Best lefty off all time? My vote is Koufax!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I see the Snow PaTroll is back...

You guys should go look through this clown's post history over the past few months. Just go through them one by one. He never contributes even a shred of value to any conversation. All he does is post about me. From one thread to the next. His entire existence here is stalking me.

That's demonstrably not true. The first page of his posts shows a wide variety of subjects having nothing to do with you. Prices, PSA fees, Jackie Robinson cards, BST issues, REA, etc. You're a liar. Or did you just make yet another assertion without checking the facts?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

That's demonstrably not true. The first page of his posts shows a wide variety of subjects having nothing to do with you. Prices, PSA fees, Jackie Robinson cards, BST issues, REA, etc. You're a liar. Or did you just make yet another assertion without checking the facts?

Bullshit. 16 of his last 25 posts are either directly about me or mocking something I've said. And that's just page one.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Bullshit. 16 of his last 25 posts are either directly about me or mocking something I've said. And that's just page one.

You said:
All he does is post about me. From one thread to the next. His entire existence here is stalking me.

What YOU said is BS. I thought you were a statistician, since when is 16 of 25 100 percent? By lawyer math it's 64 percent.

Or maybe it's the same logic that lets you ignore half of Koufax' career lol. Only the 16 count.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You said:
All he does is post about me. From one thread to the next. His entire existence here is stalking me.

What YOU said is BS. I thought you were a statistician, since when is 16 of 25 100 percent? By lawyer math it's 64 percent.

OK captain literal. As if you didn't know what I meant by what I said.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

OK captain literal. As if you didn't know what I meant by what I said.

A man so precise with numbers who speaks figuratively. Got it.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You said:
All he does is post about me. From one thread to the next. His entire existence here is stalking me.

What YOU said is BS. I thought you were a statistician, since when is 16 of 25 100 percent? By lawyer math it's 64 percent.

Or maybe it's the same logic that lets you ignore half of Koufax' career lol. Only the 16 count.

This is the perfect example of why everyone hates lawyers. There isn't a single person here, including yourself, who is confused about what someone actually means when they say something like "all he/she does is X". Then the forum captain lawyer comes along to point out the obvious, "well actually, he did make a post about Jackie Robinson last week". Or if someone says, "all he does is sleep", you're the genius that's going to point out, "well actually, I saw him eating lunch yesterday".

I'm done playing games with you Peter. Have fun talking to the wall like you always do.

My point is clear. Lorewalker stalks me from thread to thread. He has a serious problem. The majority of his content over the past 3 or 4 months is either directly about me or mocking me. It's extremely childish.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This is the perfect example of why everyone hates lawyers. There isn't a single person here, including yourself, who is confused about what someone actually means when they say something like "all he/she does is X". Then the forum captain lawyer comes along to point out the obvious, "well actually, he did make a post about Jackie Robinson last week". Or if someone says, "all he does is sleep", you're the genius that's going to point out, "well actually, I saw him eating lunch yesterday".

I'm done playing games with you Peter. Have fun talking to the wall like you always do.

My point is clear. Lorewalker stalks me from thread to thread. He has a serious problem. The majority of his content over the past 3 or 4 months is either directly about me or mocking me. It's extremely childish.

Of the two of us, who do you think is liked less on this forum? Let's see just how perceptive you are, Mr. statistician turned figurative.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Lorewalker stalks me from thread to thread.

Not accurate. I have been on threads before you got there. That I addressed you in them is only because your posts warranted it. I have refrained more times than I have posted.

Originally Posted by Snowman

He has a serious problem.

I am sure I have many problems but they pale in contrast to your serious problems.

Originally Posted by Snowman

The majority of his content over the past 3 or 4 months is either directly about me or mocking me.

Oh stop it. You love the attention.

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's extremely childish.

Ok. Ya got me there but I do have a passion for collecting cards which inhibits my ability to act like an adult, at times. For a guy who insults and attacks so many people you really should be thicker skinned. You constantly put a target on yourself.

