That Tom Seaver is not an option is appalling.
Gover Clever Alexander
That Tom Seaver is not an option is appalling.
Would you trust a blind scout? Of course you wouldn't but that's what you do when you simply go by stats
Can someone please tell me how Pedro better then Ryan thanks
and how Nolan ryan overrated
It's funny that the two most overrated pitchers in history are #1 and #2 on this poll. The OP can't even spell Koufax's name, to boot. Great poll.
FWIW, the best pitcher ever is one of: Maddux, Seaver, Randy Johnson. Clemens is dinged for being a roider, Pedro for not having a high career value, and Spahn/W. Johnson for playing in an inferior era. If pressed, I'm going Maddux because of his era, his peak, and his career taken as a whole.
Your list is pretty good, but Spahn was too close to league average ERA+ to belong in this group - IMO.
Pedro is much like Koufax, just better and lasted longer - he's not top 10 either - right.
RC - was borderline HOF before he went to Toronto and hit his roid years. He's a hard call, but, mostly likely w/o the juice he would have pitched 1k innings less, and with less effectiveness then he did. Not #1.
I assume Alexander falls into the same group as WJ. Lose points for being in an earlier time. OK.
What about Grove? Later time. Good innings count, and very good ERA+, or does he get nixed? Gibson? Carlton? Top #8-#15 range for all 3 for sure, but not #1.
That leaves Maddux, RJ, Seaver. If there are no era adjustments to knock down Seaver, he's the best of the 3. If you clip him for being earlier, then I got RJ ahead of Maddux (slightly):
for a stronger 7 year peak (BR WAR):
R-J: 8.8, 8.4, 8.2, 7.8, 7.7, 7.6, 7.4
GM: 8.8, 8.4, 7.8, 7.3, 6.3, 6.2, 6.1
Seasons in the top 110 all time ERA+
RJ (7): 40, 41, 53, 68, 76, 95, 110 (the most of anyone)
GM (4): 04, 05, 63, 74
Cy Young Win Shares:
GM: 4.92 (4 Cy's)
RJ: 6.50 (5 Cy's) (in 1000 less innings he did more)
Also, RJ dominated in both leagues. Don't forget at that time not only was Randy dealing with the DH, the AL strike zone was much smaller then the NL from 1987 thru the early 2000's.
Meanwhile Maddux was functionally as a routine matter given a strike zone rivaling that of the mid 60's. I saw it twice in person, and it was marked and obvious.
If you look at HOF Standards, Maddux comes out as #8 all time, and RJ #9, but considering Maddux tossed 1k more innings, the peak is clearly with RJ. RJ pitched deep into his decline and sucked his first few years, but between those... Now RJ did pitch over 4k innings so I can't see him being nicked compared to anyone in terms of longevity in a difficult env (AL & K zone as I mentioned). Besides he evaporated a bird with a pitch....
Last edited by bagwell368; 02-02-2011 at 09:56 AM.
how could u say pedro was by FAR better? im sorry, thats idiotic. if want to argue hes better, then fine, but no way it could be by far.
first: it wasnt 30 yrs vs 15, more like 26 vs. 17, from the time they became full time major leaguers.
second: ryan won no cy youngs, mostly because he didnt play on good teams which is why his W-L wasnt great. he also walked alot. and he pitched in an era where there was a huge number of great pitchers.
third: ryan was a much stronger and durable pitcher. ryan pitched more complete games than games pedro won. he threw more shutouts than pedro had complete games.
fourth: 7 no hitters. thats not a fluke, thats not because he pitched for a long time, thats just pure dominance. theres something pedro never did.
fifth: the obvious, 324 wins and 5700 srikeouts
sixth: the walks.. well that was a young nolan ryan problem. he led the league in walks 8 times, but he pitched 11 years after the last time he did that. he even led the league in k:bb ratio once.
seven: pedros era is only marginally better. even though from 1997-2003 he put together one of the greatest pitching stretches ever, outside of that, he was a good but not great pitcher. ryan struck out 301 batters at age 42 lol
eight: ryan is also the all time leader in hits per 9
Last edited by metsfan4ever; 02-02-2011 at 09:38 PM.
I take it you understand that Ryan pitched in a 4 man rotation, finish your game era, and Pedro did not??
Let's try some others:
ERA+: Pedro - 154 (means he was 54% above the average pitcher of his time) which is BTW the #1 all time for a starter. Considering Pedro had to deal with the DH more then Ryan, a smaller strike zone, juiced hitters, his edge over Ryan in ERA+ (301st all time at a 112 - a mere 12% above average). Huge edge for Pedro. One more tidbit on ERA+ Pedro has 5 of the top 34 seasons of all time, nobody else can match that. Ryan's best 5: 46th, oops, can't find the 2nd best because it's outside the top #500. Oh dear.
WAR - do you know that one? Pedro 75.90 - in 2827 IP; Ryan 84.80 in 5386 IP. Therefore, per inning Ryan is 58.6% as good as Pedro. Whoa.
WHIP: Pedro 1.0544 (5th all time); Ryan 1.2473 (265th all time)
ERA 1st place by year: Ryan 2; Pedro 5
H/9: Nolan 1st; Pedro 11th (hey!!! Ryan finally gets one !!)
K/9: Pedro 10.0398 (3rd); Ryan 9.5481 (4th)
K/BB: Pedro 4.1500 (3rd); Ryan 2.0444 (243rd)
Speaking of K's - Nolan is #1 all time with 5714 (14.7% ahead of #2). Now for BB's - also #1 - 34.5% ahead of #2.... hahahhahahahhaha
Wild Pitches: Ryan 277 (2nd); Pedro 62 (339th) (another one Ryan wins ! )
Cy Young: Ryan 0; Pedro 3
Wins? Pedro's W-L% over his teams winning percentage is far far higher then Ryan's.
