Who was the greatest pitcher from this photo?
Goldenage
Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
No reasons please.
Just a name please.
0
Comments
Ryan
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
Lynn
Bobby Orr
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Ryan. He had a longer, successful career.
seriously though, I would take Ryan. Koufax only had 6 outstanding seasons.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Maybe this is a commonly seen photo, but I have not seen it before...and it is a good one...Thanks for sharing!
Nolan
Ryan.
This question has got to be a joke......
I personally watched them both pitch.... No comparison between the two.
When Ryan came over to the Angels from the Mets was jazzed! I was a kid right out of high school driving a forklift in a lumber yard. I could see the "Big A" real close.
The owner of the lumber yard had Angels season tickets. He gave me those tickets any time I wanted. I always went to the games when Ryan was pitching..... And later on when my childhood twin George Brett and the Royals were in town.
Ryan was the most inconsistent pitcher I ever saw .. Good in one inning, lousy the next. He was fantastic in one game and then he stunk out the joint in the next game.....But he did throw the ball fast.....except that was it. That's all he had. A fastball..... Whoop De Doo!....He wasn't any good.....He could never be counted on to put in a solid 9 innings. When he was on the mound it was a crapshoot. Take my word for it.
Koufax....The knock on him is that he only had 6 good years....What the Hell is that supposed to mean? It means nothing. Nothing. Long ago I was a pen pal with All Bridwell. He played for the New York Giants in 1909.......Long time ago....
He told me that the two best pitchers were Walter " Big Train" Johnson and Koufax.
Then he said that Koufax is the best of the two....
Hydrant I agree with you.
Ryan had over 20 years to try to win a cy young award and couldn’t do it.
He was never the best pitcher for any single season in his career.
In Koufax’s short career he won 3 of them all well deserved.
Clearly Sandy was far superior.
I would argue that Marichal was better in 1965:
https://stathead.com/tiny/xU5nU
Nevertheless, from 1963 to 1966 Koufax and Marichal were clearly the best pitchers in baseball. Ryan never was. But a four year peak is very short. Koufax was good, not very good, for two more years, and barely average for the rest of his short career. For better or worse, Ryan was an average pitcher for 27 years with some good years and the occasional very good year. I'm astonished that so few are suspicious that he was much more effective in his 40s than in his 30s, but that's a topic for another day.
Bottom line is that Koufax had a higher peak, but Ryan had fifteen extra decent years. That counts for something. It's not as though Ryan was Jim Kaat or something.
Not a Ryan fan and think he's horribly overrated, but his career was better than Koufax's.
Koufax was a greater pitcher.
Didn’t ask about longevity.
Asked who was greater.
Ryan never did what Sandy did.
Ryan couldn’t be as great as him.
He wasn’t at Sandy’s level.
If I climbed Mount Everest in 9 days 20 times in my life, and daltex climbed it in 5 days just twice in his life, then he was a greater climber than I was. He did what I couldn’t do.
Except, Koufax was washed after age 30.
Just like Bobby Orr.
Well, actually, Bobby was washed after age 27.
Maybe we can say Koufax was greater before age 30 and Ryan after 30. Career-wise, clearly Ryan as Sandy was sitting on the couch the final 15 years Ryan was on the mound
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
So basically this is a hidden Bobby Orr thread, except Gordie Howe had a better peak than Bobby Orr, and Howe won four titles in five years, and Orr only two(the OP counts titles as the yard stick, so I am using his yardstick, not mine).
Other pitchers had greater peaks than Koufax too, but their peaks are hidden within long careers, and they had longer peaks too. Tom Seaver was better than Koufax.
Koufax best four year ERA+ was 172
Maddux best four year ERA+ was 202 with four Cy Young wins.
Pedro Martinez had a seven year peak with an ERA+ of 213 and three Cy Youngs.
If you want to ignore ERA+, and just want raw totals without context of the era or ballpark, ok then that means...
Ed Walsh won 97 games in four years with a 1.43 ERA
Tommy Bond won 154 games in four years with a 1.97 ERA
.....and several others better, but probably never heard of Walsh or Bond.
