Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I can't help you there, I'm just someone who twists words.

Incidentally, on that note, inevitably people will obliterate all of Phelps' times. I would still say Phelps is the BEST (yep, say it again, BEST) swimmer of all time unless and until someone tops his record of RELATIVE success in the sport.

I agree, I don’t think the argument of modernity is invalid but I don’t think it’s the strongest one. Everything occurs in context, context is a key factor that must not be ignored (including time, place, home park, and a whole lot more). “All time” is clearly an indicator of more than one generation. The all time team should include all times, not in perfect proportion because of the random chance of greatness, but if long periods are absent from the top, one is probably not looking fairly at an era.

But the appeal to modernity, by simply looking at a timeline, quite obviously hurts Koufax who many of its adherents over the last year have tried to use it or a form of it to protect. And frankly, Johnson doesn’t need it to have an excellent argument for the top spot. Logical, fair, consistent arguments can be made for more than one candidate. Koufax is modern, Spahn is ancient isn’t one of them.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I agree, I don’t think the argument of modernity is invalid but I don’t think it’s the strongest one. Everything occurs in context, context is a key factor that must not be ignored (including time, place, home park, and a whole lot more). “All time” is clearly an indicator of more than one generation. The all time team should include all times, not in perfect proportion because of the random chance of greatness, but if long periods are absent from the top, one is probably not looking fairly at an era.

But the appeal to modernity, by simply looking at a timeline, quite obviously hurts Koufax who many of its adherents over the last year have tried to use it or a form of it to protect. And frankly, Johnson doesn’t need it to have an excellent argument for the top spot. Logical, fair, consistent arguments can be made for more than one candidate. Koufax is modern, Spahn is ancient isn’t one of them.

Notwithstanding our resident genius, one can't help but notice that nearly every list ranking baseball all-time greats that's ever been put together, including by statisticians, has Ruth and Cobb and Mays in the top 5 hitters/fielders and WALTER Johnson as the top pitcher. They must be lawyers who twist words too.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Notwithstanding our resident genius, one can't help but notice that nearly every list ranking baseball all-time greats that's ever been put together, including by statisticians, has Ruth and Cobb and Mays in the top 5 hitters/fielders and WALTER Johnson as the top pitcher. They must be lawyers who twist words too.

And that’s why the appeal to authority never works - another authority can always be found and then the ‘logic’ an appeal to authority works on, that of unquestionable expertise, completely falls apart.


Just to make sure we hit 2,000 posts here, contextual best team, using the conventional definition of an all time team that has been in use for many decades:

RHP Walter Johnson (though I think Cy Young is right there due to his insane amount of effective innings)

LHP Lefty Grove

Relief Pitcher - Mariano, Hoyt Wilhelmina second but the gap here is big.

C - Berra, for his consistency but this is hard to pick. Bench is close,

1B - Gehrig, Pujols and Anson are close.

2B Collins, Joe Morgan is right there.

3B Schmidt, pretty wide margin I think.

SS Wagner, pretty wide margin I think.

LF Bonds or Williams, entirely dependent on steroid philosophy.

CF Mays, but it hurts to leave off Cobb.

RF Ruth, it’s not even close.





The best team if we ignore everyone before current times:
RHP: Clemens

LHP Johnson (I don’t see Kershaw passing him)

RP: Mariano

C: Ivan Rodriguez, but boy Piazza could hit and peak Posey and Mauer were fantastic

1B: Pujols, Thomas second

2B: Biggio, but there’s several close

3B: Chipper

SS: A-Rod

LF: Bonds

CF: Griffey, probably today. Will end up as Trout soon

RF: Gwynn? Walker? Ichiro? Would have to look up the numbers instead of using memory.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

And that’s why the appeal to authority never works - another authority can always be found and then the ‘logic’ an appeal to authority works on, that of unquestionable expertise, completely falls apart.


Just to make sure we hit 2,000 posts here, contextual best team, using the conventional definition of an all time team that has been in use for many decades:

RHP Walter Johnson (though I think Cy Young is right there due to his insane amount of effective innings)

LHP Lefty Grove

Relief Pitcher - Mariano, Hoyt Wilhelmina second but the gap here is big.

C - Berra, for his consistency but this is hard to pick. Bench is close,

1B - Gehrig, Pujols and Anson are close.

2B Collins, Joe Morgan is right there.

3B Schmidt, pretty wide margin I think.

SS Wagner, pretty wide margin I think.

LF Bonds or Williams, entirely dependent on steroid philosophy.

