Most Dominant Pitcher Ever?

[underdog]

Pedro Martinez - Most Dominant Pitcher Ever?

He's always been viewed as one of the most dominant pitchers ever, but does the fact that he obliterated the AL during the steroid era make him the best pitcher ever?

In the two years following McGuire and Sosa's HR battle, Martínez allowed 288 hits and 69 walks in 430 innings, with 597 strikeouts, an 0.83 WHIP, and a 1.90 ERA. Pitching in Fenway Park.

--- Damnit - My drunk finger hit enter before I finished the subject!

[Fallon]

Pedro was the best I've ever watched.

[underdog]

Pedro was the best I've ever watched.

It was fantastic everytime he was on the mound.

And thanks for changing the subject.

[King Hippos Bandaid]

too bad the Mets diddn't have late 1990s Pedro, he was unbeatable when he was on ( he was on alot0

[Fallon]

It was fantastic everytime he was on the mound.

And thanks for changing the subject.

He's the only guy I'd make sure I watched pitch. That was the Sox game to watch for the week.

[donnie_darko]

yeah, take that roger clemens, you no neck motherfucker.

i have no idea what any of this means.

[TheMojoPin]

Pedro on the Expos 7 Red Sox is clearly the best pitcher of all time. Nobody else really comes close in terms of how totally and completely dominant he was. Insanity.

[Kevin]

If it wasn't for the Yankees, He would have had alot more wins. He was awesome.

[TheMojoPin]

If it wasn't for the Yankees, He would have had alot more wins. He was awesome.

Fuck wins. Using wins to gauge anything about a pitcher, good or bad, is one of the most useless stats out there. A pitcher's wins and losses are almost meaningless because they're so dependent on so many factors the pitcher has zero control over.

[Devo37]

Dwight Gooden (first 3 years).

[TheMojoPin]

Dwight Gooden (first 3 years).

Get the fuck out of here. No, really...leave and never come back if you're going to honestly stack that up against Pedro's best years.

[Snoogans]

PEDRO PEDRO PEDRO PEDRO PEDRO

Unless you are gonna go back to koufax or like Bob Gibson, you cant not say pedro

and even then i might still say Pedro

[Kevin]

Fuck wins. Using wins to gauge anything about a pitcher, good or bad, is one of the most useless stats out there. A pitcher's wins and losses are almost maningless because they're so dependent on so many factors the pitcher has zero control over.

Did i make a comment that stated that it made him less of a pitcher? I was just stating that he lost alot of games to the Yankees. And its not like he got bombed, he lost 2-1 1-0 3-2 most o it because he was just tired when they got to him.. You say Montreal, but that year he had with the Sox when he got fucked out of the MVP for Pudge Roidriguez, was the best ever IMHO. Considering the roids and all.

[TheMojoPin]

PEDRO PEDRO PEDRO PEDRO PEDRO

Unless you are gonna go back to koufax or like Bob Gibson, you cant not say pedro

and even then i might still say Pedro

I don't think there's any "might" about it. Look at his peak numbers right in the middle of the most dominant hitter's era the game has ever seen.

[TheMojoPin]

Did i make a comment that stated that it made him less of a pitcher? I was just stating that he lost alot of games to the Yankees. And its not like he got bombed, he lost 2-1 1-0 3-2 most o it because he was just tired when they got to him.. You say Montreal, but that year he had with the Sox when he got fucked out of the MVP for Pudge Roidriguez, was the best ever IMHO. Considering the roids and all.

No, I'm just saying fuck wins and losses 99% of the time with any pitcher. They mean shit.

[Fallon]

God damn he dominated.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/martipe02.shtml

[Snoogans]

No, I'm just saying fuck wins and losses 99% of the time with any pitcher. They mean shit.

Like Wang

[Fallon]

Like Wang

You do?

[Kevin]

Like Wang

BDC is gunna fuck you up.

[Devo37]

Get the fuck out of here. No, really...leave and never come back if you're going to honestly stack that up against Pedro's best years.

how bout Sid Fernandez?

[Snoogans]

BDC is lucky he can fuck up a loaf of bread. Thats like tellin michael strahan that he is gonna get blocked by East Side Dave

[TheMojoPin]

Like Wang

Does he have an assload of wins? Perfect example.

Another good one? Look at Clemens' W-L totals a bunch of the seasons he pitched with the Astros.

I've got a great close to home example...Jason fucking Marquis. A horrendous pitcher, and he had two seasons of hot, rank garbage with the Cardinals when they were good where he had 13 and 14 wins respectively. 14 wins in a season where his fucking ERA was over 6 and his WHIP was 1.523. Ridiculous.

[TheMojoPin]

how bout Sid Fernandez?

Dude, come on. COME ON. The answer was rightly Pedro in the very first post. It is actually impossible to argue otherwise.

[Snoogans]

how bout Sid Fernandez?

Sid Fernandez wouldnt be in the top ten best mets pitchers ever

[Kevin]

I would take Pedro's 220 wins over 95% of the 300 wins in the HOF. If not 100.

[King Hippos Bandaid]

Anthony Young was quite dominant in 1992-1993

[Kevin]

Sid Fernandez wouldnt be in the top ten best mets pitchers ever

Sad Statement.. He could however give Curry a run for his money on the Buffet table.

[Snoogans]

I would take Pedro's 220 wins over 95% of the 300 wins in the HOF. If not 100.

209. Pedro was 209 and 93 or something like that

Still, he played years for the expos hen the rest in the toughest div in baseball

[Snoogans]

Anthony Young was quite dominant in 1992-1993

best met....and Cub ever

[Snacks]

Its funny, I think Clemens was the best pitcher of my lifetime but I think Pedro, Randy and Maddox were the most dominant. maddox doesnt have the k's but look at his career #'s. almost every year he had 15 plus wins, he rarley walked a batter and his era was 2. He was unhittable.

[TheMojoPin]

209. Pedro was 209 and 93 or something like that

Still, he played years for the expos hen the rest in the toughest div in baseball

Goddamn, I hate pitching wins and losses so much.

I understand why they're kept, but it irks me that so many people talk about it over anything else like it's the stat that defines a pitcher.

[Devo37]

Sid Fernandez wouldnt be in the top ten best mets pitchers ever

but he may be the fattest. that has to count for something.

[Snoogans]

but he may be the fattest. that has to count for something.

yea its called the early 90's SHITTY mets

[TheMojoPin]

Its funny, I think Clemens was the best pitcher of my lifetime but I think Pedro, Randy and Maddox were the most dominant. maddox doesnt have the k's but look at his career #'s. almost every year he had 15 plus wins, he rarley walked a batter and his era was 2. He was unhittable.

OK, here's another great example. Maddux played most of his 15 game streak on the 90's Braves...of course he was going to have an assload of wins.

I love Maddux as a pitcher, but he was ultimately much more hittable than Pedro since his had so little relative speed to use. If his control was just a little off, he could get smacked around hard.

[HBox]

For 59 innings it was Orel Hershiser.

[Kevin]

I tell you who is the most dominant post season pitcher as of now..

http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/0669ea2a28_beckett_02132008.jpg

Nice to see that he kept in shape this offseason...

[Snoogans]

For 59 innings it was Orel Hershiser.

yea but he has no stretch of even 2 years that hold up. 7 games wonderful, we need at least a couple seasons

[TheMojoPin]

In fantasyland, it's been a healthy Mark Prior over the last 5 seasons, what with his 3 Cy Young's and 2 WS's for the Godforsaken Cubs and all.

[TheMojoPin]

I tell you who is the most dominant post season pitcher as of now..

http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/0669ea2a28_beckett_02132008.jpg

Nice to see that he kept in shape this offseason...

Dude likes his pies.

[Snoogans]

In fantasyland, it's been a healthy Mark Prior over the last 5 seasons, what with his 3 Cy Young's and 2 WS's for the Godforsaken Cubs and all.

in fantasy land Alou also caught that foul ball

[Snoogans]

I tell you who is the most dominant post season pitcher as of now..

http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/0669ea2a28_beckett_02132008.jpg

Nice to see that he kept in shape this offseason...

after what he did last October I don care. He still isnt half of fuckin Cabrera

[TheMojoPin]

in fantasy land Alou also caught that foul ball

In fantasyland, Bartman still went home with his ball and Alex Gonzalez turned the easiest double play of all time.

[HBox]

Dude likes his pies.

He's really following the Roger Clemens path.

In 20 years he'll be trying to convince Congress that he didn't really secretly have a bionic arm surgically installed, that it was really his wife and Jon Lester "misremembered."

[Fallon]

Dude likes his pies.

He sure does..

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/2006/beckettuh4.jpg

[Devo37]

Sid Fernandez wouldnt be in the top ten best mets pitchers ever

ok, then i'll go with Sidd Finch.

[Kevin]

Dude likes his pies.

King Hippos Beckett sure does!

[underdog]

Another good one? Look at Clemens' W-L totals a bunch of the seasons he pitched with the Astros.

Didn't Clemens beat out Randy Johnson one year for the Cy Young because Johnson didn't have enough wins, but Clemens had like 20 wins, but an almost 4 era?