My experience in this: I saw plenty of Ryan starting from when he pitched for the Mets and a lot more of Pedro. I was a paid pitching coach for over 10 years. And Ryan was a thrower, not a pitcher. Pedro was better then Koufax, Carlton, Gibson, Maddux, RC, you name it - on a per inning basis. The best pitcher I've seen since 1966.
Ryan is a "volume" thrower. Great longevity, although interestingly he didn't end up in the top 10 for IP in his league many times. His best ERA years all seemed to happen when he was pitching not that many innings. Half of Ryan's years he gave up MORE runs then the average pitcher in his league. How can he be great and have that hanging over his head? 7 no hitters? 1 out 100 starts. It's what he did in the other 99 that concern me. Let me know when he can just dial one up whenever he likes. Maybe he should have learned to pitch..??
Pedro commanded the strike zone and the hitters far better then Ryan ever did. He combined power and control in a way no other pitcher ever has - not to mention he is the only pitcher I know of that had 3 pitches that were at or near the best of his time - nobody else ever had more then 2. Koufax, Saberhagen before he was hurt, and Schilling are the only guys that had seasons that rivaled Pedro. Pedro in his prime from 1997-2005 put together a run of pitching brilliance never before seen - ever. Look it up.
The usual way player are judged is a mix of peak and career. Pedro being the best peak pitcher of all time, with a #23 WAR comes in around #12-13 all time. Ryan having longevity and better career marks, but poor peak values is at best in the #25-27 range. Far better? If I'm making an all time 25 man team to play w/ 2010 rules and conditions, Pedro is on my #1 team. I'd have to get down to about the 9th set of 25 man teams before I would consider Ryan. Is that far apart enough for you?
Pedro >> Ryan
Last edited by bagwell368; 02-02-2011 at 10:18 PM.
I also hate that argument about Ryan not getting Cy's because his teams sucked. It makes me sick. Here is an excerpt from a piece I wrote on 3/14/09:
Originally Posted by Old Sweater View Post
The problem were the awful teams for whom he played.
Tossing away the 3 IP 1966 campaign. We have 26 years to examine:
5 teams that made the playoffs
11 other teams over .500
6 other teams that were 10 games under .500 through .500
4 teams more then 10 games out:
'68 Mets 73-89, '74 Angels 68-94, '75 Angels 72-89, '77 Angels 74-88
You know 4 poor (but not horrible), 5 real good, more teams over .500, a few under... sounds like par for the course to me. Also Nolan's teams had good defense since his DERA is worse then average that could be expected.
I located 10 years when Ryan's winning percentage was below his teams.
I located 3 more years when it was less then .020 over.
I located 4 years years when it was more then .100 over.
Without having to look l can assure you Pedro has more seasons over .100+ winning percentage then Ryan.
OK, I looked:
'97 Montreal 78-84 .481 -- 17-8 Pedro .680
'98 Boston 92-70 .568 --- 19-7 Pedro .731
'99 Boston 94-68 .580 --- 23-4 Pedro .852
'00 Boston 85-77 .525 --- 18-6 Pedro .750
'01 Boston 82-79 .509 --- 07-3 Pedro .700
'02 Boston 93-69 .574 --- 20-4 Pedro .833
'03 Boston 95-67 .586 --- 14-4 Pedro .777
'04 Boston 98-64 .605 --- 16-9 Pedro .640
'05 NY Met 83-79 .512 --- 15-8 Pedro .652
9 years: 8 out of 9 .199%+ over team, the other a mere .035 over, double of what Ryan earned in 26 years, Pedro did in 9 years.
This is what a great pitcher does, take a good team, and makes it better, year in and year out. Show me where Ryan did that?
It's not Ryan's winning percentage per se which bothers me, its the lack of him carrying a team to victory. The only team he carried was California, but that was more out of them being poor, then him being great.
The BB's do bother me, throw in the #1 all time Wild Pitch record, then the unbelievable drumbeat of his fans. Yeah, I appreciate a good thrower, but he was not, nor will ever be one of the great pitchers of baseball history.
I just want to be straight with the logic that was given:
#1. BB's don't really matter because Ryan gave up so few hits.
#2. Pitchers with less IP then Ryan (even a few) are suspect and cannot be used to compare against Ryan. Even someone like Spahn, who pitched 142 1/3 less IP, in 6 less years then Ryan, and had a core of IP from '47 to '63 that Ryan can't touch. On the other side, Pedro can't be counted, even though he was much more brilliant in his career - since he has just over 1/2 of Ryan's innings he doesn't count
#3. Pitchers with more innings pitched at a time with bigger strike zones, and less players, so they don't count either.
Basically, you have made a set of criteria that only one person can meet. Then your glorify your self full filling hero because nobody can else can meet the criteria. The point of metrics and statistics is to not to come up with the answer first, but to honestly look for the truth, no matter where the chips may fall.
Went with Johnson but it is close between him and Kofax.
How did anyone vote for Nolan Lynn Ryan or Sanford Koufax??? You guys understand it says Greatest pitcher, not favorite pitcher, right?
I did not enter the voting but....can't really take this poll seriously........One of the greatest, Grover Cleveland Alexander.......0 votes.
Cy Young, Walter Johnson and Nolan Ryan
Ryan is pathetic as the #1.
No doubt that that Alexander is top drawer historically.