Bob Feller Career

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tomi

Was looking at pitching careers on baseball reference and came across his stats. Aside from missing 3 full prime seasons to the war and only pitching 9 games in his 1st year back, the guy was pretty incredible.
Just wondering where you guys place him on your list of all time great pitchers.
Top 5,10,15 etc. Overrated, underrated, right where he belongs. His name rarely comes up with the greats at the top of the list but was a hell of a pitcher in his day. Just blown away with how many complete games he has.

I never understood why metrics don't like him. 51st by JAWS? Come on.

[rats60]

I have him 13th.

[cgjackson222]

The heater from Van Meter had some very dominant years, but the 2nd half of his career was not very productive.

I place him around 29, a little behind Nolan Ryan. Both were extreme power pitchers that also walked a lot of batters.

In his prime though, he may be top 10-15.

[Leon]

Every thread needs a card..or blotter..

[Hankphenom]

Who was the best pitcher in the A.L. for the decade of the 1940s, or for the 15 years 1937-52? Answer: Bob Feller. Any pitcher with that kind of dominance on their resume has to be in the truly great category. Fill in Feller's war years with his prime numbers and you've got the proper perspective. Top 10 or 15 all time.

[Peter_Spaeth]

His strikeouts really fell off dramatically after 1946, like he lost a foot on his fastball or something.

[Jay Wolt]

He signed at a ton of card shows, always a dignified man

Here's some of his personally owned cards

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

His strikeouts really fell off dramatically after 1946, like he lost a foot on his fastball or something.

Pretty impressive before the strikeouts fall off that he led the league in strikeouts 4 years in a row, went to the military for 3 years, came back and pitched only 9 games the following year and then led the league in strikeouts 3 more years in a row after that. Just imagine those 4 full prime seasons.
Does anyone know if there was an injury in the later half of his career or did he just naturally decline?

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

His strikeouts really fell off dramatically after 1946, like he lost a foot on his fastball or something.

Mr. Spaeth, there is actually a very plausible answer and explanation to your question, given on the Wikipedia site for Bob Feller, and apparently coming directly from Feller himself. In the last paragraph of the "Return to Cleveland (1945 - 1948)" section on Feller it talks of him pitching in a game in Philly against the Athletics on June 13, 1947, and in the 4th inning after already accumulating 10 strikeouts, him falling off the mound made slippery by rain, and injuring his back as a result. The article quotes Feller as saying, "My fastball was never the same after that.". The fact that that Feller can pinpoint the exact time, date, and place it happened is pretty telling. His record going forward you pointed out speaks for itself, and adds another big "What if?" to his career. It also raises a further question as to would today's modern medical advances have been able to do something about his injury and restored him to his pre-injury condition and health.

And sincerely hope this is on point and topic enough for the usual forum trolls. I didn't know that in talking about how certain aspects of a player's career compared to and impacted or were interwoven into that of other players was considered so off topic, or how rude one should be lest anyone acknowledge and respond to a slightly off topic or tangential question which was asked. I actually thought there was a lot of good and informative info and conversation going on that would be enlightening and entertainting to a lot of others. I typically have those troll types on ignore, but then others go quoting them and their BS shows up anyway. And if there is anything posted in a thread that could ever be called more "off-topic", it is making a post and just complaining about others in the thread being off-topic. At least my post calling out such a complainer actually does also speak to Feller and his career.

[ClementeFanOh]

270+ career complete games, 3 no hitters, first ballot HOF. I'd call
that outstanding, but just wait- some sophist will insist he is somehow
"overrated". Wait for it... Trent King

[BobC]

Unfortunately, Feller gave up almost four full seasons at the absolute prime of his career to enlist in the Navy and serve as a gun captain aboard the USS Alabama. He was the very first professional athlete, not just a baseball player, to voluntarily enlist in the service after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. He remained in the Navy till after the Japanese unconditionally surrendered on August 14, 1945, and was officially discharged on August 22, 1945. And in typical Feller fashion, just two days later he took the mound for the Indians on August 24 and pitched a complete game, 12 strikeout, 4-2 win over the season's eventual World Series champs, the Tigers.