Oh yeah, 2004 :

He finished the 2004 season with a 16-14 record, but had a far better season than his won-lost total indicated; the D-Backs scored two or fewer runs in 17 of his 35 starts that season. Johnson led the major leagues in strikeouts (with 290). In the games where Arizona scored three or more runs, Johnson was 13-2. As his team only won 51 games that year, his ratio of winning 31.3% of his team's games was the highest for any starting pitcher since Steve Carlton in 1972 (who won 27 of the Phillies 59 wins for an all-time record ratio of 45.8%). He finished second to Roger Clemens in that year's Cy Young Award balloting.

That should prove your Win / Loss hatred.

Even in 2000, Pedro "only" won 18 games, but his ERA was under 1.90.

AND, in just his losses, his ERA was lower than the NL's ERA leader's for the entire year.

[TheGameHHH]

This really depends on how you define dominant.........Pedro was fucking outstanding but I feel like his run of dominance was too short to be labeled the greatest of all time. Santana seems to be mowing down people left and right for a good 3 years now. I don't think some of his numbers are as good as Pedro's but he's been doing it consistantly for a few years. I never watched koufax pitch but i hear he was pretty fucking dominant. Big Unit was scary for a few years, again I don't know the numbers. I think I would need to sit down and analyze numbers before I decided on who was "dominant".

[joethebartender]

had to.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/Kool-AidMan.jpg

[Flounder61]

Pedro was a guaranteed win ever time he took the ball with the Red Sox. 96 mph fastball and a jelly leg change. see you fucking later.

[jauble]

pedro is good but he tossed an old man in a fight....Id go with

http://www.authenticsportscollectibles.com/store/product_thumb.php?img=images/RYANPHS016003-L.jpg&w=210&h=166

no fucking around there

[TeeBone]

347 wins and a 3.11 ERA-----Not too shabby.
And, he did it without performance enhancing drugs.
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:XjR66k_gPkJUfM:http://photos.signonsandiego.com/gallery1.5/albums/070403padres2007/SMHpadres271049x007.thumb.jpg

[sailor]

In fantasyland, it's been a healthy Mark Prior over the last 5 seasons, what with his 3 Cy Young's and 2 WS's for the Godforsaken Cubs and all.

gotta love dusty.

[A.J.]

Pedro from 1997-2000 was pretty awesome, but this guy was pretty good too:

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2007/writers/frank_deford/06/13/baseball.pitchcounts/t1_gibson.jpg

[topless_mike]

http://www.tristarproductions.com/Sales/Images/Baseball/Astros/RyanN-8x10-Rainbow.jpg

[Jujubees2]

http://www.tristarproductions.com/Sales/Images/Baseball/Astros/RyanN-8x10-Rainbow.jpg

Just beat me to it Mike. Ryan in his prime was unhittable. You knew he was bringing the heater but you just couldn't catch up with it.

And Gibson wasn't too shabby either.

[foodcourtdruide]

Pedro Martinez had a WHIP lower than 1 FOUR years in a row.

But what was the better season:

Martinez 2000
or
Gooden 1985

[OGC]

Just beat me to it Mike. Ryan in his prime was unhittable. You knew he was bringing the heater but you just couldn't catch up with it.

And Gibson wasn't too shabby either.

I never understood Nolan Ryan. The all those no hitters, such a killer fastball, all the strike outs, but over his career, we was just barely over .500 (324-292). In his best win season he won 22 and lost 16.

Sure he was on some crappy California, Texas and Houston teams, but dominant pitchers would be able to win no matter how awful the team was.

[foodcourtdruide]

I never understood Nolan Ryan. The all those no hitters, such a killer fastball, all the strike outs, but over his career, we was just barely over .500 (324-292). In his best win season he won 22 and lost 16.

Sure he was on some crappy California, Texas and Houston teams, but dominant pitchers would be able to win no matter how awful the team was.

W/L's are a team stat. Dominant pitchers should not be able to win no matter what. A dominant pitcher does not make their teams offense better.

[Snoogans]

This really depends on how you define dominant.........Pedro was fucking outstanding but I feel like his run of dominance was too short to be labeled the greatest of all time. Santana seems to be mowing down people left and right for a good 3 years now. I don't think some of his numbers are as good as Pedro's but he's been doing it consistantly for a few years. I never watched koufax pitch but i hear he was pretty fucking dominant. Big Unit was scary for a few years, again I don't know the numbers. I think I would need to sit down and analyze numbers before I decided on who was "dominant".

Pedro did it from like 97-2001/2002. And WAYYYYY better then Santana.

I think Santana is a great pitcher, but all of a sudden he went from a great pitcher to the best in the last 20 years during an OFFSEASON. His value was overblown the second the trade talks started. He isnt even close to what Pedro was.

[TheMojoPin]

I never understood Nolan Ryan. The all those no hitters, such a killer fastball, all the strike outs, but over his career, we was just barely over .500 (324-292). In his best win season he won 22 and lost 16.

Sure he was on some crappy California, Texas and Houston teams, but dominant pitchers would be able to win no matter how awful the team was.

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHH!!!

That bolded part makes abolutely no sense. A pitcher has zero control over the rest of the team's offense (except in the NL, where their impact is next to nothing). Please explain to me how a good pitcher is able magically "win" all the time when his team's bats repeatedly shit the bed? PITCHING WINS AND LOSSES MEAN SHIT.

Oh, and if we're picking pitchers based on fighting, Farnsworth wins, despite his suckiness at his actual job.

http://reds.enquirer.com/2003/06/20/Fight1_zoom.jpg

http://www.agonyandivy.com/images/kyle_farnsworth.jpg

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/news/2003/06/19/cubs_reds_ap/lg_fight_ap.jpg

[TheMojoPin]

Pedro did it from like 97-2001/2002. And WAYYYYY better then Santana.

I think Santana is a great pitcher, but all of a sudden he went from a great pitcher to the best in the last 20 years during an OFFSEASON. His value was overblown the second the trade talks started. He isnt even close to what Pedro was.

Plus, everyone is only talking about Pedro's Red Sox years. He was badass in Montreal, too.

[Snoogans]

http://www.iiiii.nu/image_archive/public_figures/park_chan_ho/angry.jpg

[Snoogans]

Plus, everyone is only talking about Pedro's Red Sox years. He was badass in Montreal, too.

My fave moment ever with Pedro was he had a perfect game in the 8th, and he hit Reggie Sanders in the arm. Still had a no hitter but lost his perfect game. REGGIE SANDERS CHARGED THE MOUND. WHO THE FUCK IS GONNA HIT YOU ON PURPOSE WITH A PERFECT GAME??

Pedro just kinda stared at him all confused

[TheMojoPin]

Chan don't mess around.

How about the bitchiest pitcher move?

http://blooblud.nyfsblogs.com/files/2007/12/clemens_hurls_bat_at_piazza.jpg

[TheMojoPin]

My fave moment ever with Pedro was he had a perfect game in the 8th, and he hit Reggie Sanders in the arm. Still had a no hitter but lost his perfect game. REGGIE SANDERS CHARGED THE MOUND. WHO THE FUCK IS GONNA HIT YOU ON PURPOSE WITH A PERFECT GAME??

Pedro just kinda stared at him all confused

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAH!!!

Sanders was a moron.

[A.J.]

Chan don't mess around.

How about the bitchiest pitcher move?

http://blooblud.nyfsblogs.com/files/2007/12/clemens_hurls_bat_at_piazza.jpg

That was probably the result of his best friend, wife and teammate taking HGH.

I love how Clemens claimed he thought the bat was the ball. Shouldn't you have thrown to first then Roger?

[Jujubees2]

That was probably the result of his best friend, wife and teammate taking HGH.

I love how Clemens claimed he thought the bat was the ball. Shouldn't you have thrown to first then Roger?

I think he was just misremembering a fight he had with someone else and he thought it was Piazza.

[FUNKMAN]

That was probably the result of his best friend, wife and teammate taking HGH.

I love how Clemens claimed he thought the bat was the ball. Shouldn't you have thrown to first then Roger?

everything is said and done with but I always look back on this play and thought it would have been a great move if Valentine took his team off the field until Clemens was thrown out of the game.

He would have had a strong argument considering Clemens had already hit Piazza in the head and now he threw a splintered bat at him. He could have claimed "his teams safety" and "Clemens mental instability" and at the time in the series the Mets were a beaten team and this may have been something that could have turned it around for them.

Yeah it seems whacky to pull your team but you can not disagree that Clemens throwing a splintered bat in Piazza's direction was one of the whackiest things experienced on the diamond. Piazza stood there not knowing what the hell was going on and probably everyone watching it

[foodcourtdruide]

Part of me feels really bad that a legendary pitcher like Clemens' reputation is being destroyed.

Another part of me is happy because of the Piazza fiasco.

[Snoogans]

Part of me feels really bad that a legendary pitcher like Clemens' reputation is being destroyed.

Another part of me is happy because of the Piazza fiasco.

Is clemens rep being destroyed? Or did Clemens distroy it himself. Nobody is after Roger Clemens. Everything going on now he brought on himself and he fuckin deserves.

