Options
Greatest seasons ever by non-HOFers
dallasactuary
Posts: 4,117 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
To be clear from the start, "non-HOFer" means a player who is eligible for the HOF both officially (no Rose, no current players) and unofficially (no Bonds) and also no players currently on the HOF ballot who still have at least a theoretical chance of being elected (no Raines). These are players that aren't in the HOF and won't ever be in the HOF, despite being eligible and despite being great players.
1. Will Clark, 1989. I've written about this season at length and won't repeat myself. 8.25 WPA and 44 Win Shares, the highest in both categories for anyone not in or going to the HOF.
2. Norm Cash, 1961. Cash would have won the MVP for his 1961 season in most years, but in 1961 he didn't stand a chance. Mantle had a season for the ages (and should have won the MVP) and Maris set the most famous record in baseball (and still holds it, IMO). But Cash loses only to Clark in both WPA and Win Shares, with 7.67 and 42, among non-HOFers. Cash led the league on OPS in '61 and lost only to Mantle in OPS+ (park-adjusted), 1st in hits, 4th in runs and RBI, 1st in OBP, 2nd in slugging, 6th in HR, 2nd in walks and 1st in BA with .361. He also led the league in Total Zone Runs at 1B. A HOF season by a player who ought to be in the HOF.
3. Al Rosen, 1953. Al Rosen didn't crack a major league lineup until he was 26, although he was outstanding in every one of his many minor league seasons. His rookie season he led the league in HR, drove in 116, came in 4th in WAR and 3rd in OPS+. At 29 he crushed it. With 6.61 WPA and 42 WS, he led the league in HR and RBI and missed the triple crown by .001 in BA to Mickey Vernon. Rosen was a fixture in the top 10 of every meaningful offensive and defensive category in each of his six full seasons, when an injury ended his career at 32. Rosen was as good or better than the great majority of HOFers. While he was technically eligible for the HOF with games played in 10 different seasons, four of those seasons add up to a total of 156 games, so he didn't, and didn't deserve to, get in. But he was a HOF-level player when he did play.
4. Richie Allen, 1972. If I made a list of the top 11 non-HOFer seasons, Allen would be on it three times, but I'm stopping at 5 so this is his only appearance. In 1972, Allen had 7.26 WPA and 40 WS, leading the league in HR, RBI, BB, OBP, SA, OPS, and OPS+. And his teammate Carlos May had a season that ranks at #32 on this list, while Wilbur Wood was one of the best pitchers in the league. But after that, the White Sox had nothing, and despite the Herculean efforts of Allen, May and Wood, they came up 5.5 games short the A's. The A's didn't have anyone close to Allen that year, but Reggie was about as good as May, Hunter was about as good as Wood, and the rest of the team was much better than the woeful remaining White Sox. Allen was a top-tier HOF player, but he was also an ass, and for that reason and no other he never got as high as 20% in HOF balloting.
5. Bobby Murcer, 1971. Murcer also ranks at #18 on this list for 1972 - for that two-year period he was the best player in baseball, but went largely unnoticed then and is remembered today only by old folks like me, and more as a Cub than as a Yankee. Murcer was hailed as the next Mickey Mantle by the New York press, and when he couldn't live up to that, nobody much noticed how great he was. In 1971, Murcer had 7.19 WPA and 38 WS (the next year, 5.59 and 36), and led the league in OBP, OPS and OPS+. He also made the top 5 in BA, WAR, SA, TB, RBI, and BB, and made the top 10 in HR and several other categories. In short, he had a season that Mickey Mantle would have been proud to have, but few people noticed because he didn't do it with HR, he did it with everything else. Murcer doesn't deserve to be in the HOF - he was pretty ordinary for the bulk of his career, but for a few years he was a HOF player, even if nobody remembers.
I won't provide any descriptions, but a few other names in the Top 44 (I stopped there for a reason, but it's not important) that I found interesting are listed below. If they surprise you. too, please look them up and check them out.
13. Cesar Cedeno, 1972
20. Roy White, 1970
29, Jim Wynn, 1972
40. Tito Francona, 1959
42. Mike Epstein, 1969
And in addition to seasons 4, 7 and 11, Richie Allen also has seasons 23 and 43. Allen was the best player in baseball for a decade (1964 through 1973). He, Will Clark and Stan Hack (in a depleted league)are the only non-cheating players in MLB history who can make that claim who are not in the HOF.
1. Will Clark, 1989. I've written about this season at length and won't repeat myself. 8.25 WPA and 44 Win Shares, the highest in both categories for anyone not in or going to the HOF.
2. Norm Cash, 1961. Cash would have won the MVP for his 1961 season in most years, but in 1961 he didn't stand a chance. Mantle had a season for the ages (and should have won the MVP) and Maris set the most famous record in baseball (and still holds it, IMO). But Cash loses only to Clark in both WPA and Win Shares, with 7.67 and 42, among non-HOFers. Cash led the league on OPS in '61 and lost only to Mantle in OPS+ (park-adjusted), 1st in hits, 4th in runs and RBI, 1st in OBP, 2nd in slugging, 6th in HR, 2nd in walks and 1st in BA with .361. He also led the league in Total Zone Runs at 1B. A HOF season by a player who ought to be in the HOF.
