

[G1911]

Lefty Grove’s stats are made up by jock sniffers and Randy Johnson was a steroid abusing cheater because... he was alive when some other people did?

How is this the actual argument for Koufax? This is the stupidest argument one could possibly make. Can we move on to applying some rationality and considering the actual candidates instead of this garbage?

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by G1911

Lefty Grove’s stats are made up by jock sniffers and Randy Johnson was a steroid abusing cheater because... he was alive when some other people did?

How is this the actual argument for Koufax? This is the stupidest argument one could possibly make. Can we move on to applying some rationality and considering the actual candidates instead of this garbage?

I think Tony is more interested in a "mike drop" moment instead of a cohesive debate. Maybe he's a politician?

[RCMcKenzie]

I haven't followed the whole thread, I guess y'all ended up deciding on Glavine?

Heads up on Framber Valdez. Highest spin-rate going and Trout says he has the best stuff he's seen.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by G1911

Lefty Grove’s stats are made up by jock sniffers and Randy Johnson was a steroid abusing cheater because... he was alive when some other people did?

How is this the actual argument for Koufax? This is the stupidest argument one could possibly make. Can we move on to applying some rationality and considering the actual candidates instead of this garbage?

If you say it’s stupid, then it must be.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by G1911

Lefty Grove’s stats are made up by jock sniffers and Randy Johnson was a steroid abusing cheater because... he was alive when some other people did?

How is this the actual argument for Koufax? This is the stupidest argument one could possibly make. Can we move on to applying some rationality and considering the actual candidates instead of this garbage?

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

It's funny how you ignore my requests that you tell us which of Grove's stats are "questionable."

Groves stats as well as others in that era and before are suspect because we have no idea how records were kept, how lenient scoring was and most of all the hitting Just wasn’t that great. I hope that my opinion satisfies your craving as to my meaning of suspect.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cammb

Groves stats as well as others in that era and before are suspect because we have no idea how records were kept, how lenient scoring was and most of all the hitting Just wasn’t that great. I hope that my opinion satisfies your craving as to my meaning of suspect.

Once again, this is easily proven to be completely false garbage. We do know how records were kept. The majors have excellent documentation of this period, for every single league game. What game are the records incorrect or incomplete for? Just one, solitary example.

How was scoring more lenient in 1930 than in 1965?

Hitting WAS great. Far better than during Koufax's period. We can see this in the stats. It's basic math; many more runs were scored in an average game in 1930 than in 1965. This has been explained about 300 times in this thread.

You did not say they were "suspect", you actually said his stats were made up by jock sniffers (implying that God Sandy's are not). But fine, we'll go with suspect.


Have any evidence for your charges about Johnson? Whatsoever? No?


Can we please find a rational argument for the views advanced? We've had logical cases presented for Grove and Johnson. I guess logic is for jock sniffers. This is even more ridiculous than basing a case upon anecdotes one likes. Denying easily verifiable facts is absurd.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by G1911

Lefty Grove’s stats are made up by jock sniffers and Randy Johnson was a steroid abusing cheater because... he was alive when some other people did?

How is this the actual argument for Koufax? This is the stupidest argument one could possibly make. Can we move on to applying some rationality and considering the actual candidates instead of this garbage?

Originally Posted by G1911

Once again, this is easily proven to be completely false garbage. We do know how records were kept. The majors have excellent documentation of this period, for every single league game. What game are the records incorrect or incomplete for? Just one, solitary example.

How was scoring more lenient in 1930 than in 1965?

Hitting WAS great. Far better than during Koufax's period. We can see this in the stats. It's basic math; many more runs were scored in an average game in 1930 than in 1965. This has been explained about 300 times in this thread.

You did not say they were "suspect", you actually said his stats were made up by jock sniffers (implying that God Sandy's are not). But fine, we'll go with suspect.


Have any evidence for your charges about Johnson? Whatsoever? No?


Can we please find a rational argument for the views advanced? We've had logical cases presented for Grove and Johnson. I guess logic is for jock sniffers. This is even more ridiculous than basing a case upon anecdotes one likes. Denying easily verifiable facts is absurd.

I have to evidence against Johnson because I did not accuse him of directly taking steroids. He is suspect as others who performed over their heads as they got older

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by cammb

Groves stats as well as others in that era and before are suspect because we have no idea how records were kept, how lenient scoring was and most of all the hitting Just wasn’t that great. I hope that my opinion satisfies your craving as to my meaning of suspect.

Holy Crazy Train! No idea how records were kept?? It wasn't the dark ages. So you discount Walter, Cy, Hornsby, Ott, Cobb and Wagner? And that non-great hitting includes those bums Ruth and Gehrig, but they probably sucked because the scorekeepers were so lenient.

This from they guy who says Koufax must be the best of all time because he's the youngest HOFer, cause all the other guys ruined their careers by playing longer

In all seriousness, you might want to avoid discussions on baseball history.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Holy Crazy Train! No idea how records were kept?? It wasn't the dark ages. So you discount Walter, Cy, Hornsby, Ott, Cobb and Wagner? And that non-great hitting includes those bums Ruth and Gehrig, but they probably sucked because the scorekeepers were so lenient.

This from they guy who says Koufax must be the best of all time because he's the youngest HOFer, cause all the other guys ruined their careers by playing longer

In all seriousness, you might want to avoid discussions on baseball history.

This from a guy who is an Early Wynn fan. What happened to you?

[G1911]

The logic just gets better and better. All the options before Koufax have "suspect" stats from bad record-keeping (a completely made up fiction, please identify a single such gap in the records) and the work of "jock sniffers". The options after Koufax have to be dismissed because other players cheated.


I don't think you have any idea what "all time" means.... If our premise is that only Sandy Koufax even qualifies to be discussed, well I guess he is the best. This is mindless drivel.