[Knowledged_one]

Walter Johnson was the best, the Big Train could throw seeds man the guy was an animal

417 career wins (2nd all-time)
110 career shutouts (1st all-time)
3509 career strikeouts (9th all-time)
Won MVP award in 1913 & 1924
Played in two World Series (1924 and 1925)
An inaugural member of Baseball Hall of Fame
Pitched 56 consecutive scoreless innings, a record that stood until 1968

and you know what Mike Scott and Nolan Ryan were almost unhittable in RBI Baseball

[Judge Smails]

Most Dominant Pitcher Ever?

http://www.webwiseforradio.com/site_files/249/Image/Ian/Classic_rock_autos/rob_halford.JPG

[underdog]

I never understood Nolan Ryan. The all those no hitters, such a killer fastball, all the strike outs, but over his career, we was just barely over .500 (324-292). In his best win season he won 22 and lost 16.

You forgot all the walks. Ryan put way too many men on base. All he cared about was strikeouts and not letting people hit the ball. He never let his defense do anything behind him.

[OGC]

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHH!!!

That bolded part makes abolutely no sense. A pitcher has zero control over the rest of the team's offense (except in the NL, where their impact is next to nothing). Please explain to me how a good pitcher is able magically "win" all the time when his team's bats repeatedly shit the bed? PITCHING WINS AND LOSSES MEAN SHIT.



I didn't say "good" pitchers can win on losing teams. I said a dominant pitcher can. A dominant pitcher will win when his team only scores one or two runs. Sure if your team scores zero runs, no pitcher will be able to help you out, but a truly dominant pitcher , adapts when it is obvious he is not going to get much offensive support.

You are correct though that wins and losses are not the best way to rate pitchers .

[TheMojoPin]

I didn't say "good" pitchers can win on losing teams. I said a dominant pitcher can. A dominant pitcher will win when his team only scores one or two runs. Sure if your team scores zero runs, no pitcher will be able to help you out, but a truly dominant pitcher , adapts when it is obvious he is not going to get much offensive support.

You are correct though that wins and losses are not the best way to rate pitchers .


So a truly dominant pitcher isn't actually dominant if he gives up 2 runs and his team can only score one? What if he pitches an entire game, gives up 3 runs, and his team can't beat that? That's ridiculous to put on the pitcher.

[Knowledged_one]

Just to echo Mojo a bit, here are some pitchers who have lost games and had no hitters

[edit] Pitched a no-hitter and lost
On April 23, 1964, Ken Johnson of the Houston Colt 45's became the only pitcher to lose a complete game no-hitter in nine innings when he was beaten 1-0 by Cincinnati. The winning run was scored by Pete Rose in the top of the ninth inning via an error, groundout, and another error.[7] In 1967, Steve Barber and Stu Miller of the Baltimore Orioles pitched a combined no-hitter, but lost 2-1 to the Detroit Tigers.[8] Three pitchers – Silver King (1890), Andy Hawkins (1990), and Matt Young (1992) – have lost eight-inning unofficial no-hitters where the home team won the game.[9][10]


[edit] Lost in extra innings
A game that is a no-hitter through nine innings may be lost in extra innings. On May 2, 1917, Fred Toney of the Cincinnati Reds and Hippo Vaughn of the Chicago Cubs pitched a hitless, scoreless tie after nine innings – the only time in baseball history that neither team has had a hit in regulation. The Reds got two hits in the top of the tenth inning and scored the winning run. In the bottom of the tenth, Toney retired the side and recorded a ten-inning no-hitter. (The closest any game has come since to having no hits in regulation was in 1965, when Sandy Koufax pitched a perfect game and opposing pitcher Bob Hendley of the Cubs gave up only one hit to the Dodgers, in the seventh inning.)

A total of thirteen potential no-hitters have been lost in extra innings; two were perfect games. In 1959, Harvey Haddix of the Pittsburgh Pirates pitched twelve perfect innings before losing the no-hitter and the game to the Milwaukee Braves in the thirteenth inning. Pedro Martínez, then a member of the Montreal Expos, was the last pitcher to lose a no-hitter in the tenth against the San Diego Padres in 1995.[11] Vaughn, Haddix, Martínez, and the other ten pitchers who lost no-hitters in extra innings are not credited with official no-hitters because they did not keep the opponent hitless for the entire course of the game.

--Edit: Hippo Vaughn is a kick ass name for a baseball player - must be a relative of KHB

[TheMojoPin]

--Edit: Hippo Vaughn is a kick ass name for a baseball player - must be a relative of KHB

Well, he's not a big fat failure, so clearly not.

[Knowledged_one]

Well, he's not a big fat failure, so clearly not.

and i dont think Hippo Vaughn was ever banned from baseball

[razorboy]

For what its worth, my grandad grew up watching the KC Monarchs, and always says Satchel Paige was the best he had ever seen.

[Snoogans]

Armando Benitez. Everytime I watched the Mets when he was there, it DOMINATED

[OGC]

So a truly dominant pitcher isn't actually dominant if he gives up 2 runs and his team can only score one? What if he pitches an entire game, gives up 3 runs, and his team can't beat that? That's ridiculous to put on the pitcher.

What I am saying is that in my mind, a dominant pitcher will step up his game and shut down the other team's offense more often than not when his team is ridiculously bad. If a pitcher can't win if his team doesn't score much, he isn't dominant.

Yes it is ridiculous to expect a pitcher to win if his team only scores a couple of runs, but a dominant pitcher should be "ridiculously" good. Thats why it is so hard to come up with more than a handful of pitchers that are considered dominant.

Sure, he can't win all of the time, but a dominant pitcher only needs a run or two to win.

[Snoogans]

What I am saying is that in my mind, a dominant pitcher will step up his game and shut down the other team's offense more often than not when his team is ridiculously bad. If a pitcher can't win if his team doesn't score much, he isn't dominant.

Yes it is ridiculous to expect a pitcher to win if his team only scores a couple of runs, but a dominant pitcher should be "ridiculously" good. Thats why it is so hard to come up with more than a handful of pitchers that are considered dominant.

Sure, he can't win all of the time, but a dominant pitcher only needs a run or two to win.

you are also forgetting something. Most guys dont pitch complete games every start. They coulda come out up 1-0 or 2-1 and the team lost 3-2. Guess what, they dominated, and they didnt get a win

[OGC]

you are also forgetting something. Most guys dont pitch complete games every start. They coulda come out up 1-0 or 2-1 and the team lost 3-2. Guess what, they dominated, and they didnt get a win

You are right. I think we can agree that wins and losses aren't a good indicator of dominant pitchers.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

From 61-66 Koufax had some sick numbers, Plus he was dominant in a few world series

http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/koufasa01.shtml

[TheMojoPin]

It's all about the eras. Pedro has had to face a much wider spread of much better hitters around the league than anyone with the numbers he's had in the past, or came close to them.

[BoondockSaint]

I wonder what Pedro would have done before they lowered the mound.

[Drunky McBetidont]

i win!!!!

http://www.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/2026577/pitcher-of-beer_Full.jpg
:smoke:

[PhishHead]

you guys have obviously never faced Steve Nebraska.


but on a serious note, my vote is for Shaun McClarty that kid is sick.

[Snoogans]

you guys have obviously never faced Steve Nebraska.


but on a serious note, my vote is for Shaun McClarty that kid is sick.

McClarty had a filthy splitter. His run was short, but that 16K game was something to behold. You might be onto something with this one

[PhishHead]

McClarty had a filthy splitter. His run was short, but that 16K game was something to behold. You might be onto something with this one

McClarty's short run is better then Pedro's entire career. I mean seriously, people hit homers off Pedro alot, you never see McClarty giving up jacks, players are lucky to get singles off of him.

[MadMatt]

:lol:

Never mind. It was a good joke, but probably would have earned me a horrible Mod Quote.

:lol:

[Snoogans]

McClarty's short run is better then Pedro's entire career. I mean seriously, people hit homers off Pedro alot, you never see McClarty giving up jacks, players are lucky to get singles off of him.

McClarty only gave up 1 home run ever. To that BASTARD Eric Duncan. Only 1 in history hit off Shaun McClarty

[WRESTLINGFAN]

I wonder what Pedro would have done before they lowered the mound.

If Im correct they did that the Year after Gibson had that dominant season when he had something like a 1.12 ERA Probably around 67 or 68

[FUNKMAN]

Babe Ruth

[Snoogans]

I wonder what Pedro would have done before they lowered the mound.

I wonder what those old guys woulda done facing 75% juicers

[PhishHead]

McClarty only gave up 1 home run ever. To that BASTARD Eric Duncan. Only 1 in history hit off Shaun McClarty

1 aint so bad. I mean to a great player like Duncan that is acceptable.

[Snoogans]

1 aint so bad. I mean to a great player like Duncan that is acceptable.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I swear he was alot better then....plus aluminum bat

[razorboy]

If Im correct they did that the Year after Gibson had that dominant season when he had something like a 1.12 ERA Probably around 67 or 68
Correct. It was after the 68 season. For the life of me I'll never figure how he had 9 losses.

[PhishHead]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I swear he was alot better then....plus aluminum bat

Yea aluminum bats change the game. I mean imagine Pedro pitching against batters with aluminum bats he gives up at least 50 homers.

[Snoogans]

Yea aluminum bats change the game. I mean imagine Pedro pitching against batters with aluminum bats he gives up at least 50 homers.