3. Al Rosen, 1953. Al Rosen didn't crack a major league lineup until he was 26, although he was outstanding in every one of his many minor league seasons. His rookie season he led the league in HR, drove in 116, came in 4th in WAR and 3rd in OPS+. At 29 he crushed it. With 6.61 WPA and 42 WS, he led the league in HR and RBI and missed the triple crown by .001 in BA to Mickey Vernon. Rosen was a fixture in the top 10 of every meaningful offensive and defensive category in each of his six full seasons, when an injury ended his career at 32. Rosen was as good or better than the great majority of HOFers. While he was technically eligible for the HOF with games played in 10 different seasons, four of those seasons add up to a total of 156 games, so he didn't, and didn't deserve to, get in. But he was a HOF-level player when he did play.
4. Richie Allen, 1972. If I made a list of the top 11 non-HOFer seasons, Allen would be on it three times, but I'm stopping at 5 so this is his only appearance. In 1972, Allen had 7.26 WPA and 40 WS, leading the league in HR, RBI, BB, OBP, SA, OPS, and OPS+. And his teammate Carlos May had a season that ranks at #32 on this list, while Wilbur Wood was one of the best pitchers in the league. But after that, the White Sox had nothing, and despite the Herculean efforts of Allen, May and Wood, they came up 5.5 games short the A's. The A's didn't have anyone close to Allen that year, but Reggie was about as good as May, Hunter was about as good as Wood, and the rest of the team was much better than the woeful remaining White Sox. Allen was a top-tier HOF player, but he was also an ass, and for that reason and no other he never got as high as 20% in HOF balloting.
5. Bobby Murcer, 1971. Murcer also ranks at #18 on this list for 1972 - for that two-year period he was the best player in baseball, but went largely unnoticed then and is remembered today only by old folks like me, and more as a Cub than as a Yankee. Murcer was hailed as the next Mickey Mantle by the New York press, and when he couldn't live up to that, nobody much noticed how great he was. In 1971, Murcer had 7.19 WPA and 38 WS (the next year, 5.59 and 36), and led the league in OBP, OPS and OPS+. He also made the top 5 in BA, WAR, SA, TB, RBI, and BB, and made the top 10 in HR and several other categories. In short, he had a season that Mickey Mantle would have been proud to have, but few people noticed because he didn't do it with HR, he did it with everything else. Murcer doesn't deserve to be in the HOF - he was pretty ordinary for the bulk of his career, but for a few years he was a HOF player, even if nobody remembers.
I won't provide any descriptions, but a few other names in the Top 44 (I stopped there for a reason, but it's not important) that I found interesting are listed below. If they surprise you. too, please look them up and check them out.
13. Cesar Cedeno, 1972
20. Roy White, 1970
29, Jim Wynn, 1972
40. Tito Francona, 1959
42. Mike Epstein, 1969
And in addition to seasons 4, 7 and 11, Richie Allen also has seasons 23 and 43. Allen was the best player in baseball for a decade (1964 through 1973). He, Will Clark and Stan Hack (in a depleted league)are the only non-cheating players in MLB history who can make that claim who are not in the HOF.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
0
Comments
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
1. Will Clark, 1989. I've written about this season at length and won't repeat myself. 8.25 WPA and 44 Win Shares, the highest in both categories for anyone not in or going to the HOF.
That probably deserves a big ol' asterisk. Joe Torre had a higher WPA in 1971. He's in the HOF, but as a manager, not a player. Also, there's no WPA for pre-1930 players.
I'll make a similar list for pitchers.
Frank Howard is on my list twice: 1969 at #21 and 1970 at #19. I'm sure 1968 isn't too far off the list, either. The reasons that Howard's seasons aren't ranked higher is that his clutch hitting was so-so in '69 and downright terrible in '70. In '68 he hadn't yet figured out how to take a walk. Also, he was a terrible fielder; that doesn't affect his WPA, but it does keep his WS low.
Gil Hodges has no seasons within a mile and a half of this list, or any other list like it. Hodges top season in WS is 29 - same as Bobby Tolan - and his top WPA is 4.2. At his best, Gil Hodges was not as good as Boog Powell, and he wasn't at his best as long as Powell. In short, Hodges just wasn't as good as people seem to think he was. He played in a really easy hitter's park, and with really good teammates, and that made him look better than he was.
Colavito had seasons with 32 and 33 WS, and his WPA in those years was 5.2 and 5.3; both of those years just missed my list. He was a great player, but none of his seasons were as great as the one's I listed.