In 1965 Koufax ended the season with a 26-8 record. The Dodgers won the World Series that year. That team had the worst team batting average of any championship team other than the 1909(?) White Sox "Hitless Wonders." That year the Dodgers had a relief pitcher named Phil Reagan. His job was basically to relieve for Koufax in the 8th and 9th innings after Koufax came out for a pinch hitter. He ended the year 14-1. When Reagan came into the game, the scores of the game were typically 1-0, 0-0, 2-1, etc. In the 8 losses that Koufax had that year the Dodger run production was similar..... They were a terrible hitting team. I have always believed to this day, that if the Dodgers had just a mediocre hitting team that Koufax would have won 40 games that season. As Mickey Mantle said coming in to the dugout during the 1963 World Series, "How the f**k is anybody supposed to hit that sh*t?"
I saw both Ryan and Koufax pitch.....No comparison between the two.
Koufax was great.
But, how great was he after age 30?
remember, the greatest ability is availability.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
In 1991 at age 31 Wayne Gretzky and the LA Kings lost in the Cup finals.
Gretzky, Kurri, and McSorely had the worst plus minus on the team the entire season.
Gretzky was not good at all from age 31 on up but he got his points, while hurting his teams.
He was a bad minus age 31 on up
If you are transitioning to hockey, the goalposts move. Orr was effectively washed after age 27. are you saying Gretzky was a below-average player who's presence on the ice hurt his teams after age 27?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Question; Why is it that on this forum as in countless personal conversations that I have heard since FOREVER does the name Sandy Koufax always come up when the subject is which pitcher is the best is being debated? I've never heard anyone ask, "Who is better, "Seaver or Gibson?".... or...." Ryan or Randy Johnson?"....or....."Pedro Martinez or Steve Carlton?"...etc., etc., etc. It's always Koufax who is being compared to whoever. Answer that question and BINGO!.....You have the answer to the the other question. It's that simple.....
The greatest ability is not availability.
The greatest ability is to dominate the rest of the field.
Since Koufax retired when he was 30 years old, I'd say he was just just as good at that point for the Dodgers as Ted Williams was for the Red Sox after he retired...... Other than that?....Hard to say.🤷
That is more of a depends how you look at it scenario, just as peak and career value are.
What isn't a depends how you look at it is> @Goldenage said:
That can be true...and which is why players like Gordie Howe who dominated like no other in his peak, or Pedro & Maddux who dominated their peak better than Koufax, can be considered the greatest. When you add that those same dominating players went on to excel for another 20 years it is easy to see how each would be viewed as considerably better than guys like Orr or Koufax. They did it better AND longer.
I climbed mount Everest in five days twice in my life, and then climbed it another 20 times(in 9 days each), so I am better than both you and your example above...and that is Gordie Howe and Maddux in terms of their sports world.
At least Orr was a great player for his entire (too short) career.
Koufax was a below average pitcher for half of his time in the majors. He finished with ONE truly great season and another two that were very good. He didn't have five great seasons, in two of those last five, he missed ten starts or so, about 25% of a season.
Marichal, Gibson, Seaver and a bunch of other pitchers are WAY better than Sandy.
Taking the Orr/Koufax comparison a step further, Or was hurt by some incredible cheap shots, while Koufax hurt himself by throwing the ball too hard and wearing out his arm. He had been told MANY times to quit throwing with maximum effort to get some control, but he refused for years.
Koufax is probably the single most overrated player in all of sports.
He did have three great seasons, I'll give you that.
I like what you said, but Howe never dominated like Orr.
Orr held the puck as long as he wanted to. He killed 2 minute penalties by just holding the puck.
Too fast. Too good a skater.
Howe could never do what Bobby did. You had to see it to believe it
Fair enough point on believing Orr dominated better than Howe.
You do have to account for the titles though, or amend your philosophy on how titles impact the individual player. You can't use titles to define greatness in one player, and then ignore it when Howe won four in five years and Orr only two.
Jordan and Lebron James is a good example for your overall topic too. It really is a good discussion.
you didnt answer the question. Orr was effectively washed after age 27. was Gretzky after age 27 a below average player who hurt his teams? Who was more valuable after age 27?
again, I dont have a problem if you qualify your statement with Orr was the greatest player until age 27, because he sure wasnt after 27
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
That is the issue. Koufax was washed at 30. He couldnt physically do it anymore. Williams did it WELL past 30. and continued to do it well.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Howe 4 in 26
Orr 2 in 12
Looks even to me
there is a perception that koufax was the best ever. in this instance, perception does not equal reality.
as has been mentioned in other threads, koufax was in large part a product of dodger stadium.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Hard to say?
