Warren Spahn - Why No Hobby Love?

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

I'm sorry, but if these "modern" metrics of yours add up to the conclusion that Spahn wasn't a LOT better than Red Faber, Ron Guidry, or Bob Lemon, you need to go back to the drawing board. The guy won 20 games or more 13 times, he pitched 5,200 innings despite missing three prime years for military service, he completed 362 games of 665 started, won 363 of them including 63 shutouts (both records for lefties) He was an All-Star 17 times, far and away the most for pitchers. Not enough Ks for you, ERAs not low enough? Maybe he just knew how to pitch, and didn't mind letting his fielders do some work or putting some runners on base until it was time to bear down. Not to denigrate the pitchers you named or any others you might want to lump him in with, but he was head and shoulders above them because 1) he was a prodigious winner for an incredibly long time, 2) his numbers are nothing less than staggering, especially considering he was already 25 when he came up, and 3) oh, by the way, he was a terrific hitter and fielder. Spahnie just "very good?" Give me a break.

You are missing my point. I have zero intention of denigrating Spahn, who was an excellent pitcher for a very long time. I was simply expressing why he does not get a ton of hobby attention.

To paraphrase a famous advertisement, "collectors dig the flash." Being consistently good for a long time does not make a player valuable in the hobby. Collectors prefer a brief fireworks explosion than extended consistency. Think Koufax over Spahn, even though for his career, Spahn was way more valuable.

The fact he did not have a huge number of K's is not an indictment of his pitching ability. It's a recognition that K's get attention. It's one of the reasons that Bob Feller finished higher than Thorton Lee in the MVP voting in 1941, despite Lee having a much lower ERA.

You refer to my use of 'modern metrics.' Don't get caught up in the metric. I'm using it to emphasize a point. ERA+ looks at how much better a player's ERA is from the league average. It is a metric that easily translates into attention. In 2002, when Pedro Martinez has an ERA of 2.22 and the league average was above 4, people paid attention. In 1968, when the average ERA was under 3, a 2.22 ERA was nice but not attracting a ton of attention.

I did not intend to compare Spahn to Red Faber, Ron Guidry, or Bob Lemon except to highlight that he was not generally a very dominant pitcher. This remains accurate, but when you look at his career, none of those are remotely good comps. I was highlighting that his actual dominance is in fact similar to players who are lesser players.

A different Braves pitcher is probably a better comp. Tom Glavine won 300+ games, won 20 or more 5 times in an era where that was much rarer. And had an ERA+ for his career of 118, almost identical to Spahn. I don't think there is anyone out there who believes that Glavine deserves way more hobby attention.

Additionally, the hobby is heavily biased towards players who started young, since fans can project their HOF trajectory from early on and jump on. Spahn started his career late and had just 108 wins by age 30. This does not make his career win total less impressive, it arguably makes it more impressive, but it was probably not until he was 37-38 that people viewed him as a HOFer. Again, not a statement about his value as a baseball player, but a factor in the hobby.

I'm trying to emphasize two points:
1) Spahn's value in the hobby is lower than his value as a baseball player, because he was quickly excellent for a long time, but was not flashy and did not have the factors (such as starting at a young age, K'ing a lot of poeple, having unworldly seasons like Koufax etc) that get attention.

2)Spahn was an elite pitcher, but he is not in the same league as Lefty Grove, Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson, Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson or Tom Seaver. He never achieved their levels of dominance

[gonefishin]

Jeff, Jim Hoskins here. I need to comment a little - I for one didn't take your comments as derogatory. I actually enjoyed them because it gave me a little more insight as to why some people don't embrace Mr. Spahn more in the hobby. That was the objective for beginning the thread.

So, thank you for your perspective! I would actually like to hear from other readers that may also have reasons why Spahn doesn't receive the love.

We all don't have to agree with someone's opinion because that's what it is - their opinion.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Topnotchsy

You are missing my point. I have zero intention of denigrating Spahn, who was an excellent pitcher for a very long time. I was simply expressing why he does not get a ton of hobby attention.

No, I didn't miss your point, I just disagreed with it. Nowhere did I accuse you of denigrating Spahn, you made that up. But your intention in stating that "Spahn's consistency and longevity resulted in some incredible career numbers, but his 119 ERA+ is the same as Red Faber, Ron Guidry, Bobby Shantz and Bob Lemon, some very good pitchers, but not all-time greats" is unmistakable. I just disagree with you, that's all. Trying to turn his "consistency and longevity" into some kind of case against his inclusion with the all-time greats is laughable since those are among the prime criteria. Say what you will, he merits discussion in the same breath as those you name, IMO. As for why he doesn't get the hobby love to go with that, your guess is as good as mine. Small market, no flash, his schnoz, who knows? Maybe the hobby will catch up to his record one of these days. Just to try to wrap up this up, the guy had more wins and shutouts than any other lefty in baseball history. That alone should merit his inclusion with the elite few at the top, shouldn't it?