You're right, of course, about Torre, but I always thought Torre should have made the HOF as a player and I treat him like he did. Had I included his 1971 season I would have ranked it #2. Offensively he was a little bit better than Clark, but defensively he was a total bust. Torre was a perfectly fine catcher, but when the Cards moved him to third he was completely lost. He got better in '72, though still not good, but in '71 he was a disaster. That's why Clark's season still beats Torre's.
And you're right that I should have made it clear that I wasn't looking at any seasons where the data doesn't exist. I don't think many older seasons would have made the list, partly because they gave out HOF memberships like candy to every halfway decent player back then, but maybe a few. Cy Seymour in 1905 and Sherry Magee in '07 are possibilities. Hack Wilson in 1930 is the season that a lot of people point to as one of the greatest ever. It wasn't, and I doubt it would have made the list; I'm just about certain it wouldn't have made the top 25.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I am biased as a Mets fan, but Gooden's 85 season was absolutely filthy~the best I ever saw personally.
I wasn't a Mets fan but I sat behind home plate at a Gooden pitched game in 85. His stuff was electric. Every pitch
FYI back to Lolich in 71. He started 45 games and completed 29 of them. 376 innings pitched. 308 strikeouts and 25 wins. Blue had an even better year and Wilbur Woods stats were off the charts that year as well. Wood's year may make Dallas's list
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
He led the league in five offensive categories, also stole 79 bases and won a gold glove. 8.4 WAR.
In the course of every human endeavor since the dawn of time the risk of human error has always been a factor. Including but not limited to field goals, 4th down attempts, or multiple paragraph ramblings on a sports forum authored by someone who shall remain anonymous.
Led the league in HR, Runs, RBI, BB, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, and TB
George Foster in 1977.
.320 avg, led the league in HR and RBI with 52 and 149. Led the league in Runs, SLG, OPS, and TB
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
Rico Carty in 1970 was very good, but 1964 (his rookie season) is actually his best. Mostly, it's his clutch hitting in 1970 that does him in; 10 GIDP in only 94 high-leverage ABs (!!!), and OBP that dropped 30 points and a SA that dropped over 100 points. It was still a very good year, but since the painfully slow Carty gets no points for anything but his hitting, it wasn't list-worthy.
Davey Johnson hit a freakish (for him) number of HR in 1973, but that's all he did. I'd call it a "good" season, but not "very good". He was tied for 43rd in WS that year, and not within shouting distance of Darrell Evans, by far the best player on the Braves that year. He was 4th on the Braves in WAR, behind Evans, Carl Morton, and Aaron. And while Johnson was historically a pretty good second baseman - Gold Gloves 4 years running heading into 1973 - for whatever reason that all came crashing down in Atlanta. He still had nice range, but he booted most of the extra chances that gave him. He made 30 errors in 1973, more than he had made in 1970-1972 combined. Mostly, what you're seeing when you look at Johnson's 1973 season is how easy it was to look good as a hitter in Atlanta in 1973; Johnson slugged over .600 in Atlanta and under .500 on the road.
How about the season Roy Sievers had with the Senators- either 1957 or 58?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Dave Parker 1978
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Next post: pitchers.
Willie Wilson in 1980.
He led the league in five offensive categories, also stole 79 bases and won a gold glove. 8.4 WAR.
Three of those offensive categories were AB, Plate apparences and triples. His OBP was only .357. He only had 46 extra base hits while having over 700 plate apparences. He finished 4th in the MVP that year. I hazard to guess his season might be categorized in the top 250 in the modern era.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Willie Wilson in 1980.
He led the league in five offensive categories, also stole 79 bases and won a gold glove. 8.4 WAR.
Three of those offensive categories were AB, Plate apparences and triples. His OBP was only .357. He only had 46 extra base hits while having over 700 plate apparences. He finished 4th in the MVP that year. I hazard to guess his season might be categorized in the top 250 in the modern era.
mark
Well, my next post was going to be the pitchers but I was 99% typing it up and accidentally deleted it. So I took a time out to scream, and saw this. I think the truth is somewhere in between. Wilson doesn't make my list but he's not as far off as you imply. If it was for hitting only he would be, but Wilson also stole 79 bases and got caught only 10 times; that makes up for a lot of "missing" extra base hits. He also won, and deserved, a Gold Glove playing LF and CF. It wasn't an epic season, but it was a great season.
My next post will be the pitchers but I have lost the spirit to provide a lot of commentary, again.
In lieu of too much commentary I'll just post the whole list (ending point is pretty much random).