[G1911]

It turns out that insulting absolutely everyone active in a thread will make everyone in a thread unite against you. I for one am shocked at this revelation.

Waddell, Plank and Hubbell aren’t the best but they probably deserve more mentions than they have gotten. Waddell seems to me one of the great ‘could have been’s’, he had a fine career but if he’d been more mature/sane/dedicated he might be the one the serious people are debating.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

It turns out that insulting absolutely everyone active in a thread will make everyone in a thread unite against you. I for one am shocked at this revelation.

Waddell, Plank and Hubbell aren’t the best but they probably deserve more mentions than they have gotten. Waddell seems to me one of the great ‘could have been’s’, he had a fine career but if he’d been more mature/sane/dedicated he might be the one the serious people are debating.

He did complement one guy who agreed with him about something. See that's the sole criterion, someone who agrees with him gets it, everybody else is stupid.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

It turns out that insulting absolutely everyone active in a thread will make everyone in a thread unite against you. I for one am shocked at this revelation.

Waddell, Plank and Hubbell aren’t the best but they probably deserve more mentions than they have gotten. Waddell seems to me one of the great ‘could have been’s’, he had a fine career but if he’d been more mature/sane/dedicated he might be the one the serious people are debating.

I just paid silly money for an e93 waddell. Inspiring me to learn more about him. Interesting character so far.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This is the perfect example of why everyone hates lawyers. There isn't a single person here, including yourself, who is confused about what someone actually means when they say something like "all he/she does is X". Then the forum captain lawyer comes along to point out the obvious, "well actually, he did make a post about Jackie Robinson last week". Or if someone says, "all he does is sleep", you're the genius that's going to point out, "well actually, I saw him eating lunch yesterday".

I'm done playing games with you Peter. Have fun talking to the wall like you always do.

My point is clear. Lorewalker stalks me from thread to thread. He has a serious problem. The majority of his content over the past 3 or 4 months is either directly about me or mocking me. It's extremely childish.

Being a statistician, perhaps you can go back and compute the number of your posts with an ad hominem comment ridiculing someone, or the forum collectively?

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

That's demonstrably not true. The first page of his posts shows a wide variety of subjects having nothing to do with you. Prices, PSA fees, Jackie Robinson cards, BST issues, REA, etc. You're a liar. Or did you just make yet another assertion without checking the facts?

Hey Peter,

When someone accuses someone else of stalking them on here, and then points to the accused's prior posts that apparently they went searching for to then go through, am I missing something or does it not sound like the accuser is maybe the one actually doing the stalking?

[G1911]

I’m really sad I’m not going to get to see this groundbreaking statistic that shows Koufax is top 3, crapping all over the inferior work of respected baseball statisticians that have not been able to achieve this.

Anyways, Grove Vs. Johnson Vs. Spahn with the shared acknowledgement that all 3 were truly great pitchers is a much more reasonable polite debate for us all to have than the screeching from Koufax stans that is most of this.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by G1911

Anyways, Grove Vs. Johnson Vs. Spahn with the shared acknowledgement that all 3 were truly great pitchers is a much more reasonable polite debate for us all to have than the screeching from Koufax stans that is most of this.

I can't disagree with these three, makes too much sense. But really can't tell you how to pick one over the other two. They're truly from three distinct eras, which is part of what makes it so tough to try choose just one as the best. Maybe because of the disparity between the different eras, rather than trying to pick just one overall great lefty, why not see if there isn't more of a consensus of who the best lefty is in each era.

And we could debate about what the different, distinct eras are, but for me I'd break them out roughly as follows:

19th Century (18** - 1899)
Pre-War Deadball (1900 - 1920)
Pre-War Liveball (1920 - 1945)
Post-War Vintage (1945 - 1980)
Post-War Modern (1980 - 2000)
21st Century Modern (2000 - 202*)

Feel free to say/do what you want with these, but they do kind of run along generational lines, which was coincidental and not necessarily my original intention.