CF Mays, but it hurts to leave off Cobb.

RF Ruth, it’s not even close.





The best team if we ignore everyone before current times:
RHP: Clemens

LHP Johnson (I don’t see Kershaw passing him)

RP: Mariano

C: Ivan Rodriguez, but boy Piazza could hit and peak Posey and Mauer were fantastic

1B: Pujols, Thomas second

2B: Biggio, but there’s several close

3B: Chipper

SS: A-Rod

LF: Bonds

CF: Griffey, probably today. Will end up as Trout soon

RF: Gwynn? Walker? Ichiro? Would have to look up the numbers instead of using memory.

Depending on whether you put him at 3b or ss and his games played at each are very close, I think ARod could compete for the all time team at either position, if you overlook the PED and his personality. He had some SERIOUS numbers. His stature also suffered from being paired with the beloved Jeter even though Jeter was far inferior.

[Ricky]

Originally Posted by G1911

And that’s why the appeal to authority never works - another authority can always be found and then the ‘logic’ an appeal to authority works on, that of unquestionable expertise, completely falls apart.


Just to make sure we hit 2,000 posts here, contextual best team, using the conventional definition of an all time team that has been in use for many decades:

RHP Walter Johnson (though I think Cy Young is right there due to his insane amount of effective innings)

LHP Lefty Grove

Relief Pitcher - Mariano, Hoyt Wilhelmina second but the gap here is big.

C - Berra, for his consistency but this is hard to pick. Bench is close,

1B - Gehrig, Pujols and Anson are close.

2B Collins, Joe Morgan is right there.

3B Schmidt, pretty wide margin I think.

SS Wagner, pretty wide margin I think.

LF Bonds or Williams, entirely dependent on steroid philosophy.

CF Mays, but it hurts to leave off Cobb.

RF Ruth, it’s not even close.





The best team if we ignore everyone before current times:
RHP: Clemens

LHP Johnson (I don’t see Kershaw passing him)

RP: Mariano

C: Ivan Rodriguez, but boy Piazza could hit and peak Posey and Mauer were fantastic

1B: Pujols, Thomas second

2B: Biggio, but there’s several close

3B: Chipper

SS: A-Rod

LF: Bonds

CF: Griffey, probably today. Will end up as Trout soon

RF: Gwynn? Walker? Ichiro? Would have to look up the numbers instead of using memory.

Hornsby at second?

Regarding Koufax and Spahn, I don’t think it’s a case where Spahn is ancient and that’s why Koufax supporters denigrate him. They obviously overlapped. It’s that Koufax dominated and Spahn never did.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Ricky

Hornsby at second?

Regarding Koufax and Spahn, I don’t think it’s a case where Spahn is ancient and that’s why Koufax supporters denigrate him. They obviously overlapped. It’s that Koufax dominated and Spahn never did.

Depends on your definition of dominance though. Some may feel that having a winning record for as many years as Spahn did, leading his league in wins in 8 years (5 years in a row at one point), and having the most wins of any lefty all time (#6 all time overall), is a pretty dominant pitcher. Despite what many would say. And this with losing three prime years to WW II. Plus, he stayed around about 4 years too long, going 20-45 ove that time with an ERA in excess of 4.00. Just think if he somehow got the three early years back, and retired when he should have. Likely 400 wins (#3 all time overall), win Pct. well over .600, and an ERA under 3.00. He still won't get a lot of love though.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by BobC

Depends on your definition of dominance though. Some may feel that having a winning record for as many years as Spahn did, leading his league in wins in 8 years (5 years in a row at one point), and having the most wins of any lefty all time (#6 all time overall), is a pretty dominant pitcher. Despite what many would say. And this with losing three prime years to WW II. Plus, he stayed around about 4 years too long, going 20-45 ove that time with an ERA in excess of 4.00. Just think if he somehow got the three early years back, and retired when he should have. Likely 400 wins (#3 all time overall), win Pct. well over .600, and an ERA under 3.00. He still won't get a lot of love though.

Wins in baseball don’t matter. I’ve “learned” that.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Wins in baseball don’t matter. I’ve “learned” that.

Wins in baseball is everything. Wins as a statistic attributed to a pitcher don't matter. There's a difference.