Wilbur Wood, 1971
Dwight Gooden, 1985 (the gap from Wood to Gooden is miniscule - you could call it a tie)
Ron Guidry , 1978
Bret Saberhagen, 1989
Dick Ellsworth, 1963 (Koufax won a unanimous Cy Young; Ellsworth was better)
Vida Blue, 1971
Dolf Luque, 1923
Dean Chance, 1964
Kevin Appier, 1993
Kevin Brown, 1996
Mike Tudor , 1985
Bucky Walters, 1939
Bill Hands, 1969
Denny McLain, 1968 (Great year, but the 30 wins was just luck)
Wilbur Wood, 1972
Kevin Brown, 1998
Bobby Shantz, 1952
Rick Reuschel, 1977
Mark Fidrych, 1976
Mike Caldwell, 1978
Luis Tiant, 1968
Mike Scott, 1986
Frank Viola , 1987
Ewell Blackwell, 1947
Mel Parnell, 1949
Sam McDowell, 1970
Randy Jones, 1975
Larry Dierker, 1969
Frank Viola , 1988
Dave Stieb, 1985
Mickey Lolich, 1971
Denny McLain, 1969
Luis Tiant, 1974
Dave Stieb, 1984
Johnny Antonelli, 1954
Mark Gubicza, 1988
Jon Matlack, 1974
Sam McDowell, 1965
Dave Stieb, 1982
Steve Rogers, 1982
Orel Hershiser, 1988
Vida Blue, 1976
Frank Tanana, 1976
Bob Purkey, 1962
Bill Lee, 1938
Camilo Pascual, 1959
The ones in bold are the ones that completely surprised me. Bill Lee surprised mostly because I had never heard of him.
And if you're counting, yes, Dave Stieb is on here three times. He was the best pitcher of the 1980's and got 1% in his one and only HOF vote.
The poster you replied to thinks you're never wrong, so I'm sure stands corrected.
In the course of every human endeavor since the dawn of time the risk of human error has always been a factor. Including but not limited to field goals, 4th down attempts, or multiple paragraph ramblings on a sports forum authored by someone who shall remain anonymous.
I thought maybe Saberhagen would make it for 1985 as well, but knew he had to
be quite high on the list for 1989.
In the course of every human endeavor since the dawn of time the risk of human error has always been a factor. Including but not limited to field goals, 4th down attempts, or multiple paragraph ramblings on a sports forum authored by someone who shall remain anonymous.
I am biased as a Mets fan, but Gooden's 85 season was absolutely filthy~the best I ever saw personally.
I wasn't a Mets fan but I sat behind home plate at a Gooden pitched game in 85. His stuff was electric. Every pitch
FYI back to Lolich in 71. He started 45 games and completed 29 of them. 376 innings pitched. 308 strikeouts and 25 wins. Blue had an even better year and Wilbur Woods stats were off the charts that year as well. Wood's year may make Dallas's list
mark
I knew Woods year was epic but didn't think it would land at number 1. Interestingly enough he finished 3rd in the CY Award that year to two other non HOFers.
Dean Chance's 64 year was epic
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Thank you Dallas, for the post in defense of Willie Wilsons great season.
The poster you replied to thinks you're never wrong, so I'm sure stands corrected.
Ha.
Stand corrected? Not hardly. Knew that season wouldn't make that top 44 list. No way, no how.
No doubt a great season and certainly not epic. In truth I was being a little facetious at top 250. That was primarily done to get a rise out of a homer. It seemed to work. So maybe top 125? Stretch to top 100? I could be ok with that.
And no Dallas doesn't walk on water. I just enjoy and appreciate his thought provoking posts and insight but he does sometimes leave me scratching my head.
FYI there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a homer. I was just calling you out on it.
No hard feelings intended. Just a poke in the ribs
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I can see Perranoski over Koufax in 1963, but how does Ellsworth beat them both?!?!?!?!?!
Perranoski had a fine season, for a relief pitcher, but likewise Manny Mota and Gates Brown didn't make it anywhere near the position player list; you just can't when you only play a fraction of the innings.
In addition to pitching less than half the innings as Ellsworth, what you also have to consider is that Perranoski, like Koufax, got to pitch half his innings in Dodger Stadium. I don't know if Dodger Stadium in the 1960's was the hardest stadium ever to score a run, and therefore the easiest ever for pitcher to prevent a run from scoring, but I do know that it's at least close. Wrigley Field was, is, and always will be a hitter's park. For context, Ellsworth, Koufax and Perranoski allowed 46, 39, and 19 fewer runs, respectively, than an average pitcher would have allowed given their innings in 1963 in neutral parks.
As an aside, and probably relevant to Perranoski, I did not even look at, let alone factor in, a pitcher's W/L record in making this list. Wins and losses are the ultimate team stat, and assigning them to the pitcher makes absolutely no sense at all. Sure, if a pitcher has a great year then his team will more than likely win most of the games he pitches, but whether they win or lose when the pitcher gives up one or two runs in eight or nine innings, the pitcher has still had a great game. He is not a worse pitcher because the rest of his team couldn't score a run. Ask Nolan Ryan about 1987; Ryan started 14 games in which he allowed either 1 or 0 earned runs before being pulled, and the Astros went 7-7 in those games. When he allowed 2 earned runs, they were 4-6. When he allowed 3, they were 1-6. He only allowed more than 3 earned runs 3 times, and they were 0-3 in those games. Ryan led the league in ERA and Strikeouts and was 3rd in WHIP - and his team was 12-22 when he pitched, and his personal W/L record was 8-16. Meanwhile, Jim Deshaies, on the same team, allowed 0 or 1 runs 6 times, and the 'Stros were 5-1; 2 runs - 3-1; 3 runs - 1-4; more than 3 runs - 4-7. Deshaies ERA was almost double Ryan's and the team was 13-13 when he pitched, and his personal W/L was 11-6. The Astros scored 116 for Deshaies - 4.5 per game. They scored 2 fewer runs for Ryan - 114 - in 8 more starts, for an average of 3.4 per game. So a bad pitcher and a good pitcher on the same team have W/L records of 11-6 and 8-16, respectively. Which is all to say that W/L records don't have any place in evaluating a pitcher, and Perranoski's 16-3 record in 1963 doesn't earn him any points.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I don't put too much stock in W-L record, but I do include it in my thinking.