Now if these are kind of what would be agreed upon as the different eras, I'd say as far as best lefties go:


Ed Morris or Jesse Tannehill for 19th Century Era (Toss-Up ?)

(Not many good lefties pitching back then, but these two about the best in terms of Wins, W/L%, ERA, WHIP, Ks, and ERA+, with maybe the nod to Norris for pitching 15 seasons, to only 7 seasons for Tannehill.)



Rube Waddell for the Pre-War Deadball Era (Eddie Plank a close 2nd)

(Plank has over 326 wins [3rd all time for lefties] and a .627 Win% over 17 seasons to Waddell's 193 wins and .574 Win% over 13 seasons, but Waddell has it slightly over Plank in ERA, WHIP, Ks, and ERA+. Waddell also had a dominant 6 year stretch from 1902-07, leading the AL in Ks all six years, and won the pitching Triple Crown in 1905. Plank had a long productive career, winning a lot, but never really led his league or the majors in any significant pitching measures. This almost seems a repeat of the Spahn-Koufax argument, but I think the edge goes to Waddell in this case due to him pitching and being so dominant a few years longer than Koufax. Honorable Mention to Ruth maybe, but not enough years pitching.)



Grove takes the Pre-War Liveball Era

(Hubbell gets 2nd spot, but Grove all the way.)



Spahn gets the Post-War Vintage Era (Carlton a close 2nd spot.)

(Carlton would primarily fall into this Era and does have 4 CYAs, and a pitching Triple Crown, and with 329 wins only trails Spahn's 363 wins as the most all time for a lefty. This one appears to be a lot closer than it first looks, but Spahn did lose 3 prime years to the service. Slight edge to Spahn.)



Randy Johnson for the Post-War Modern Era (Tom Glavine in 2nd spot.)

(Maybe even though he pitched better in the following Era, more than half of Johnson's pitching career was in this Era. Glavine actually has 2 more wins than Johnson [305 to 303], but Johnson has a better ERA, WHIP, and ERA+ than Glavine, and crushed him in Ks.))



Randy Johnson tentatively for the 21st Century Era (Subject to change.)

(Think this may be tentative for now, and we need to wait and see how current lefty pitchers like Kershaw and DeGrom finish out their careers. Johnson had his best years primarily in this Era. For now, Glavine may still be in 2nd, with the aforemented still active pitchers maybe closing fast.)

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by BobC

I can't disagree with these three, makes too much sense. But really can't tell you how to pick one over the other two. They're truly from three distinct eras, which is part of what makes it so tough to try choose just one as the best. Maybe because of the disparity between the different eras, rather than trying to pick just one overall great lefty, why not see if there isn't more of a consensus of who the best lefty is in each era.

And we could debate about what the different, distinct eras are, but for me I'd break them out roughly as follows:

19th Century (18** - 1899)
Pre-War Deadball (1900 - 1920)
Pre-War Liveball (1920 - 1945)
Post-War Vintage (1945 - 1980)
Post-War Modern (1980 - 2000)
21st Century Modern (2000 - 202*)

Feel free to say/do what you want with these, but they do kind of run along generational lines, which was coincidental and not necessarily my original intention.

Now if these are kind of what would be agreed upon as the different eras, I'd say as far as best lefties go:


Ed Morris or Jesse Tannehill for 19th Century Era (Toss-Up ?)

(Not many good lefties pitching back then, but these two about the best in terms of W/L%, ERA, WHIP, Ks, and ERA+, with maybe the nod to Norris for pitching 15 seasons, to only 7 seasons for Tannehill.)



Rube Waddell for the Pre-War Deadball Era (Eddie Plank a close 2nd)

(Plank has over 326 wins [3rd all time for lefties] and a .627 Win% over 17 seasons to Waddell's 193 wins and .574 Win% over 13 seasons, but Waddell has it slightly over Plank in ERA, WHIP, Ks, and ERA+. Waddell also had a dominant 6 year stretch from 1902-07, leading the AL in Ks all six years, and won the pitching Triple Crown in 1905. Plank had a long productive career, winning a lot, but never really led his league or the majors in any significant pitching measures. This almost seems a repeat of the Spahn-Koufax argument, but I think the edge goes to Waddell in this case due to him pitching and being so dominant a few years longer than Koufax. Honorable Mention to Ruth maybe, but not enough years pitching.)