Exactly. That seals it. It HAS TO BE Shaun McClarty

[BoondockSaint]

I wonder what those old guys woulda done facing 75% juicers

Not too good. I mean those guys would be in their 60s.

[PhishHead]

Exactly. That seals it. It HAS TO BE Shaun McClarty

These fools just don't realize that is the problem.

1. Shaun McClarty
2. Steve Nebraska
3. Pedro

[Knowledged_one]

These fools just don't realize that is the problem.

1. Shaun McClarty
2. Steve Nebraska
3. Pedro

Rick "Wild Thing" Vaughn

[PhishHead]

Rick "Wild Thing" Vaughn

no way...too inconsistent.

[PD]

Dwight Gooden (first 3 years).
Get the fuck out of here. No, really...leave and never come back if you're going to honestly stack that up against Pedro's best years.


you didn't see Gooden in 84 & 85 obviously.

1985 - 16 complete games, 8 shut outs, 1.53 ERA, 276+inn, 198 hits, 24-4 for a 2nd place team.

I love Pedro, but you cannot deny the dominance Gooden had that year.

[Knowledged_one]

no way...too inconsistent.

You would be too if you had to face Klue Heywood

[Knowledged_one]

you didn't see Gooden in 84 & 85 obviously.

1985 - 16 complete games, 8 shut outs, 1.53 ERA, 276+inn, 198 hits, 24-4 for a 2nd place team.

I love Pedro, but you cannot deny the dominance Gooden had that year.

Like my dad says - One game doesnt make a season and one season doesnt make a career

[BoondockSaint]

Sam "Mayday" Malone.

[PhishHead]

you didn't see Gooden in 84 & 85 obviously.

1985 - 16 complete games, 8 shut outs, 1.53 ERA, 276+inn, 198 hits, 24-4 for a 2nd place team.

I love Pedro, but you cannot deny the dominance Gooden had that year.

1 year does not = most dominant pitcher ever.

[TheMojoPin]

Please. It's all about Henry Rowengartner. He's only 12, so his ceiling is insanely high, and he throws so hard it knocks his catchers off of their feet. Incredibly raw, but he's going to be around for a while.

[TheMojoPin]

you didn't see Gooden in 84 & 85 obviously.

1985 - 16 complete games, 8 shut outs, 1.53 ERA, 276+inn, 198 hits, 24-4 for a 2nd place team.

I love Pedro, but you cannot deny the dominance Gooden had that year.

By that logic, Derrek Lee is one of the greatest hitters of all time.

Madness.

[Knowledged_one]

Please. It's all about Henry Rowengartner. He's only 12, so his ceiling is insanely high, and he throws so hard it knocks his catchers off of their feet. Incredibly raw, but he's going to be around for a while.

You are such a blind homer for them Cubs, and his ceiling it turns out was low because he was a 18 year old virgin by American Pie and had to stick it in Tara Reid

[TheMojoPin]

You are such a blind homer for them Cubs, and his ceiling it turns out was low because he was a 18 year old virgin by American Pie and had to stick it in Tara Reid

By the time he made it to college in the NE, he was getting roped into violent drug deals by some dude named "Dawson." Sad, really.

[PhishHead]

By the time he made it to college in the NE, he was getting roped into violent drug deals by some dude named "Dawson." Sad, really.

hahaha i forgot he was in that movie.

[PD]

Like my dad says - One game doesnt make a season and one season doesnt make a career

I'm not saying it makes him better than Pedro (or Koufax) for career; but the idea was thrown out there for his one year, and Mojopin rejected it against Pedro's best years.

[Knowledged_one]

I'm not saying it makes him better than Pedro (or Koufax) for career; but the idea was thrown out there for his one year, and Mojopin rejected it against Pedro's best years.

but thats the thing Pedro has had multiple great years while Gooden had the great season then not much

thats why its hard to take Gooden seriously as a dominant pitcher

[PD]

By that logic, Derrek Lee is one of the greatest hitters of all time.

Madness.

see above. The discussion was who was most dominant. The proposal was that Gooden had some (3) amazing years; you said it wasnt as good as any of pedro's, and dismissed the argument out of hand. I said that Gooden's 85 was at least close to any of Pedro's year.

simple.

It doesn't mean career.

to tell you the truth, i had more of a problem with you dismissing Koufax than dismissing gooden.

[TheMojoPin]

see above. The discussion was who was most dominant. The proposal was that Gooden had some (3) amazing years; you said it wasnt as good as any of pedro's, and dismissed the argument out of hand. I said that Gooden's 85 was at least close to any of Pedro's year.

simple.

It doesn't mean career.

to tell you the truth, i had more of a problem with you dismissing Koufax than dismissing gooden.

Career-wise, Gooden doesn't sniff Pedro's jockstrap.

Plenty of pitchers have managed 1 or 2 amazing seasons. The real test is doing it over an over again. That's the idea of this thread...which pitcher had such dominance that season after season, when they took the mound, you had to battle just to keep in the game, and that's the reputation they had. Gooden is nowhere near being that guy except for one season. If we want to talk impressive single season performances, fine, he's right up there. But this thread wasn't started about that.

And Pedro own Koufax, especially when you contrast the eras they'd played in.

[Team_Ramrod]

Juan Guzman was the most dominant pitcher to pitch ever in 1992.

Outside of 92, there was a 5 year span of Randy Johnson being a cross between a genius and a lunatic on the mound.

I guess the most dominant over my life time would be Pedro, but he never scared me starting the game as much as Hoffman scared me closing it out.

Ruling:

Starter - Pedro

Closer - Hoffman

[cougarjake13]

how bout Sid Fernandez?

or hell why not bob ojeda ???

[Crippler]

Juan Guzman was the most dominant pitcher to pitch ever in 1992.

Outside of 92, there was a 5 year span of Randy Johnson being a cross between a genius and a lunatic on the mound.

I guess the most dominant over my life time would be Pedro, but he never scared me starting the game as much as Hoffman scared me closing it out.

Ruling:

Starter - Pedro

Closer - Hoffman

I would agree on Pedro, although as a Yankee fan they seemed to have a weird way of getting to him in some of the more important games...but he was always to be feared.

As for Hoffman, I could only agree if the game in question was being played in May or June. The guy has had a regular season career that is staggering to look at on paper. But in his very few big post season appearances he has been very regular, even not-so-good. Shit, he even crumbled under the pressure of an big spot in an all star game.

[TheGameHHH]

After doing some statistical research I have reached the conclusion that Pedro was the most dominant pitcher i have ever seen.

[Team_Ramrod]

As for Hoffman, I could only agree if the game in question was being played in May or June. The guy has had a regular season career that is staggering to look at on paper. But in his very few big post season appearances he has been very regular, even not-so-good. Shit, he even crumbled under the pressure of an big spot in an all star game.

Good point, I however like to pick my 'best ever' crew like the media select MVP's... I go with regular season stats only.






Actually that's not true, I just wanted to acknowledge you had a good point.

[Crippler]

I hear ya!

[Bulldogcakes]

Pedro Martinez - Most Dominant Pitcher Ever?

He's always been viewed as one of the most dominant pitchers ever, but does the fact that he obliterated the AL during the steroid era make him the best pitcher ever?

In the two years following McGuire and Sosa's HR battle, Martínez allowed 288 hits and 69 walks in 430 innings, with 597 strikeouts, an 0.83 WHIP, and a 1.90 ERA. Pitching in Fenway Park.



He was my first thought, his best years compare with anything Kofax (http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/koufasa01.shtml)ever did.

If you want someone who did it longer, you could go with Randy Johnson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=2131)from 1993-2002. In that 10 year period he compiled a 194-69 record striking out 3257 and walking 798 in 2434.2 innings while giving up only 1864 hits. His WHIP for that 10 year period was 1.09. Doing a little quick math that makes his average season 19-7 pitching 243 innings with 325 SO.

[Snoogans]

I'm attempting to locate the stats from Shaun McClarty's final season, however they are so ridiculous they are almost hard to believe

[Bulldogcakes]

Pedro on the Expos 7 Red Sox is clearly the best pitcher of all time. Nobody else really comes close in terms of how totally and completely dominant he was. Insanity.

Check my Kofax (http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/koufasa01.shtml)link. He was every bit as good from 62-66.

[Crippler]

I'm attempting to locate the stats from Shaun McClarty's final season, however they are so ridiculous they are almost hard to believe

Fuck that...he was such a flash-in-the-pan.

[Snoogans]

Fuck that...he was such a flash-in-the-pan.

Injuries can ruin careers like that. But to somehow give up over 100 runs in 20 starts and have an ERA under 2 is really a site to behold. I cant tell you the level of defense that was responsible for quality like that

[Bulldogcakes]

Pedro from 1997-2000 was pretty awesome, but this guy was pretty good too:

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2007/writers/frank_deford/06/13/baseball.pitchcounts/t1_gibson.jpg

If were talking a single season, in 1968 he had the greatest season (http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gibsobo01.shtml)any pitcher has ever had.