When I'm building a statistical model, I always use wins as the target variable. I want to know which team is most likely to win the game and what their odds of winning are. But far, the most important factor in that model is who the starting pitchers are. I can throw 100+ variables at the model and the mathematics will determine which of them are important. But it turns out that if you want to predict wins, you should actually look at other statistics besides "wins" attributed to a pitcher, because they are simply irrelevant in the presence of other variables like SIERA, K/BB, xFIP, velocity, WHIP, or even ERA. Knowing a pitcher's win/loss record literally adds zero information mathematically speaking. It is a nothing burger that only serves as a surrogate for things outside of one's control. I can't imagine a noisier statistic to look at.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Carter08

Wins in baseball don’t matter. I’ve “learned” that.

LOL

Yeah, tell that to the fans that watch.

This idea seems to come, at least partially, from starting pitchers almost never throwing complete games anymore. And as these bigger, taller, harder throwing modern pitchers become more the norm, they all seem to be throwing fewer and fewer innings. Their reduced impact on the outcome of a game does make sense though the earlier they leave the game. But that's another modern bias. You go back to older pitchers like Grove and Spahn who mostly pitched complete or near complete games throughout their careers, and not only did they win lots of games, but they were way more responsible for those wins than modern starting pitchers who only seem to go 5 or 6 innings in their starts all the time anymore. So for modern pitchers the wins are less meaningful. But why disparage Grove or Spahn who completed games, if anything, they should be getting some extra credit for seeing games through till the end to better ensure their teams win. Doesn't fit with statistician's narratives of what they think counts and shows their lean towards modern pitchers.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by BobC

Depends on your definition of dominance though. Some may feel that having a winning record for as many years as Spahn did, leading his league in wins in 8 years (5 years in a row at one point), and having the most wins of any lefty all time (#6 all time overall), is a pretty dominant pitcher. Despite what many would say. And this with losing three prime years to WW II. Plus, he stayed around about 4 years too long, going 20-45 ove that time with an ERA in excess of 4.00. Just think if he somehow got the three early years back, and retired when he should have. Likely 400 wins (#3 all time overall), win Pct. well over .600, and an ERA under 3.00. He still won't get a lot of love though.

Here you go again with "wins" attributed to a pitcher. Lol

(facepalm)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Hypothetical.

As a rookie, a guy next year sets records or is close in every meaningful modern metric. It's universally acclaimed as the greatest pitching season ever. He then quits baseball or dies. Is he the best pitcher ever?

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

And that’s why the appeal to authority never works - another authority can always be found and then the ‘logic’ an appeal to authority works on, that of unquestionable expertise, completely falls apart.


Just to make sure we hit 2,000 posts here, contextual best team, using the conventional definition of an all time team that has been in use for many decades:

RHP Walter Johnson (though I think Cy Young is right there due to his insane amount of effective innings)

LHP Lefty Grove

Relief Pitcher - Mariano, Hoyt Wilhelmina second but the gap here is big.

C - Berra, for his consistency but this is hard to pick. Bench is close,

1B - Gehrig, Pujols and Anson are close.

2B Collins, Joe Morgan is right there.

3B Schmidt, pretty wide margin I think.

SS Wagner, pretty wide margin I think.

LF Bonds or Williams, entirely dependent on steroid philosophy.

CF Mays, but it hurts to leave off Cobb.

RF Ruth, it’s not even close.





The best team if we ignore everyone before current times:
RHP: Clemens

LHP Johnson (I don’t see Kershaw passing him)

RP: Mariano

C: Ivan Rodriguez, but boy Piazza could hit and peak Posey and Mauer were fantastic

1B: Pujols, Thomas second

2B: Biggio, but there’s several close

3B: Chipper

SS: A-Rod

LF: Bonds

CF: Griffey, probably today. Will end up as Trout soon

RF: Gwynn? Walker? Ichiro? Would have to look up the numbers instead of using memory.

I like Berra getting his due here. I’m a Gary Carter fan and understand why Bench is so highly respect but I feel like Berra gets overlooked too often as just a funnyman. Guy could rake. He also looked 40 years old when he was 20. Love those kind of guys.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I like Berra getting his due here. I’m a Gary Carter fan and understand why Bench is so highly respect but I feel like Berra gets overlooked too often as just a funnyman. Guy could rake. He also looked 40 years old when he was 20. Love those kind of guys.

Snider looked 60.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Snider looked 60.

He sure dude. Randy Johnson is actually another one. Was never young.

[Carter08]

Meant he sure did.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Notwithstanding our resident genius, one can't help but notice that nearly every list ranking baseball all-time greats that's ever been put together, including by statisticians, has Ruth and Cobb and Mays in the top 5 hitters/fielders and WALTER Johnson as the top pitcher. They must be lawyers who twist words too.

And Wagner competes with Ripken.