In Perranoski's favor, I also look at saves and ERA. He does fall a bit in WHIP, but the fact that he won a lot of games AND saved a lot of games adds to his value in this case. That year he was very good at holding the lead he was given, or keep his team in the game so they could make a come from behind (or tied) victory. His WHIP is not as good and he pitched a lot less innings than the other two, but he sure did his job about as well as he could have. Looks like he was also as good if not better away from home! Not much of a "park factor" here. Let's leave Gates Brown and Manny Mota out of this one, they WERE good players though. A reliever is never going to have the IP a starter does but he makes that up in appearances (69), most of which in Ron's case were probably close games.
I wouldn't give Koufax the MVP that year, Aaron or Mays would have been my choice. I just can't quite see Ellsworth being better than Koufax, although I would put him a lot closer than before because of the parks they pitched in. When you look at Walk and Strikeout totals, Koufax was MUCH better. If you don't value that, I suppose that would hurt Koufax in the comparison. In looking at the home/away numbers that year Koufax ERA was much worse on the road, but about the same as Ellsworth's home ERA. Koufax also pitched most of his innings at the opponents park while Ellsworth pitched more at home. Koufax WAS unbeatable at home that year, but was it because of the park, or was he just that good on those days? Sandy's huge strikeout total compared to his very low walk rate and WHIP make it look like he was pretty unhittable that year no matter the park.
My personal opinion on park factor is that it doesn't help the "best of the best" as much as it does the average or above average player.
Good discussion! I would never have considered Ellsworth that year until now.
Just wanted to clarify that your decision to claim Ellsworth was better is based only on park factor, 7 runs over the course of the season in neutral parks gets them closer, but isn't enough for me. Koufax leads in every statistical category.
I don't put too much stock in W-L record, but I do include it in my thinking.
In Perranoski's favor, I also look at saves and ERA. He does fall a bit in WHIP, but the fact that he won a lot of games AND saved a lot of games adds to his value in this case. That year he was very good at holding the lead he was given, or keep his team in the game so they could make a come from behind (or tied) victory. His WHIP is not as good and he pitched a lot less innings than the other two, but he sure did his job about as well as he could have. Looks like he was also as good if not better away from home! Not much of a "park factor" here. Let's leave Gates Brown and Manny Mota out of this one, they WERE good players though. A reliever is never going to have the IP a starter does but he makes that up in appearances (69), most of which in Ron's case were probably close games.
I wouldn't give Koufax the MVP that year, Aaron or Mays would have been my choice. I just can't quite see Ellsworth being better than Koufax, although I would put him a lot closer than before because of the parks they pitched in. When you look at Walk and Strikeout totals, Koufax was MUCH better. If you don't value that, I suppose that would hurt Koufax in the comparison. In looking at the home/away numbers that year Koufax ERA was much worse on the road, but about the same as Ellsworth's home ERA. Koufax also pitched most of his innings at the opponents park while Ellsworth pitched more at home. Koufax WAS unbeatable at home that year, but was it because of the park, or was he just that good on those days? Sandy's huge strikeout total compared to his very low walk rate and WHIP make it look like he was pretty unhittable that year no matter the park.
My personal opinion on park factor is that it doesn't help the "best of the best" as much as it does the average or above average player.
Good discussion! I would never have considered Ellsworth that year until now.
When you say that Ellsworth being better than Koufax depends "only" on park factor, that's a bit misleading. Try phrasing it as "Ellsworth only appears better than Koufax if you take into account the conditions under which they pitched"; does that still sound fair to Ellsworth?
I don't want to make too big a deal out of it because Koufax did in fact have an incredible year in 1963, and while I posted the factor that favored Ellsworth the most (runs allowed less than average pitcher), there are other factors that favor Koufax. I think Ellsworth was better, but only by a little bit.
I don't know if you consider this relevant or not, but as late as August 21st Ellsworth actually had a better ERA than Koufax, even without any park adjustment. But the Dodgers were in a playoff race and the Cubs were way out of it. In September, Koufax kept pitching as well as he always had, while Ellsworth trailed off. If the Cubs hadn't stunk, and if it still mattered how well Ellsworth pitched in September, would he have pitched better than he did? There's no way to know, but it's obviously possible that he would have.