Grove takes the Pre-War Liveball Era

(Hubbell gets 2nd spot, but Grove all the way.)



Spahn gets the Post-War Vintage Era (Carlton a close 2nd spot.)

(Carlton would primarily fall into this Era and does have 4 CYAs, and a pitching Triple Crown, and with 329 wins only trails Spahn's 363 wins as the most all time for a lefty. This one appears to be a lot closer than it first looks, but Spahn did lose 3 prime years to the service. Slight edge to Spahn.)



Randy Johnson for the Post-War Modern Era (Tom Glavine in 2nd spot.)

(Maybe even though he pitched better in the following Era, more than half of Johnson's pitching career was in this Era. Glavine actually has 2 more wins than Johnson [305 to 303], but Johnson has a better ERA, WHIP, and ERA+ than Glavine, and crushed him in Ks.))



Randy Johnson tentatively for the 21st Century Era (Subject to change.)

(Think this may be tentative for now, and we need to wait and see how current lefty pitchers like Kershaw and DeGrom finish out their careers. Johnson had his best years primarily in this Era. For now, Glavine may still be in 2nd, with the aforemented still active pitchers maybe closing fast.)

I like this. I’m starting to come around to Carlton, Grove, Randy, and Spahn tied for the greatest with Koufax following them. Easy way out and I’ll take it.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I like this. I’m starting to come around to Carlton, Grove, Randy, and Spahn tied for the greatest with Koufax following them. Easy way out and I’ll take it.

Good, maybe we can cease the other crap and actually get some agreement. To me, the different Eras really makes it impossible to truly compare pitchers. This way you're looking at pitchers from similar times in a much more consistent context. The Koufax paradox is still there because of his fairly short time at his peak, and pretty early retirement. Personally, it is just too short for me to give him more credit. Especially when he retired and gave his health as a primary reason for reting early. Because of that, you wonder how bad he felt and if he had continued pitching would he have possibly been hit with injuries going forward, including possibly a career ending one.

I know it isn't statistically relevant or necessarily makes sense, but had he simply retired for no good reason, I wouldn't have counted the early retirement against him so much. He was at the height of his career when he stopped so, if I thought he could still be able to play at a high level otherwise, I would tend to subconciously see him continuing to perform well. Kind of like you may subconsciously think Spahn would have been doing had he not lost those 3 years to the service. But because he retired due to health, I think of him as being done at the point, with further enhancement to his career or stats not happening. Just the way it comes across to me, and doubt anyone else may think about it in that manner.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

Good, maybe we can cease the other crap and actually get some agreement. To me, the different Eras really makes it impossible to truly compare pitchers. This way you're looking at pitchers from similar times in a much more consistent context. The Koufax paradox is still there because of his fairly short time at his peak, and pretty early retirement. Personally, it is just too short for me to give him more credit. Especially when he retired and gave his health as a primary reason for reting early. Because of that, you wonder how bad he felt and if he had continued pitching would he have possibly been hit with injuries going forward, including possibly a career ending one.

I know it isn't statistically relevant or necessarily makes sense, but had he simply retired for no good reason, I wouldn't have counted the early retirement against him so much. He was at the height of his career when he stopped so, if I thought he could still be able to play at a high level otherwise, I would tend to subconciously see him continuing to perform well. Kind of like you may subconsciously think Spahn would have been doing had he not lost those 3 years to the service. But because he retired due to health, I think of him as being done at the point, with further enhancement to his career or stats not happening. Just the way it comes across to me, and doubt anyone else may think about it in that manner.

He essentially did have a career ending injury. His elbow was gone and his long-time physician told him he couldn't get him through another season.