Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[frankbmd]

Deadball pitchers benefitted from their fielders lousy gloves. Lousy gloves create errors. Errors create unearned runs. Unearned runs create create lower ERAs.

I’m not sure about WAR, WHIP, BABIP, and the rest of he alphabet, but the percentage of total runs that are “earned” is a lot higher in today’s game.

The difference in eras (not ERAs) is not always reflected in the statistics.

More errors would also account for fewer hits and lower BABIPs. Do you think WaJo lost sleep because of this? or was he just WHIPPED after a complete game.

[HistoricNewspapers]

I forgot about Madison Bumgarner. Six foot five and 257 pounds of muscle in his legs and ass. As Tabe said, size does contribute to velocity. I see no valid reason why Lefty Grove would be tabbed the starter over Madison Bumgarner when Bumgarner has Grove beat in all those measurables of size, velocity, command...and of course all these modern HOF pitchers have the immeasurables too otherwise they wouldn't be good for so long.

The left handed batters that were so good in Pre War never faced pitchers as described like this. They didn't exist in the combination of size, speed, command.

As Frank pointed out above there are also minute details to cause statistical achievement simply not attainable in modern times.

I often talk about Ruth Out homerering every team in the league. That isn't a point of how great he was, but more of a point of how bad the league hitters were compared to modern times. Then add the fact that Ruth never faced these pitching monsters that have been roaming the earth in the last 35 years, you get statistical achievements from Ruth that are simply unattainable now.

That isn't even going over the fact that Ruth faced the same pitcher three or four times and really beefed up his stats on the fourth time through. Now he would have to face a six foot seven Andrew Miller coming out of the pen throwing left handed at 96 MPH...and again, six foot seven. Heck even guys like Drew Pomeranz didn't exist back then.

The modern hitters have it tougher than ever and the modern pitchers have it tougher than ever, because both groups are at the pinnacle of the best ever.

And this isn't a knock on pre war players. They were special players worthy of study.

But the reality is, WJ would not get the ball over Justin Verlander despite what the current stats say.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Deadball pitchers benefitted from their fielders lousy gloves. Lousy gloves create errors. Errors create unearned runs. Unearned runs create create lower ERAs.

To your point: 25.2% of all runs allowed by Walter Johnson were unearned. 8.4% of runs allowed by Clayton Kershaw have been unearned. So Johnson had 3x as many unearned. At 8.4%, Johnson would have an ERA of 2.65 - still great but far higher. Kershaw at 25.2% would have an ERA of 2.03 - 5th all-time despite playing in a live ball era.

[AndrewJerome]

I agree with most of Peter’s post #1233.

And I don’t think anyone in here is arguing that 1910s 1920s and 1930s players overall are “better” than the modern players. Yet this thread is bombarded with arguments against the overall play of the old guys. You are arguing against no one. No one is arguing the overall play from 1910 or 1930 is better than 2021. So that argument can be put to rest. Except I guess those posters who think Grove is the best ever? Even those posters are selectively taking one player and not an entire era of players.

However, I think there are interesting questions to ponder. Overall quality of play is very difficult to evaluate. Snowman thinks a model could be made to try and get some answers. Who knows. Personally, I think it is much more complicated than just saying players are bigger, taller and stronger now, so every year the quality of play goes up slightly. I think there are more ebbs and flows based on the number of elite players at any one time. Again, who knows. I also think that there is a limit to how much bigger, taller and stronger helps a baseball player. I used around 6’ 3” or 6’ 4” as about the max height that it helps a baseball player. I’ll stick to that. Absolutely for the 8 position players. There are very few 6’ 5”+ players who can play any semblance of defense for the 8 fielding positions (sure, a very tall guy can try to play 1st). There is a point where very tall human simply can’t function as a middle infielder or outfielder. It would be like having a bunch of DH type guys playing in the field. It doesn’t work.

Similarly, no one is arguing short players are abundant or better than 6’ 3” guys. So put this argument to rest. Altuve is 5’ 4” and won a MVP, so clearly short players can be elite. However, no one is saying there are 100s of short guys dominating. But there clearly are some short/small guys who are elite. Height is not a barrier to entry for baseball. Which is what makes baseball great. Just like there are some really tall guys who are elite like Randy Johnson. But certainly there are not 100s of super tall guys dominating either. It would be fun to see a list of the best modern players 6’ 5” and taller. Freddie Freeman is elite at 6’ 5”. However, this 6’ 5”+ list does not include most of he best modern players:

Trout 6’ 2”
Vlad Jr. 6’ 2”
Acuna 6’ 0”
Harper 6’ 3”
Soto 6’ 2”
Jose Ramirez 5’ 9”
Ohtani 6’ 4”
Schertzer 6’ 3”
Kershaw 6’ 4”
Degrom 6’ 4” and 180 pounds!
Cole 6’ 4”

Glasnow is a great example of modern bigger, taller, stronger that isn’t really better. He’s 6’ 8” and throws 99. So what? He’s 27 years old and pitched 403 innings for his whole career. He likely will miss much of his age 28 season with injury and be stuck on 403 innings. He can’t stay healthy because he is too big, tall, and strong. He gets you like 60-70 innings per year before his body breaks down. This is an epidemic for modern bigger, taller, stronger pitchers. The force on their bodies of throwing so hard leads to lots and lots of injuries. It is debatable how much better you can be than previous players if you are constantly hurt.

Randy again is a massive outlier at his height, dominance, and longevity. I have Randy as the best lefty ever. The reasons have been given in great detail. So again to be clear, I am NOT saying old time players are better than modern players. I just think the analysis is much more complicated than some in here seem to think.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I've seen a number of arguments, although I can't specifically now say where, that the overall level of play was better in decades past, or that players were as good or better, not just on a relative basis but on an absolute basis. People cite that other sports hadn't made inroads into the talent pool, the smaller number of teams, that increases in athletic ability aren't all that relevant to baseball because so much of it is skill, etc.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by AndrewJerome

I agree with most of Peter’s post #1233.

And I don’t think anyone in here is arguing that 1910s 1920s and 1930s players overall are “better” than the modern players. Yet this thread is bombarded with arguments against the overall play of the old guys. You are arguing against no one. No one is arguing the overall play from 1910 or 1930 is better than 2021. So that argument can be put to rest. Except I guess those posters who think Grove is the best ever? Even those posters are selectively taking one player and not an entire era of players.

However, I think there are interesting questions to ponder. Overall quality of play is very difficult to evaluate. Snowman thinks a model could be made to try and get some answers. Who knows. Personally, I think it is much more complicated than just saying players are bigger, taller and stronger now, so every year the quality of play goes up slightly. I think there are more ebbs and flows based on the number of elite players at any one time. Again, who knows. I also think that there is a limit to how much bigger, taller and stronger helps a baseball player. I used around 6’ 3” or 6’ 4” as about the max height that it helps a baseball player. I’ll stick to that. Absolutely for the 8 position players. There are very few 6’ 5”+ players who can play any semblance of defense for the 8 fielding positions (sure, a very tall guy can try to play 1st). There is a point where very tall human simply can’t function as a middle infielder or outfielder. It would be like having a bunch of DH type guys playing in the field. It doesn’t work.

Similarly, no one is arguing short players are abundant or better than 6’ 3” guys. So put this argument to rest. Altuve is 5’ 4” and won a MVP, so clearly short players can be elite. However, no one is saying there are 100s of short guys dominating. But there clearly are some short/small guys who are elite. Height is not a barrier to entry for baseball. Which is what makes baseball great. Just like there are some really tall guys who are elite like Randy Johnson. But certainly there are not 100s of super tall guys dominating either. It would be fun to see a list of the best modern players 6’ 5” and taller. Freddie Freeman is elite at 6’ 5”. However, this 6’ 5”+ list does not include most of he best modern players:

Trout 6’ 2”
Vlad Jr. 6’ 2”
Acuna 6’ 0”
Harper 6’ 3”
Soto 6’ 2”
Jose Ramirez 5’ 9”
Ohtani 6’ 4”
Schertzer 6’ 3”
Kershaw 6’ 4”
Degrom 6’ 4” and 180 pounds!
Cole 6’ 4”

Glasnow is a great example of modern bigger, taller, stronger that isn’t really better. He’s 6’ 8” and throws 99. So what? He’s 27 years old and pitched 403 innings for his whole career. He likely will miss much of his age 28 season with injury and be stuck on 403 innings. He can’t stay healthy because he is too big, tall, and strong. He gets you like 60-70 innings per year before his body breaks down. This is an epidemic for modern bigger, taller, stronger pitchers. The force on their bodies of throwing so hard leads to lots and lots of injuries. It is debatable how much better you can be than previous players if you are constantly hurt.

Randy again is a massive outlier at his height, dominance, and longevity. I have Randy as the best lefty ever. The reasons have been given in great detail. So again to be clear, I am NOT saying old time players are better than modern players. I just think the analysis is much more complicated than some in here seem to think.

Great points, you think a lot like a do.