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

No, I didn't miss your point, I just disagreed with it. Nowhere did I accuse you of denigrating Spahn, you made that up. But your intention in stating that "Spahn's consistency and longevity resulted in some incredible career numbers, but his 119 ERA+ is the same as Red Faber, Ron Guidry, Bobby Shantz and Bob Lemon, some very good pitchers, but not all-time greats" is unmistakable. I just disagree with you, that's all. Trying to turn his "consistency and longevity" into some kind of case against his inclusion with the all-time greats is laughable since those are among the prime criteria. Say what you will, he merits discussion in the same breath as those you name, IMO. As for why he doesn't get the hobby love to go with that, your guess is as good as mine. Small market, no flash, his schnoz, who knows? Maybe the hobby will catch up to his record one of these days. Just to try to wrap up this up, the guy had more wins and shutouts than any other lefty in baseball history. That alone should merit his inclusion with the elite few at the top, shouldn't it?

Fair enough. I did not realize you want to put him in the same category as guys like Grove, Maddux etc. If so, we disagree. I see him as a tier lower than that. Still slam-dunk HOF and better than many pitchers in the Hall, but not on the short list (say top 10) best pitchers all-time.

Regarding, "denigrating"... I thought you were taking me to say that Spahn was a similar pitcher to Red Faber, Ron Guidry, Bobby Shantz and Bob Lemon, which I definitely was not meaning to say.

[Carter08]

He’s the best lefty of all time in my opinion and at the very least he’s top 3. Randy Johnson might be close. After all, he did win four Warren Spahn awards!

[Kevin]

I am sloughing away at two sets: T206 and the 1950 Bowman. I really just accumulated the 1950 Bowmans. I don't have Spahn in my set yet and went to look on eBay. He's pretty reasonable. Might have to take the plunge...

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Carter08

He’s the best lefty of all time in my opinion and at the very least he’s top 3. Randy Johnson might be close. After all, he did win four Warren Spahn awards!

Top five lefties, pick your order: Grove, Spahn, Koufax, Carlton, Johnson.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Topnotchsy

Fair enough. I did not realize you want to put him in the same category as guys like Grove, Maddux etc. If so, we disagree. I see him as a tier lower than that. Still slam-dunk HOF and better than many pitchers in the Hall, but not on the short list (say top 10) best pitchers all-time.
Regarding, "denigrating"... I thought you were taking me to say that Spahn was a similar pitcher to Red Faber, Ron Guidry, Bobby Shantz and Bob Lemon, which I definitely was not meaning to say.

I'd have him top 15, if not top ten, that's the truly elite considering how many great pitchers there have been. Even his K's, which you cite as a negative: Where was he when he retired--#3, 4, 5? Not too shabby. Of course,they didn't strike out as much during his time. Where do the big boys like Bill James have him? They might be in your camp with the new metrics, but my God, the guy could win and suck up a ton of innings and do it year after year after year. If I'm a manager, I'd want Spahnie on my staff!

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

I'd have him top 15, if not top ten, that's the truly elite considering how many great pitchers there have been. Even his K's, which you cite as a negative: Where was he when he retired--#3, 4, 5? Not too shabby. Of course,they didn't strike out as much during his time. Where do the big boys like Bill James have him? They might be in your camp with the new metrics, but my God, the guy could win and suck up a ton of innings and do it year after year after year. If I'm a manager, I'd want Spahnie on my staff!

Joe Posnanski has him as the 59th best player of all-time (although he stresses that he is not really trying to put people in an absolute position).

59th includes hitters and pitchers, and includes Negro League players.



His top 20 pitchers (I pulled this from the book and could not find a straight list, so I may be overlooking someone)

1) Walter Johnson
2) Satchel Paige
3) Roger Clemens
4) Lefty Grove
5) Grover Cleveland Alexander
6) Randy Johnson
7) Greg Maddux
8) Cy Young
9) Christy Mathewson
10) Pedro Martinez
11) Tom Seaver
12) Bob Gibson
13) Warren Spahn
14) Nolan Ryan
15) Bob Feller
16) Smokey Joe Williams
17) Steve Carlton
18) Gaylord Perry
19) Sandy Koufax
20) Bert Blyleven

I think his placement is reasonable. I'd probably move a few around on his list and would have Grove, Mathewson and Seaver a bit higher. I think Ryan is too high. And I struggle with Clemens and how to consider him, but generally think it is a pretty good list.

In my mind, the top 8-10 or so are in their own category, and then the rest come after. But looking at this list is informative. During his career, Gaylord Perry reached #2 all-time in K's, but did not strike out many batters per game. Guys like Bob Feller and Bob Gibson are more valuable (hobby-wise). Pedro Martinez, Sandy Koufax and Greg Maddux are very valuable. They each had transcendent peaks, where even fans of other teams felt they needed to tune in when they were pitching.

The list of pitchers who have real value is very short. Few care about Bert Blyleven and Gaylord Perry from a hobby perspective. Steve Carlton won 300 games and 4 Cy Youngs and is not particularly valuable.

Spahn may be a top 15 all-time pitcher. I'd probably have him in that range. Possibly a little lower, but likely still top 20. I might move Steve Carlton above him. Possibly Bob Feller due to his incredible peak, (there was no Cy Young Award during his peak, but he would likely have won at least 4 Cy Young Awards and possibly more), though I may be biased because I collect barnstorming items and Feller was a legend in that arena.

Of course that's my personal list based on my preferences and my knowledge of baseball, which is of course, not all-encompassing.