In 1941, his last full season before he enlisted in the Navy, he led all the majors in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced. He additionally led just the AL in games pitched in, shutouts, hits given up, and SO per 9 innings. He pitched 28 complete games with an ERA of 3.15 on 343.0 innings pitched, and per Baseball Reference had a WAR of 8.2, which was actually a somewhat down year for him as he had a 9.9 and 9.2 WAR for the previous 1940 and 1939 seasons, respectfully.

Then in his first full season back in 1946, he led all the majors again in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced, and added also leading the majors in total games pitched in, shutouts, and hits given up. And I can already hear all the trolls and naysayers chomping at the bit to jump on and put him down for giving up all those hits and walks, but that year he did so with an ERA of 2.18. Or are all the sabremetric and statistical nerds going to argue he was the luckiest pitcher alive and must have had one of the greatest and luckiest defenses in baseball behind him, over the entire season? In that first year back, he pitched 36 complete games, out of a total of 42 that he started, 10 of which were shut outs, with 348 strikeouts over 371.1 innings pitched. He literally pitched less than every fourth day for the entire season. And he ended up per Baseball Reference with a 10.0 WAR for that year.

I couldn't find or figure out on Baseball Reference how to get a listing of total WAR for all players by season back then, it kept wanting to give me listings for just offensive or position player WAR. So over on FanGraph I found some total WAR listings for all MLB players which showed that Bob Feller ranked #1 in WAR for all of baseball in 1939 and 1940, was #6 in 1941, and then came back to rank #2 in WAR for 1946, second only to Ted Williams. And don't forget, Feller has three no-hitters, including the only Opening Day no-hitter in MLB history back in 1940, the same year he also won the AL's Pitching Triple Crown.

Now, go back and fill in the four seasons that Feller lost due to WW II, based on how he was doing before he left and after he came back, and then tell everyone where he should rank. Oh, and maybe keep in mind that Feller actually didn't have to go into the service and was eligible for a deferment due to his father's health. Stats and metrics are okay, but there is so much they can't/don't take into account. Feller was probably top 2-3 in his era. I don't see the waste of time in arguing who is this or that over all time because of the differences in the game, context, rules, equipment, and everything else. And then top it off with all the statistics-centric people that view the modern game and players as being so much better than everyone before them.

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by BobC

Unfortunately, Feller gave up almost four full seasons at the absolute prime of his career to enlist in the Navy and serve as a gun captain aboard the USS Alabama. He was the very first professional athlete, not just a baseball player, to voluntarily enlist in the service after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. He remained in the Navy till after the Japanese unconditionally surrendered on August 14, 1945, and was officially discharged on August 22, 1945. And in typical Feller fashion, just two days later he took the mound for the Indians on August 24 and pitched a complete game, 12 strikeout, 4-2 win over the season's eventual World Series champs, the Tigers.

In 1941, his last full season before he enlisted in the Navy, he led all the majors in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced. He additionally led just the AL in games pitched in, shutouts, hits given up, and SO per 9 innings. He pitched 28 complete games with an ERA of 3.15 on 343.0 innings pitched, and per Baseball Reference had a WAR of 8.2, which was actually a somewhat down year for him as he had a 9.9 and 9.2 WAR for the previous 1940 and 1939 seasons, respectfully.

Then in his first full season back in 1946, he led all the majors again in wins, games started, innings pitched, strikeouts, walks given, and batters faced, and added also leading the majors in total games pitched in, shutouts, and hits given up. And I can already hear all the trolls and naysayers chomping at the bit to jump on and put him down for giving up all those hits and walks, but that year he did so with an ERA of 2.18. Or are all the sabremetric and statistical nerds going to argue he was the luckiest pitcher alive and must have had one of the greatest and luckiest defenses in baseball behind him, over the entire season? In that first year back, he pitched 36 complete games, out of a total of 42 that he started, 10 of which were shut outs, with 348 strikeouts over 371.1 innings pitched. He literally pitched less than every fourth day for the entire season. And he ended up per Baseball Reference with a 10.0 WAR for that year.