As for MVP, you're exactly right. Aaron was the best player in the NL in 1963, and Mays wasn't too far behind. Whoever you think was better of Ellsworth and Koufax was next in line, but the gap from Aaron/Mays down to the pitchers is substantial.
Just wanted to clarify that your decision to claim Ellsworth was better is based only on park factor, 7 runs over the course of the season in neutral parks gets them closer, but isn't enough for me. Koufax leads in every statistical category.
I don't put too much stock in W-L record, but I do include it in my thinking.
In Perranoski's favor, I also look at saves and ERA. He does fall a bit in WHIP, but the fact that he won a lot of games AND saved a lot of games adds to his value in this case. That year he was very good at holding the lead he was given, or keep his team in the game so they could make a come from behind (or tied) victory. His WHIP is not as good and he pitched a lot less innings than the other two, but he sure did his job about as well as he could have. Looks like he was also as good if not better away from home! Not much of a "park factor" here. Let's leave Gates Brown and Manny Mota out of this one, they WERE good players though. A reliever is never going to have the IP a starter does but he makes that up in appearances (69), most of which in Ron's case were probably close games.
I wouldn't give Koufax the MVP that year, Aaron or Mays would have been my choice. I just can't quite see Ellsworth being better than Koufax, although I would put him a lot closer than before because of the parks they pitched in. When you look at Walk and Strikeout totals, Koufax was MUCH better. If you don't value that, I suppose that would hurt Koufax in the comparison. In looking at the home/away numbers that year Koufax ERA was much worse on the road, but about the same as Ellsworth's home ERA. Koufax also pitched most of his innings at the opponents park while Ellsworth pitched more at home. Koufax WAS unbeatable at home that year, but was it because of the park, or was he just that good on those days? Sandy's huge strikeout total compared to his very low walk rate and WHIP make it look like he was pretty unhittable that year no matter the park.
My personal opinion on park factor is that it doesn't help the "best of the best" as much as it does the average or above average player.
Good discussion! I would never have considered Ellsworth that year until now.
When you say that Ellsworth being better than Koufax depends "only" on park factor, that's a bit misleading. Try phrasing it as "Ellsworth only appears better than Koufax if you take into account the conditions under which they pitched"; does that still sound fair to Ellsworth?
I don't want to make too big a deal out of it because Koufax did in fact have an incredible year in 1963, and while I posted the factor that favored Ellsworth the most (runs allowed less than average pitcher), there are other factors that favor Koufax. I think Ellsworth was better, but only by a little bit.
I don't know if you consider this relevant or not, but as late as August 21st Ellsworth actually had a better ERA than Koufax, even without any park adjustment. But the Dodgers were in a playoff race and the Cubs were way out of it. In September, Koufax kept pitching as well as he always had, while Ellsworth trailed off. If the Cubs hadn't stunk, and if it still mattered how well Ellsworth pitched in September, would he have pitched better than he did? There's no way to know, but it's obviously possible that he would have.
As for MVP, you're exactly right. Aaron was the best player in the NL in 1963, and Mays wasn't too far behind. Whoever you think was better of Ellsworth and Koufax was next in line, but the gap from Aaron/Mays down to the pitchers is substantial.
We basically agree. There is really no way of determining beyond any doubt who the best player was because all factors are not exactly equal. It would have been nice had the Cubs games meant more at the end of the year to see if Ellsworth could have kept it up.
20-6 overall, 3.64 ERA
With the Cubs though: 16-1, 2.69 ERA
Steve
The pitcher's list.
In lieu of too much commentary I'll just post the whole list (ending point is pretty much random).
Dave Stieb, 1985
Dave Stieb, 1984
Dave Stieb, 1982
And if you're counting, yes, Dave Stieb is on here three times. He was the best pitcher of the 1980's and got 1% in his one and only HOF vote.
Regarding Stieb:
On Sep 24 and 30, 1988, (consecutive home starts), Stieb had no-hitters broken up with 2 outs in the ninth inning, and with 2 strikes on the batter.
He came within 2 pitches of equaling Johnny VanderMeer's consecutive no-hitters in 1938.
Steve
I recall Clyde Wright had great season- maybe 22-12 or so with Angels in 1970 or 1971
Rudy May had at least one or two decent years with the Yankees
Roy Face put up amazing numbers in 1959 for the Pirates but he may not fall with the established criteria
Finally, one other -Joe Horlen White Sox 1967
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Just curious if you looked at the following pitchers:
I recall Clyde Wright had great season- maybe 22-12 or so with Angels in 1970 or 1971
Rudy May had at least one or two decent years with the Yankees
Roy Face put up amazing numbers in 1959 for the Pirates but he may not fall with the established criteria
Finally, one other -Joe Horlen White Sox 1967
I can tell that what you're looking at to identify a "great season" is the W/L record. As a general rule, great seasons include great W/L records, but the reverse is not true - great W/L records can occur in seasons that are not great. You'll be better off not looking at W/L record - check ERA+ first, innings pitched second, and then WHIP and K/BB. Those will identify 100% of great seasons, and W/L, or anything else, will just muddy the water.