[TheGameHHH]

I'm attempting to locate the stats from Shaun McClarty's final season, however they are so ridiculous they are almost hard to believe

The Star Ledger called him "one of the most over-hyped pitchers in history"

[Snoogans]

The Star Ledger called him "one of the most over-hyped pitchers in history"

Thas like calling Griffey over hyped. Injuries ruined McClarty's promising career. And real injuries too, not Pavano injuries

[Bulldogcakes]

Just beat me to it Mike. Ryan in his prime was unhittable. You knew he was bringing the heater but you just couldn't catch up with it.


Ryan was a very talented but VERY flawed pitcher. He's the All-Time walks leader (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/BB_p_career.shtml), and its not even close. Almost a thousand more than anyone else. He had seasons where he walked 200+ men. That's just insane. The guys we're talking about will walk around 60-80 in a typical season.

His strikeout #s are insane, his no hitters and one-hitters are amazing. He deserves to be in the HOF. But he didn't know where the fuck the ball was going half the time.

[PhishHead]

McClarty might have been the best pitcher i ever saw in my life.

[TheMojoPin]

Check my Kofax (http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/koufasa01.shtml)link. He was every bit as good from 62-66.

Like we've pointed out, it's all about the eras. Pedro did those numbers against a wider slew of better hitters.

[cougarjake13]

all of you are insane


this conversation begins and ends with


anthony young



http://webzoom.freewebs.com/hofautographmaster/YoungA.jpg

[Snacks]

Check my Kofax (http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/koufasa01.shtml)link. He was every bit as good from 62-66.



i cant call a pitcher dominant if he wouldnt pitcher on jewish holidays!!!

[sailor]

brien taylor

[cougarjake13]

brien taylor

oh yeh i remember him

[Bulldogcakes]

Like we've pointed out, it's all about the eras. Pedro did those numbers against a wider slew of better hitters.


Yeah, I saw that after the post I quoted. If you want to get into ERA+ (which adjust for the league and ballpark) (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/ERAplus_season.shtml) then Pedro's the man. In 2000, he was almost 3 points below (291 ERA+) the adjusted league average ERA. Which is mind boggling and is the best ever for the modern era.

BTW- Maddux deserves more respect around here. He's the only other one close to Pedro.

[cougarjake13]

Yeah, I saw that after the post I quoted. If you want to get into ERA+ (which adjust for the league and ballpark) (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/ERAplus_season.shtml) then Pedro's the man. In 2000, he was almost 3 points below (291 ERA+) the adjusted league average ERA. Which is mind boggling and is the best ever for the modern era.

BTW- Maddux deserves more respect around here. He's the only one close to Pedro.

maddux was never flashy so he goes largely unnoticed

[Snoogans]

Yeah, I saw that after the post I quoted. If you want to get into ERA+ (which adjust for the league and ballpark) (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/ERAplus_season.shtml) then Pedro's the man. In 2000, he was almost 3 points below (291 ERA+) the adjusted league average ERA. Which is mind boggling and is the best ever for the modern era.

BTW- Maddux deserves more respect around here. He's the only other one close to Pedro.

he wasnt dominating, he was a great pitcher, but he gets no respect in this cause he never dominated anything. He could never just blow a guy away. He was a master at control but people just dont think of him dominating because he never overpowered anyone

[Bulldogcakes]

maddux was never flashy so he goes largely unnoticed

And he doesn't throw hard, so some people think he's not as good. His numbers speak for themselves. He proves that you don't have to be a hard thrower to dominate.

"Hitting is about timing, my job is to mess it up"-Warren Spahn

[Bossanova]

Kent Tekulve

[Snoogans]

And he doesn't throw hard, so some people think he's not as good. His numbers speak for themselves. He proves that you don't have to be a hard thrower to dominate.

"Hitting is about timing, my job is to mess it up"-Warren Spahn

Just the opposite, i think. I think dominating has more to do with just numbers or effectively pitching. To dominate, you do have to overpower guys. I do think thats a big part of it

[TheMojoPin]

Who is ignoring Maddux? He's one of the all-time greats, but he's really not up there in terms of the "domination" we're talking about with Pedro? Maddux walked a really fine line, and it usually fell his way, but it could slip up much easier than the guys we're talking about and he'd get lit up.

[Bulldogcakes]

Just the opposite, i think. I think dominating has more to do with just numbers or effectively pitching. To dominate, you do have to overpower guys. I do think thats a big part of it

I don't care how they do it, its all about effectiveness no matter how they get there. There's more than one way to get hitters out.

I think we've all seen guys who can throw the ball 100MPH and can't get anyone out. Mark Wohlers comes to mind. Nolan Ryan struck out more hitters than anyone yet was barely above .500 for his career. A big fastball is a good tool, but its one of many.

Here's the single season ERA+ list

Rank Player (age that year) Adjusted ERA+ Year Throws
1. Tim Keefe+ (23) 294 1880 R
2. Pedro Martinez (28) 291 2000 R
3. Dutch Leonard* (22) 279 1914 L
4. Greg Maddux (28) 271 1994 R
5. Greg Maddux (29) 262 1995 R
6. Walter Johnson+ (25) 259 1913 R
7. Bob Gibson+ (32) 258 1968 R
8. Mordecai Brown+ (29) 253 1906 R
9. Pedro Martinez (27) 243 1999 R
10. Walter Johnson+ (24) 242 1912 R
11. Christy Mathewson+ (24) 230 1905 R
12. Dwight Gooden (20) 228 1985 R
13. Roger Clemens (42) 226 2005 R


That means he was about 2 2/3 runs below the league average ERA in those seasons. To put that in context, only one pitcher (Pedro) has ever done better in the modern era.

[Bulldogcakes]

Who is ignoring Maddux? He's one of the all-time greats, but he's really not up there in terms of the "domination" we're talking about with Pedro? Maddux walked a really fine line, and it usually fell his way, but it could slip up much easier than the guys we're talking about and he'd get lit up.

Yes he is. You're getting overly seduced by fastballs and strikeouts. He's had 2 seasons just short of Pedro's best. Who cares how he does it, the stats speak for themselves.

[Snoogans]

I don't care how they do it, its all about effectiveness no matter how they get there. There's more than one way to get hitters out.




of course, you are missing the point. Why am I surprised. THIS ISNT A BEST OR GREATEST PITCHERS DISCUSSION. No one is denying maddox is one of the best ever. But dominating, not even close. He didnt dominate hitters. Confused, sure, froze, always. He didnt dominate.

Maybe you dont need to throw 100, but you do have to be able to blow a guy away occasionally. Maddox is one of the greats, but he didnt dominate hitters

[Snoogans]

Ill try to use an analogy

If you are a boxer, and you go 40-0-0 with 7 knockouts and win every possible title you could, you will be talked about among the best ever. However, the fact that 33 of your 40 fights went to cards means you never really dominated guys. You were the best, so you always won. But you didnt dominate.

Maddox = 40-0-0 with 7 KO's

Pedro = 35-2-0 with 34 KOs


See the difference?

[Bulldogcakes]

of course, you are missing the point. Why am I surprised. THIS ISNT A BEST OR GREATEST PITCHERS DISCUSSION. No one is denying maddox is one of the best ever. But dominating, not even close. He didnt dominate hitters. Confused, sure, froze, always. He didnt dominate.

Maybe you dont need to throw 100, but you do have to be able to blow a guy away occasionally. Maddox is one of the greats, but he didnt dominate hitters


The whole point of pitching is to get hitters out, right? What difference would it make how you get the job done?

So according to you, Greg Maddux (http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/maddugr01.shtml)wasn't "dominating" when he pitched in 1994 to a 1.56 ERA and in 1995 when he had a 1.63 ERA. Because he didn't strike enough guys out. I think most people would call those seasons dominating and he won Cy Youngs for both.

[Bulldogcakes]

Ill try to use an analogy

If you are a boxer, and you go 40-0-0 with 7 knockouts and win every possible title you could, you will be talked about among the best ever. However, the fact that 33 of your 40 fights went to cards means you never really dominated guys. You were the best, so you always won. But you didnt dominate.

Maddox = 40-0-0 with 7 KO's

Pedro = 35-2-0 with 34 KOs


See the difference?

I understand what you're saying, I just don't agree with it. Not when its about pitchers.

[Doctor Z]

It was fantastic everytime he was on the mound.


Especially if you were a Yankee fan!

[Snoogans]

The whole point of pitching is to get hitters out, right? What difference would it make how you get the job done?

So according to you, Greg Maddux (http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/maddugr01.shtml)wasn't "dominating" when he pitched in 1994 to a 1.56 ERA and in 1995 when he had a 1.63 ERA. Because he didn't strike enough guys out.

see this is where you are mistaking dominating. The whole point of being a good great elite pitcher is geting guys out. To DOMINATE hitters, you have to be able to blow them away.

Like I just said, you can win 50 boxing matches. If you never knocked a guy out, you didnt dominate. But you are still the best.

Being great and dominating arent the same. Domination involves power, intimidation. Putting the fear of them physically not being able to hit you.

You didnt dominate a game if you got 22 ground balls. Guys were hitting it, just not well, but you didnt dominate them, blow them away.