Williams gave his team an additional 11 years after the age of 30.
Pretty easy to say.
Edited to add; not all were full seasons.
How is that even? You go on and on about peak, yet in Howe's peak he won four and Orr won two. So if Howe retired after his first ten years and he had four out of ten, would that be better?
Howe won 4 in 26.
Orr only won two in 26, but in 14 of those years he was as good a hockey player as you and me since he was unemployed.
You’re cute when you become unhinged. 😉
My favorite pitcher ever !
Besides Catfish.
I've always leaned towards this man, For reasons...
BIG SIX!
Christy Mathewson.....BIG SIX
...... koufax was in large part a product of dodger stadium.
Just try to imagine what BIG SIX could have accomplished if the Giants had a competent grounds keeping crew at the Polo Grounds!
Correct.
I don't understand the obsession with +/-.
Gretzky had 54.9 Point Shares starting in his age 31 season. I don't consider that hurting his team(s). YMMV.
//> @Goldenage said:
Gordie Howe climbed Mount Everest in just five days FOUR times in his life. Orr only climbed it twice in that manor.
Then Howe went on and climbed it another 22 times in an average of 9 days, while Orr was only able to climb it 8 more times in an average of 9 days.
Howe was better. Don't lose sight of his superior peak just because he did it for far longer. That is a common mistake people make. Yeah, I know, "nobody could catch Orr on skates," lol....except it seems they caught him enough to have him win only two championships. An uncatchable guy would win more than two. Hyperbole.
Seaver is almost universally considered the best post WWII pitcher ever, which includes Sandy Koufax, so not sure your statement is really that accurate. Clemens probably is in reality, but he doesn't get mentioned by many because they discount him.
The other part to answer your question is that people who 'saw' Koufax pitch saw him pitch in an environment that nobody after him(and the decade or three before him) had the same chance to do....the extremely raised mound in Dodger stadium, the expanded strike zone, and the low run scoring environment of the league. Any pitcher is going to 'look' better when they have those advantages.
The people who did not 'see' him pitch look at his numbers that are affected by those same advantages and draw conclusions based on that.
That is why he is mentioned a lot. All that really means is that the people assuming Koufax is the best just aren't look at all the evidence.
Just take one of those advantages away from Koufax and his performance suffers. How do I know? When you take Dodger stadium's heightened mound away he suffered.
When you take away an expanded strike zone any pitcher will suffer. Koufax actually did pitch in an era with higher offense and not the expanded strike zone, and guess what, he wasn't nearly as good. You can claim some of that was before he 'learned' how to pitch, but those other factors are part of the reason too, just like for anyone else they would be.
if someone does not believe that the height of the mound or the strike zone makes a difference, then I propose we each manage a baseball team. I will make each team and you can pick which team of the two you want(so you know the teams are equal), except when my team is pitching, we pitch off an 18 inch mound. When your team is pitching, you pitch off of flat ground. When my team is pitching, we get an extra inch on each side of the plate and an extra two on the top and bottom. When my team is pitching, we will use a deadened ball. When your team is pitching, we will use a ball they used in 2021.
As with most anything else, once it is applied first hand to someone, they usually sing a completely different tune.
Nolan Ryan is probably the second most overrated pitcher in MLB history.
His best year was a short one. He had 3-5 really nice/great years and about 20 average years.
He struck a LOT of batters out and pitched forever.
Neither of these guys would be in my all time rotation.
Not be even close.
Just to summarize and state clearly what has only been alluded to, the word "greatest" is not an objective standard so there is no "right" answer to the question. Koufax was a much better pitcher than Ryan for a short time, and Ryan was a much better pitcher than Koufax for a very long time. But at his best Koufax was a much better pitcher than Ryan was at his best. Either pitcher has a reasonable claim to being better than the other. Neither pitcher has a reasonable claim to being the greatest ever, IMO.
Here are their runs saved(prevented) above league average pitcher. Note that this gives credit for their Innings Pitched totals(the more innings you throw above average the more runs being saved). A 'zero' is a league average pitcher(which by the way is actually good. How many humans are capable of being a league average MLB pitcher?).
Keep in mind that a slight negative number will most likely mean that you are a #3 starter on a five man rotation for half the teams in the league.