Clyde Wright is a good example; he was good in 1970, but he wasn't great. I didn't check hundreds of seasons, but my guess is that he is a couple hundred seasons below my list. Rudy May was close to great in 1980, but he relieved more than he started and only pitched 175 innings. He's only a little bit ahead of Wright. Whether Horlen was "great" or "very good" in 1967 is a matter opinion. My list has about 50 seasons; Horlen would have made it if it were a top 100 (I think, I didn't check).
Roy Face was a relief pitcher with the flukiest W/L record in major league history. He was excellent in the 93 innings he pitched, which makes him half as good as the pitchers who were excellent in twice as many innings and a third as good as the ones with three times as many innings. Which is to say, his 1959 season was about as valuable as an average starting pitcher's, and not in the ballpark of the list.
The only relief pitcher I'm aware of who had a season that might potentially be in the top 50 or so was John Hiller in 1973. His W/L was 10-5; respectable, but nothing historic. But his ERA was 1.44 when an expected ERA for someone pitching half their games in Tiger Stadium was 4.08, and he pitched 150 innings. In the spirit of disclosure, if I run his season through my algorithm it comes in 24th. But the problem I have is that some of the metrics I look at don't value relief pitchers correctly. Win Shares is one input that I used, for example. In Bill James' defense, he's transparent in how Win Shares are calculated, but in explaining how he calculated Win Shares for relief pitchers he exposed an obvious error. Win Shares gives extra credit for runs prevented by the pitcher in the 8th and 9th innings. You might say "that makes sense" and I actually agree with you. The problem is that he only gives that extra credit to relief pitchers, not to fielders, and not to the starting pitcher. If the staring pitcher throws a complete game shutout, he gets credit for 9 innings at 0 runs. But if they starter is pulled after giving up no runs for 8 innings, and a relief pitcher shuts them out in the 9th, the starter gets credit for 8 innings, and the reliever get credit equivalent to more than 2 innings. James did it this way solely so he could show some relief pitchers among his 100 greatest pitchers; if he hadn't none of them would have made it. Fact is, no relief pitcher deserved to make the top 100, and Win Shares for relief pitchers simply don't work. So, long story short, my algorithm doesn't work for relief pitchers so I ignored them. I suspect, but don't know for sure, that HIller's 1973 season would have made my list even if Win Shares did work correctly for relief pitchers, but I think he would have barely made it.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
or
Don Mattingly in 1986. Led the league in SLG, OPS, OPS+, TB, Doubles, Hits, and PA. Also had a .352 avg, .394 obp, 31 homers, 113 rbi, and 117 runs.
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
How about John Olerud in 1993. Led the league in AVG, OBP, OPS, OPS+, and Doubles. Also 24 homers, 107 rbi, 200 hits, 109 runs, and 114 walks.
or
Don Mattingly in 1986. Led the league in SLG, OPS, OPS+, TB, Doubles, Hits, and PA. Also had a .352 avg, .394 obp, 31 homers, 113 rbi, and 117 runs.
Those were both great seasons. Loved the stoke on Olerud.
Mattingly was a fixture on my Strat-O- Matic carry over league. ( 16 year league)
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Pete rose 1973, mattingly in 85 or 86, and the year joe Jackson hit .408. All great years
Rose and Jackson aren't eligible for the HOF, for excellent reasons, and I don't include them in any of my lists.
But I did miss Mattingly when I made my list - his 1985 and 1986 seasons come in at 35 and 41. Mattingly starts off with great numbers, but loses ground because he was not a clutch hitter (he got worse with RISP, when his team was losing or tied, with men on base, etc.). For some reason he won Gold Gloves those years, but he didn't deserve them (he did in some later years); he's getting next to nothing added for his fielding.
It would require another thread to go into enough detail for anyone who doesn't know what secondary average is, but Mattingly's secondary averages also weren't terribly impressive: .330 in 1985 and .300 in 1986. To pick a sample of other seasons on the list near Mattingly, Mike Epstein's secondary average in 1969 was .476, Jackie Jensen's in 1958 was .438, and Tim Raines' in 1987 was .451. Mattingly's secondary averages are respectable, even good, but they are among the lowest of those on this list. In brief, secondary average is the counterpart to batting average; it measures what batting average misses. As a general rule of thumb, if you use batting average to identify what is or is not a good player or season, then you will overrate players whose batting averages are higher than their secondary averages, and underrate players whose secondary averages are higher than their batting averages.
Most overrated player of all time: Ichiro. Batting average .314, secondary average .197 or maybe Bill Buckner (.289, .179) or George Sisler (.340, .197).
Most underrated player of all time: Gene Tenace. Batting average .241, secondary average .410. There are still a few people who don't know Joe Morgan was the best player on the Big Red Machine (not just in those years, but for their whole careers); Morgan's numbers are .271 and .414.