[Snoogans]

I understand what you're saying, I just don't agree with it.

then you dont know what dominating means:
dom·i·nate /ˈdɒməˌneɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dom-uh-neyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -nat·ed, -nat·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to rule over; govern; control.
2. to tower above; overlook; overshadow: A tall pine dominated the landscape.
3. to predominate, permeate, or characterize.
4. Mathematics. (of a series, vector, etc.) to have terms or components greater in absolute value than the corresponding terms or components of a given series, vector, etc.
5. Linguistics. (of a node in a tree diagram) to be connected with (a subordinate node) either directly by a single downward branch or indirectly by a sequence of downward branches.
–verb (used without object)
6. to rule; exercise control; predominate.
7. to occupy a commanding or elevated position.


maddox didnt impose his will. He didnt rule guys or overpower them. Usually more so he fooled them into hitting the ball soft. But he didnt OWN guys.

[TheMojoPin]

Most modern baseball analysts will pick Pedro as the most overall dominant/impressive/skilled/whatever pitcher of the modern era. Plenty of them, and others, will also stack him up there overall. We're not shitting on Maddux...he's a great...but do a qucik search around and you'll see analysis that shows why Pedro is so incredible, in terms of lame intangables and cold, hard overall stats and consideration for the era pitched in.

Maddux is an incredible finesse pitcher, but he's rarely, if ever, a dominant one.

[peteboy379]

While Pedro is a top tier pitcher, I think that Maddux had to be the most skilled with the art of pitching. While he wasn't an overpowering pitcher, he could, and still can fool batters with all of the junk he can throw across the plate. I didn't see anybody mention Santana, Peavey, Jason Schmidt as far as dominating P's.

[TheMojoPin]

While Pedro is a top tier pitcher, I think that Maddux had to be the most skilled with the art of control.

Fixed.

Again, Maddux is awe-inspiring...but his arsenal has been so much more limited than Pedro's. Tha's key to being truly dominant...having so many different ways you can go at a hitter. Maddux was/is just about the control. He's an artist with it, but that's all he was.

[peteboy379]

Fixed.

Again, Maddux is awe-inspiring...but his arsenal has been so much more limited than Pedro's. Tha's key to being truly dominant...having so many different ways you can go at a hitter. Maddux was/is just about the control. He's an artist with it, but that's all he was.

Fixed??? I was never a Maddux fan as such, but I did mean that he was an artisan in pitching with control and finesse being the ways he dominated pitchers. Mojo, frankly I am surprised by a Chicago boy dissing Maddux, well that might be a little harsh, but anyway, you got to see what he could do for a time with your Cubbies.

[TheMojoPin]

Fixed??? I was never a Maddux fan as such, but I did mean that he was an artisan in pitching with control and finesse being the ways he dominated pitchers. Mojo, frankly I am surprised by a Chicago boy dissing Maddux, well that might be a little harsh, but anyway, you got to see what he could do for a time with your Cubbies.

How am I dissing Maddux? Every post, I've said he was one of the greats. I'm simply pointing out that he doesn't have the varied pitching arsenal of the truly all around dominant pitchers.

[peteboy379]

just rattling your cage Mojo. This is coming from a Cardinals Fan, so what do you expect? We have had our share of "dominating" pitchers over the years, but not any in the recent years that I could brag about here.

[TheMojoPin]

just rattling your cage Mojo. This is coming from a Cardinals Fan, so what do you expect? We have had our share of "dominating" pitchers over the years, but not any in the recent years that I could brag about here.

I hear ya. All of ours have basically fallen apart.

[peteboy379]

I hear ya. All of ours have basically fallen apart.

what's sad about all of this is that both teams have had potentially dominating pitchers and they have blown up. Wood, Carpenter, et.al.

[Snoogans]

Seriously, what about Shaun McClarty? ERA under 2, only 1 career homerun allowed, a 16 K game. You people are blind to the facts

[TheMojoPin]

Seriously, what about Shaun McClarty? ERA under 2, only 1 career homerun allowed, a 16 K game. You people are blind to the facts

Guy was a total headcase...literally. He was headbutting everything until a monitor finally knocked him down to size. He was never the same after that.

[Crippler]

Seriously, what about Shaun McClarty? ERA under 2, only 1 career homerun allowed, a 16 K game. You people are blind to the facts

Clearly, he was on the juice. He should be cast aside & shamed just like Clemens will be.

[Snoogans]

I'm numb to these accusations

[TheMojoPin]

I'm numb to these accusations

That's just all the coke working.

[Snoogans]

That's just all the coke working.

Never once in my life have I ever or will I ever touch that shit. Watched too many people get ruined by it.

and seriously, how the fuck did you get 118 posts since 30K already

[bigtim666]

Walter Johnson was the best, the Big Train could throw seeds man the guy was an animal

417 career wins (2nd all-time)
110 career shutouts (1st all-time)
3509 career strikeouts (9th all-time)
Won MVP award in 1913 & 1924
Played in two World Series (1924 and 1925)
An inaugural member of Baseball Hall of Fame
Pitched 56 consecutive scoreless innings, a record that stood until 1968

and you know what Mike Scott and Nolan Ryan were almost unhittable in RBI Baseball

hey " Knowledged-one" any member of ronfez.net could type most "dominant pitcher" in to goooogle and come up with your answer, but thanks for that tidbit

[cougarjake13]

Never once in my life have I ever or will I ever touch that shit. Watched too many people get ruined by it.

and seriously, how the fuck did you get 118 posts since 30K already

like he said

its the coke working

[Snacks]

hey " Knowledged-one" any member of ronfez.net could type most "dominant pitcher" in to goooogle and come up with your answer, but thanks for that tidbit

I was thinking the same thing. Plus Walter Johnson played when there was 10 or so teams, no blacks, asians or hispanics. and back then pitchers started 50+ games a year and pitched the entire game thats why they had so many wins.

[Bulldogcakes]

I was thinking the same thing. Plus Walter Johnson played when there was 10 or so teams, no blacks, asians or hispanics. and back then pitchers started 50+ games a year and pitched the entire game thats why they had so many wins.

You could also argue that the league was half as big as it is now, and expansion has watered things down.

Then you can counter that the league was all white American born then, and is about half white now. So doubling the league was warranted to accomodate the increasing pool of talent.

Then you can say the slider wasn't even invented back then, or the split fingered fastball or the cutter.

Then you can say players didn't even see film of themselves regulary until around the 1940's. And then add medical advances like Tommy John surgery, laser eye surgery, etc. Rotator cuff injuries used to end careers, now its one year off with a procedure and rehab.



I try not to get into comparing eras. You can go back on forth on this stuff and never get anywhere.

[tbagnu]

all of you seem to be forgetting mr. benningtons' fave "lefty" who had 27 wins with a last place team in 1972! and for the majority of his career, even the lord himself couldn't hit his slider!! steve carlton rules!!!!

[Marc with a c]

nobody has ever hit a homerun off my "equalizer" in wiffleball.

[Snoogans]

nobody has ever hit a homerun off my "equalizer" in wiffleball.

I would knock the shit out of your EQUALIZER

[King Hippos Bandaid]

nobody has ever hit a homerun off my "equalizer" in wiffleball.


Id bunt for a single on your Equalizer

[TheMojoPin]

Id bunt for a single on your Equalizer

I'd "accidentally" shoot a linedrive into your gut off of his EQUALIZER.

[PhishHead]

out of all three of you, i think only snoogans would be able to hit it.

[Marc with a c]

out of all three of you, i think only snoogans would be able to hit it.

he wouldn't. i guarentee not a homerun in 20 ABs

[Snoogans]

he wouldn't. i guarentee not a homerun in 20 ABs

he just said hit it. Mojo and Hippos suck so bad they wouldnt even foul one off was basically where Phish was goin. And we will find out Marc. THIS WILL HAPPEN

[PhishHead]

he just said hit it. Mojo and Hippos suck so bad they wouldnt even foul one off was basically where Phish was goin. And we will find out Marc. THIS WILL HAPPEN

exactly! Just a hit not a homer.

[Marc with a c]

i'm sure you'd get a piece of it, but nothing solid.

[Snoogans]

i'm sure you'd get a piece of it, but nothing solid.

that i will take the challenge. I know i can make solid contact, maybe rip a couple liners, and possibly even take one deep. Im am highly skilled at the art of hitting wiffles. I can throw one pretty well too

[King Hippos Bandaid]

we need to meet up for wiffleball

this needs to be done when its warmer

there has to be cool t shirts for each team


Ando's Designs Rule

this was an example for a beer pong team for Spoony Me Ando and someone else I forgot

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y26/Andomray/Pixels/TBSA.jpg

[Marc with a c]

that i will take the challenge. I know i can make solid contact, maybe rip a couple liners, and possibly even take one deep. Im am highly skilled at the art of hitting wiffles. I can throw one pretty well too

we need to get this done. dont fuck with me and wiffleball, i take it personally

[Snoogans]

or you know, we could just dress normal, and hang out. And play a little wiffle ball

[Snoogans]

we need to get this done. dont fuck with me and wiffleball, i take it personally

ill bring a fuckin wiffle bat and ball to the next event i go to and do it in midtown. I dont give a fuck

[King Hippos Bandaid]

or you know, we could just dress normal, and hang out. And play a little wiffle ball


we could do that, as long as there is plenty of beer

[Snoogans]

we could do that, as long as there is plenty of beer

hey dont give out too many secrets of that awesome workout regimine that you have.