You know what they call a #3 starter now? A multi millionaire.
Ryan....Koufax....Seaver.....Pedro...UNIT. Their best seasons to their worst in Runs saved above league average pitcher.
45.......59..............66.............92..........73
41.......58.............59..............75..........72
32.......40.............45..............62..........64
31.......40..............40.............57..........62
27.......28..............35.............48..........58
26.......24..............35.............46..........58
26........6...............32.............42..........55
24........5...............30.............36..........38
16........2...............29.............33..........37
15........-2..............27.............30..........33
9..........-4..............26.............22..........31
8.........-9...............25.............18..........16
7..........Couch......21.............12..........11
7..........Couch......21.............4..............9
5..........couch.......18.............3..............7
4..........couch.......14.............2..............6
3..........couch.......14.............-1.............4
2..........couch.......10.............-13..........3
1..........couch.......4...............Couch.....1
-1.........couch.......2................c.............-2
-1.........couch.....-1.................c.............-3
-3..........couch....-17...............c............-5
-3...........couch.....couch........c............-9
-4...............c...........c................c...........-11
-13
-14
You know what they call a guy sitting on his couch? Not a #3 starter on a big league team.
I said that Seaver was universally considered the best post WWII pitcher ever.
I am not part of that Universe because Randy Johnson is the best post WWII pitcher. Nobody had the combination of Jonson's stuff, command, and size. Nobody. Then the results back it up, as he has the best peak and a great career length to go with it.
Pedro Martinez has the best peak in post WWII pitchers. Unit right behind him.
Career Totals
Unit 611
Pedro 568
Seaver 533
Ryan 297
Koufax 249
Clemens 853. Yeah, there is that. Pssssst, I really believe Clemens is the best ever.
If Nolan Ryan was so great, then why did the Mets let him go to the Angels in exchange for Jim Fregosi? Huh?....And why did the Angels let him loose to the Astros?....What were they thinking?.....And why did the Astros send him off to the Rangers?......Does someone know something that I don't know???.....Did I miss all those World Series championships that Ryan took the Angels, Astros, and Rangers to?...Where was I?....
Koufax vs. Ryan?.😂
Benjamin Desraeli said it best.....
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.".....
I think a good portion of his late career success can be attributed to improvement as a pitcher. He clearly had better command than previously.
But........... I definitely think it's right to be suspicious, too.
Correct, Ryan had better command of his pitches later on in his career. The reason for that is because he wasn't as strong as he was when he was younger and therefore wasn't throwing as fast.....One the other hand, Koufax got better with age and threw FASTER!....AND had better location control the older he got!...But who wants to think about that?.....
When my team is pitching, all of your "superstars" will end their at bats with a called third strike.
.
.
When your team is pitching, even my garbage players will end their at bats with contact.
.
.
Heck, give me garbage players that always swing at the first pitch, no matter what. Right, @Darin?
.
.
#EskyMagic
#MyMVPmeansmorethanyour3
I would agree that a fantastic case can be made for Clemens Being not just the greatest post WWII pitcher, but the best to ever throw it.
I suppose, by definition, Whoever is the best post-integration pitcher is the best ever.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Actually Ryan was physically stronger in his 40's than he was in his 20's.
Ryan was still throwing mid 90's at the top near the end. His command was better as he became more compact with his arm delivery as opposed to when he was younger and had more of a windmill arm swing.
Ryan had the best natural velocity with efficient effort. He didn't need to use a Lincecum or Koufax approach to get to his high velocity(neither of whom had velocity as high as Ryan's), and that is one reason why Lincecum and Koufax both burned out.
Koufax better with age? Huh? He was 31 when he was throwing harder, not 41. Also, an extra ten inches of mound height Koufax got the benefit of, didn't hurt either
.
Mets let Ryan go because they didn't know how to coach him. They were dumb. Most teams in the last ten years would have turned a guy like that into a superstar in a couple years.
Ryan actually was born in the wrong era. He would have been a perennial Cy Young contender with the right organization when he was in his early 20's. His stuff and size would play well in any era...and that is one reason why I always give him the edge over statistical similarities like Don Sutton.
Ryan was a pioneer of sort. Kind of like Babe Ruth with hitting home runs. Today's advancements on pitching velocity and command were moved faster along because Nolan Ryan existed decades earlier.