Why was Mike Schmidt, who hit .267, so much better than George Brett, who hit .305? Because Schmidt's secondary average was .450 while Brett's was .299.
It's a long and rambling explanation, but that's why Mattingly doesn't rank higher on the hitter's list.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
This is a cool topic cause there's so many players who had great seasons but were not hall of fame worthy throughout their careers. It's fun to go back and try to find those great seasons by the lesser known players.
PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)
PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)
PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
Pete rose 1973, mattingly in 85 or 86, and the year joe Jackson hit .408. All great years
Rose and Jackson aren't eligible for the HOF, for excellent reasons, and I don't include them in any of my lists.
But I did miss Mattingly when I made my list - his 1985 and 1986 seasons come in at 35 and 41. Mattingly starts off with great numbers, but loses ground because he was not a clutch hitter (he got worse with RISP, when his team was losing or tied, with men on base, etc.). For some reason he won Gold Gloves those years, but he didn't deserve them (he did in some later years); he's getting next to nothing added for his fielding.
It would require another thread to go into enough detail for anyone who doesn't know what secondary average is, but Mattingly's secondary averages also weren't terribly impressive: .330 in 1985 and .300 in 1986. To pick a sample of other seasons on the list near Mattingly, Mike Epstein's secondary average in 1969 was .476, Jackie Jensen's in 1958 was .438, and Tim Raines' in 1987 was .451. Mattingly's secondary averages are respectable, even good, but they are among the lowest of those on this list. In brief, secondary average is the counterpart to batting average; it measures what batting average misses. As a general rule of thumb, if you use batting average to identify what is or is not a good player or season, then you will overrate players whose batting averages are higher than their secondary averages, and underrate players whose secondary averages are higher than their batting averages.
Most overrated player of all time: Ichiro. Batting average .314, secondary average .197 or maybe Bill Buckner (.289, .179) or George Sisler (.340, .197).
Most underrated player of all time: Gene Tenace. Batting average .241, secondary average .410. There are still a few people who don't know Joe Morgan was the best player on the Big Red Machine (not just in those years, but for their whole careers); Morgan's numbers are .271 and .414.
Why was Mike Schmidt, who hit .267, so much better than George Brett, who hit .305? Because Schmidt's secondary average was .450 while Brett's was .299.
It's a long and rambling explanation, but that's why Mattingly doesn't rank higher on the hitter's list.
Secondary average Schmidt is #12 all time. Brett is #343.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I looked at your list of pitchers and noted that some pitchers such as Dave McNally, Jim Lonborg (1967) and Mike Queller did not make the list. And I am not taking away from their abilities, but instead, I looked at this from a different perspective. I would have immediately offered these guys up if I was just looking at W-L records. I thought both Wright and Horlen were reasonable choices given the teams they played for and their contribution to the their team's season- especially Horlen. The White Sox made a great run in 1967. If you look at their line up and compare it to the Red Sox, Tigers and Twins, its sort of amazing they did as well as they did.
May was offered up more as an after thought without looking at stats
I know Face was a reliever and that is why I made the comment that he just may not fall within the criteria
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Dallas, is Jim Thome's 2002 season on the list (despite the defensive shortcomings)?
I assume that Thome will get serious consideration for the HOF when his time comes, so I don't consider him a non-HOFer at this point.
Burks and Erstad are close, but didn't make it.
On Belle, I screwed up. I ran past him originally because I thought he was still on the HOF ballot and still had a chance. He has two seasons that make the list: 1998 comes in #24 and 1996 comes in #46.
Basically for those who have never heard of 3rd averages, it separates those
who can actually hit the ball and reach base safely from those who are overrated because
they draw a lot of walks. It rewards the elite hitters, the high contact hitters,
and punishes the strikeout kings such as Schmidt, who stranded more runners than anyone
else in the history of the game.
Schmidt if one of the most overrated players of all time.
Brett wasn't even a power hitter and finished with more RBI's than Schmidt.
In the course of every human endeavor since the dawn of time the risk of human error has always been a factor. Including but not limited to field goals, 4th down attempts, or multiple paragraph ramblings on a sports forum authored by someone who shall remain anonymous.
3rd averages- Brett .489, 15th all time. Schmidt .175 1345th all time.
Basically for those who have never heard of 3rd averages, it separates those
who can actually hit the ball and reach base safely from those who are overrated because
they draw a lot of walks. It rewards the elite hitters, the high contact hitters,
and punishes the strikeout kings such as Schmidt, who stranded more runners than anyone
else in the history of the game.
Schmidt if one of the most overrated players of all time.
Brett wasn't even a power hitter and finished with more RBI's than Schmidt.
Schmidt averaged 107 RBI per 162 games Brett averaged 96. Brett played more games.
While I agree a walk to Schmidt is not as valuable as the modern statistics say it is, I would rate Mike as the second best 3rd baseman ever behind Chipper. Killebrew and Mathews behind him then Brett and Boggs.