[King Hippos Bandaid]

hey dont give out too many secrets of that awesome workout regimine that you have.

Beer Bacon and T Rex Arm Pull Ups

I hide nothing

[Snacks]

Im in for a wiffle ball tournament. Lets do teams of 2. 1 plays the field and other pitches.

I know my cousin (crippler) loves wiffle ball, especially black wiffle ball bats!!!

[eeroomnhoj]

Since the thread is most dominant pitcher ever, shouldn't we consider Cy Young

http://re3.yt-thm-a02.yimg.com/image/25/m5/3250662858

or Christy Matthewson

http://re3.yt-thm-a02.yimg.com/image/25/f11/90553112

[Snoogans]

no. None of them pitch when hitters could even lift up real bats, and none of them did anything but throw straight balls. Anything before 1950 cant even come up without gettin laughed at

[eeroomnhoj]

no. None of them pitch when hitters could even lift up real bats, and none of them did anything but throw straight balls. Anything before 1950 cant even come up without gettin laughed at

Doesn't he still have the record for most wins though?

[Snoogans]

Doesn't he still have the record for most wins though?

yea and I think losses and innings and all kinds of shit, cause all he did was throw was throw straight balls and pitched every day

[TheMojoPin]

Doesn't he still have the record for most wins though?

And wins mean shit. Besides, if we're basing it on an awful stat like pitching wins, how do you ignore he also has, by far, the most pitching losses?

[chubbyknuckles]

no. None of them pitch when hitters could even lift up real bats, and none of them did anything but throw straight balls. Anything before 1950 cant even come up without gettin laughed at

so then steve carlton has to be considered.

[Snoogans]

so then steve carlton has to be considered.

i didnt say anything against Carlton, just dont think, persoanlly, that he did it long enough to jump up in here. Plus, I mean he was from Philly. That alone loses him like 40000% of his votes

[A.J.]

Like my dad says - One game doesnt make a season and one season doesnt make a career

Unless you're Roy Hobbs.

[A.J.]

That's just all the coke working.

Never once in my life have I ever or will I ever touch that shit. Watched too many people get ruined by it.

I believe the lad.

Now if we're talking B-12... :tongue:

[Snacks]

no. None of them pitch when hitters could even lift up real bats, and none of them did anything but throw straight balls. Anything before 1950 cant even come up without gettin laughed at

agreed

Doesn't he still have the record for most wins though?

back then pitchers started 40-50 games and pitched the entire game so they usually got the win and loss because no one else pitched in the game.

[Snoogans]

I believe the lad.

Now if we're talking B-12... :tongue:

you can continue to make coke jokes all you want. I watched my real father leave and eventually die because of it, and Im watching one of my cousins ruin his life with it right now.

Like I said, Ive watched too many people ruin themselves. I have NEVER touched it. So you guy scould fuckin knock off the goddamn jokes ok

[Bulldogcakes]

And wins mean shit. Besides, if we're basing it on an awful stat like pitching wins, how do you ignore he also has, by far, the most pitching losses?

How many times are you going to keep repeating this, Johnny One Note?

[TheMojoPin]

How many times are you going to keep repeating this, Johnny One Note?

Until dumbasses realize it and stop hinging things like HOF voting and Cy Young awards on it over any other pitching stat. It's Joe Morgan-baseball awareness at its dumbest. Like people who assume a hitter that strikes out a lot or has a lower average must automatially suck.

[cougarjake13]

pat zachary

[Bulldogcakes]

Until dumbasses realize it and stop hinging things like HOF voting and Cy Young awards on it over any other pitching stat. It's Joe Morgan-baseball awareness at its dumbest. Like people who assume a hitter that strikes out a lot or has a lower average must automatially suck.

Sounds like a plan, Don Quixote.

[TheMojoPin]

Sounds like a plan, Don Quixote.

Thanks for your support, Joe Morgan.

[Bulldogcakes]

Thanks for your support, Joe Morgan.

Anytime, Neckbeard.


BTW-Any chance we stop right here? I'm running out of names.

[TheMojoPin]

Hey, at least mine was applicable to the issue at hand, Dusty Baker. It's important to have a speedy guy hitting leadoff who can steal a bunch of bases!

OK, BDC, serious question...how important would you rank a pitcher's W-L record?

[TheMojoPin]

Unless you're Roy Hobbs.

Or Adam Greenberg. (http://www.cubsnet.com/node/442)

First and only ML AB and pitch:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/03/25/magazine/25base450.2.jpg

[sailor]

Or Adam Greenberg. (http://www.cubsnet.com/node/442)

First and only ML AB and pitch:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/03/25/magazine/25base450.2.jpg

valerio de los santos is an anti-semite.

[TheMojoPin]

valerio de los santos is an anti-semite.

He just hates anyone who he thinks is going to eat his 16th helping of food.

[Bulldogcakes]

OK, BDC, serious question...how important would you rank a pitcher's W-L record?


I would say that you right, they don't tell you everything you need to know. They are generally a function of your run support, your bullpen, luck, etc. But they do have a value that you don't seem to recognize.

Wins can tell you important little things about a pitcher. Guys who get lots of wins (or decisions either way) tend to be guys who go deep into games, which is one reason why Wang has had so many the past few years. We've also all seen pitchers who can't handle prosperity, consistently give up a lead the minute they get one. Or power pitchers who get frustrated when a few breaks go against them (Like the big Z a few years ago) and muscle up and throw a meatball that costs him a decision. And still others who will gut out a win when they don't have their best stuff. Stuff like that tell you about a pitchers character and experience level. Experienced pitchers know when to go after one guy and when to pitch around another. Its not worthless. As great as most stats are, they're not everything. Very important, but not everything. If they were, teams wouldn't need to hire scouts. They could just look at the stat sheet. There is a human element to baseball, despite what Billy Beane says. Players can also be slumping or banged up, which won't show up on his splits.

If a pitcher has a high win total, it tells me he's on a good team, has had some good luck AND is doing alot of little things right.

[A.J.]

you can continue to make coke jokes all you want. I watched my real father leave and eventually die because of it, and Im watching one of my cousins ruin his life with it right now.

Like I said, Ive watched too many people ruin themselves. I have NEVER touched it. So you guy scould fuckin knock off the goddamn jokes ok

Snoogans -- see my PM.

[TheMojoPin]

I would say that you right, they don't tell you everything you need to know. They are generally a function of your run support, your bullpen, luck, etc. But they do have a value that you don't seem to recognize.

Wins can tell you important little things about a pitcher. Guys who get lots of wins (or decisions either way) tend to be guys who go deep into games, which is one reason why Wang has had so many the past few years. We've also all seen pitchers who can't handle prosperity, consistently give up a lead the minute they get one. Or power pitchers who get frustrated when a few breaks go against them (Like the big Z a few years ago) and muscle up and throw a meatball that costs him a decision. And still others who will gut out a win when they don't have their best stuff. Stuff like that tell you about a pitchers character and experience level. Experienced pitchers know when to go after one guy and when to pitch around another. Its not worthless. As great as most stats are, they're not everything. Very important, but not everything. If they were, teams wouldn't need to hire scouts. They could just look at the stat sheet. There is a human element to baseball, despite what Billy Beane says. Players can also be slumping or banged up, which won't show up on his splits.

If a pitcher has a high win total, it tells me he's on a good team, has had some good luck AND is doing alot of little things right.

I think that's a ridiculous way to track such an important position, especially when so many more accurate and concrete stats are available. There's so many ways to actually track when pitchers tend to flame out or when they're at their worst in a game or when they tend to get in the most trouble than by basically guessing by eyeballing the almost completely subjective L stat. "Gut" and "character" are totally worthless intangables that are meaningless. I'm shocked you didn't toss "heart" and "grit" in there, too. If those are so important and useful, I could field a team of Jeromy Burnitzes to victory. And talking about scouts these days like they rely more on intangabes or just watching a player than their stats is complete fantasy. W-L do little to nothing to proving or explaining intangables OR stats...it's a flawed stat for hard evidence or complete flim-flammery.

Out of the major pitching stats, where would you rank the W-L record's importance?

[Bulldogcakes]

I think that's a ridiculous way to track such an important position, especially when so many more accurate and concrete stats are available. There's so many ways to actually track when pitchers tend to flame out or when they're at their worst in a game or when they tend to get in the most trouble than by basically guessing by eyeballing the almost completely subjective L stat.

Like what? Be specific.

and there's nothing subjective about a starting pitcher who gives up 8 runs when his counterpart pitches a shutout. You're grossly overstating your case.

"Gut" and "character" are totally worthless intangables that are meaningless. I'm shocked you didn't toss "heart" and "grit" in there, too. If those are so important and useful, I could field a team of Jeromy Burnitzes to victory.

Find where I used the word "gut" which you quoted. Also, I guess according to you players are robots who never are affected by pressure or stuff that might be going on off the field. There's not a manager in Baseball who'd agree with you. Old School or Tony LaRussa types. Also, your myopic viewpoint misses the bigger picture. There are times to go with splits and times to use your eyes. A manager would be a complete idiot if he sat blindly in the dugout as his pitcher gets shelacked because his #s are good against that particular team. It's not an either-or between stats and judgement. Both approaches have validity and its about striking a balance between the two. Unfortunately, many managers tend to fall too far into one camp or the other, to their own teams detriment.