I couldn't find or figure out on Baseball Reference how to get a listing of total WAR for all players by season back then, it kept wanting to give me listings for just offensive or position player WAR. So over on FanGraph I found some total WAR listings for all MLB players which showed that Bob Feller ranked #1 in WAR for all of baseball in 1939 and 1940, was #6 in 1941, and then came back to rank #2 in WAR for 1946, second only to Ted Williams. And don't forget, Feller has three no-hitters, including the only Opening Day no-hitter in MLB history back in 1940, the same year he also won the AL's Pitching Triple Crown.

Now, go back and fill in the four seasons that Feller lost due to WW II, based on how he was doing before he left and after he came back, and then tell everyone where he should rank. Oh, and maybe keep in mind that Feller actually didn't have to go into the service and was eligible for a deferment due to his father's health. Stats and metrics are okay, but there is so much they can't/don't take into account. Feller was probably top 2-3 in his era. I don't see the waste of time in arguing who is this or that over all time because of the differences in the game, context, rules, equipment, and everything else. And then top it off with all the statistics-centric people that view the modern game and players as being so much better than everyone before them.

Well said. I guess he will be another "what could have been" player due to missing time even though he had a great career anyway. It's just sad pitchers back in the day who were elite were pitching a lot of innings but today's pitchers are being babied by the analytics managers and are even being pulled from games that are no hitters with only 80 or so pitches thrown.

[Exhibitman]

We may all be jaded by Feller's ubiquitous hobby life. The guy literally worked the show circuit for decades and was not bashful about touting his own greatness when he did. Familiarity breeds contempt. We'd all roll eyes when he was announced as a guest and I think that carries over.

I've always thought of three pitchers in the 1930s-1941: Grove, Feller and Hubbell. I'll take those three and another good starter over any other 1-2-3 I can think of in that era.

Oh, card:

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

We may all be jaded by Feller's ubiquitous hobby life. The guy literally worked the show circuit for decades and was not bashful about touting his own greatness when he did. Familiarity breeds contempt. We'd all roll eyes when he was announced as a guest and I think that carries over.

I've always thought of three pitchers in the 1930s-1941: Grove, Feller and Hubbell. I'll take those three and another good starter over any other 1-2-3 I can think of in that era.

Oh, card:

You may have a point. What's the old joke, "The rarest Bob Feller card is the one he didn't sign.". However, he was definitely a great ambassador for the game, and had absolutely no problem interacting and meeting with fans, and especially kids. He would talk with and sign for pretty much anyone and everyone. He didn't charge an arm and a leg to sign, and if I remember, would often just ask for small donations to his museum in return for autographs.

As for touting his own greatness, what's another old saying? "It ain't bragging if you can back it up!". And if that's the worst thing you can think to say about him, I'd say that's pretty darn good for him. Always wondered why he didn't seem to get a similar level of respect at being such an ambassador for the game as say Buck O'Neil. For the longest time he seemed to be a fixture on the hobby circuit almost as much as Feller.

In the end though, I think those lost WWII years cost him more than almost anyone else in baseball. Without those missing years, he probably easily reaches the 300 wins - 3,000 strikeout milestone plateaus for pitchers, and gets the recognition he likely wasn't getting otherwise. Plus, playing his whole career in Cleveland, instead of say New York or Chicago, didn't help his overall popularity either.

And I said earlier, I'd put him in the top 2-3 pitchers for his era, so alongside Hubbell and Grove, I'm with you.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Tomi

Well said. I guess he will be another "what could have been" player due to missing time even though he had a great career anyway. It's just sad pitchers back in the day who were elite were pitching a lot of innings but today's pitchers are being babied by the analytics managers and are even being pulled from games that are no hitters with only 80 or so pitches thrown.

Right back at you, well said as well.

Not saying all modern pitchers wouldn't be able to do well back then, but I can see many that wouldn't necessarily be able to pitch so well given how pitchers were worked in those days.