And talking about scouts these days like they rely more on intangabes or just watching a player than their stats is complete fantasy. W-L do little to nothing to proving or explaining intangables OR stats...it's a flawed stat for hard evidence or complete flim-flammery.


Really? First of all, you completely misread what I wrote, so no point getting into your responding to something I never wrote. Second,

"As great as most stats are, they're not everything. Very important, but not everything. If they were, teams wouldn't need to hire scouts"

is a reworked quote from former Angels GM Bill Stoneman, who built their WS team. I'll take his word on the subject as being more informed than yours or mine. It also doesn't refer to "intangibles" as you injected, it refers to whether a player is banged up or slumping, as I already stated. Advance scouting is about looking for most recent strengths/weaknesses/tendencies. Players at the major league level often have to make adjustments, and scouting is about staying on top of them. A player batting .150 in his last 40 AB's is a nice stat, but you need to use your eyes to see exactly why that's happening. Could be nothing more than a lefty hitter facing a string of tough lefthanders, or it could be he's banged up and can't protect the outside of the plate.

I'm a big believer in stats, and if you paid any attention to my previous posts you'd know that. One of my main critcisms of Torre was his stressing his personal loyalty over matchups in the post season. But you read what you want to and skip over the parts that don't fit your agenda. Oh well. My posts are pretty clear to anyone who's fair minded.


Out of the major pitching stats, where would you rank the W-L record's importance?

See my first post. I think I was pretty clear. Why on earth would I respond to that again when you clearly haven't made any attempt to understand my first answer? Are looking for some mindless 1-10 ranking? I haven't thought about it that way and think it would be a waste of time to do so.

[underdog]

Out of the major pitching stats, where would you rank the W-L record's importance?

2nd. Right behind "Do they pitch for the Yankees".

[TheMojoPin]

Like what? Be specific.

and there's nothing subjective about a starting pitcher who gives up 8 runs when his counterpart pitches a shutout. You're grossly overstating your case.

What does this scenario have to do with W-L's telling us anything?

They track how many hits a pitcher gives up. How many walks. How many home runs. They track which innings they tend to do it most in. Which players they struggle with. How many guys are on base when it tends to happen to them. They track whether they're more likely to do it in a day game or at night. At home or on the road, etc., etc., etc. Almost any scenario is tracked. We don't need to read into something as non-informative as a pitcher's W-L at all because pretty much all of the non-intangables you alluded to can be studied and tracked very precisely.

Find where I used the word "gut" which you quoted.

OK, right here:

[sheepy horn]And still others who will gut out a win when they don't have their best stuff.[/sheepy horn]

Also, I guess according to you players are robots who never are affected by pressure or stuff that might be going on off the field. There's not a manager in Baseball who'd agree with you. Old School or Tony LaRussa types.

And how does any of that make pitching W-L records a valuable or useful stat?

Also, your myopic viewpoint misses the bigger picture.

MY myopic view? I'm not the one that gloms onto worthless stats and meaningless intangibles and ignores the slew of evidence to the contrary.

There are times to go with splits and times to use your eyes. A manager would be a complete idiot if he sat blindly in the dugout as his pitcher gets shelacked because his #s are good against that particular team.

Where in God's name did I say anything even remotely close to leaving a pitcher in if he's getting shelled?

It's not an either-or between stats and judgement. Both approaches have validity and its about striking a balance between the two. Unfortunately, many managers tend to fall too far into one camp or the other, to their own teams detriment.

Agreed, though I think the majority fall into the "manage by the gut camp."

Really? First of all, you completely misread what I wrote, so no point getting into your responding to something I never wrote. Second,

I've read exactly what you've written...pitching W-L records are a valuable stat. That's what this is all about.

"As great as most stats are, they're not everything. Very important, but not everything. If they were, teams wouldn't need to hire scouts"

is a reworked quote from former Angels GM Bill Stoneman, who built their WS team. I'll take his word on the subject as being more informed than yours or mine. It also doesn't refer to "intangibles" as you injected, it refers to whether a player is banged up or slumping, as I already stated. Advance scouting is about looking for most recent strengths/weaknesses/tendencies. Players at the major league level often have to make adjustments, and scouting is about staying on top of them. A player batting .150 in his last 40 AB's is a nice stat, but you need to use your eyes to see exactly why that's happening. Could be nothing more than a lefty hitter facing a string of tough lefthanders, or it could be he's banged up and can't protect the outside of the plate.

I didn't say stats are everything. What I AM saying is that with all the advanced stat keeping and tracking we have now, they are infinitely more valuable than anyone...scout, GM, manager, coach, whatever...just watching the game. Modern baseball is a game of too many different legit and tracked factors for anyone to keep them straight or be aware of them over the course of a single game. I don't give a rat's ass if Stonema won a WS. The White Sox lucked into one because they had a bunch of guys have career years in terms of hitting and power and they smacked the hell out of the ball, yet you will find scores of people who say they did it through a mythical sense of "White Sox small ball" and "pitching over anything else" that they of course "saw." In the long run, stats are more important than observation. Of course, coaches and managers are there to make snap judgements...but if they're doing them without a basic understanding of the stat variables, they're morons. And in no way could any of this possibly be taken as suggesting that a pitcher getting creamed should be left in a game.

I'm a big believer in stats, and if you paid any attention to my previous posts you'd know that. One of my main critcisms of Torre was his stressing his personal loyalty over matchups in the post season. But you read what you want to and skip over the parts that don't fit your agenda. Oh well. My posts are pretty clear to anyone who's fair minded.

You're a big believer in selective stats. You often misread stats and prop up weaker or worthless ones and ignore the big picture. You're a horrible baseball analyst on almost every level. That's not saying you're a bad fan...but you have a terrible demonstrated understanding of the mechanics and details of modern baseball.

See my first post. I think I was pretty clear. Why on earth would I respond to that again when you clearly haven't made any attempt to understand my first answer? Are looking for some mindless 1-10 ranking? I haven't thought about it that way and think it would be a waste of time to do so.

Why not? It would be very easy to do. Which pitching stat do you think is the most valuable to judge a pitcher if you had to pick one at a moment's notice?

[cougarjake13]

is there no love for the great craig swan ????

[TeeBone]

What does this scenario have to do with W-L's telling us anything?

They track how many hits a pitcher gives up. How many walks. How many home runs. They track which innings they tend to do it most in. Which players they struggle with. How many guys are on base when it tends to happen to them. They track whether they're more likely to do it in a day game or at night. At home or on the road, etc., etc., etc. Almost any scenario is tracked. We don't need to read into something as non-informative as a pitcher's W-L at all because pretty much all of the non-intangables you alluded to can be studied and tracked very precisely.



OK, right here:





And how does any of that make pitching W-L records a valuable or useful stat?



MY myopic view? I'm not the one that gloms onto worthless stats and meaningless intangibles and ignores the slew of evidence to the contrary.



Where in God's name did I say anything even remotely close to leaving a pitcher in if he's getting shelled?



Agreed, though I think the majority fall into the "manage by the gut camp."



I've read exactly what you've written...pitching W-L records are a valuable stat. That's what this is all about.



I didn't say stats are everything. What I AM saying is that with all the advanced stat keeping and tracking we have now, they are infinitely more valuable than anyone...scout, GM, manager, coach, whatever...just watching the game. Modern baseball is a game of too many different legit and tracked factors for anyone to keep them straight or be aware of them over the course of a single game. I don't give a rat's ass if Stonema won a WS. The White Sox lucked into one because they had a bunch of guys have career years in terms of hitting and power and they smacked the hell out of the ball, yet you will find scores of people who say they did it through a mythical sense of "White Sox small ball" and "pitching over anything else" that they of course "saw." In the long run, stats are more important than observation. Of course, coaches and managers are there to make snap judgements...but if they're doing them without a basic understanding of the stat variables, they're morons. And in no way could any of this possibly be taken as suggesting that a pitcher getting creamed should be left in a game.



You're a big believer in selective stats. You often misread stats and prop up weaker or worthless ones and ignore the big picture. You're a horrible baseball analyst on almost every level. That's not saying you're a bad fan...but you have a terrible demonstrated understanding of the mechanics and details of modern baseball.



Why not? It would be very easy to do. Which pitching stat do you think is the most valuable to judge a pitcher if you had to pick one at a moment's notice?

This might be the most horrifying post in the history of the Board. You're the best, but c'mon, Pin.

[A.J.]

Pedro from 1997-2000 was pretty awesome, but this guy was pretty good too:

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2007/writers/frank_deford/06/13/baseball.pitchcounts/t1_gibson.jpg

If were talking a single season, in 1968 he had the greatest season (http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gibsobo01.shtml)any pitcher has ever had.

Good article on Gibson and the 1968 season. (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blackhistory2008/columns/story?page=keri/080221)

[Furtherman]

all of you seem to be forgetting mr. benningtons' fave "lefty" who had 27 wins with a last place team in 1972! and for the majority of his career, even the lord himself couldn't hit his slider!! steve carlton rules!!!!

Reading this thread... it's about time!!

Steve Carlton (http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/carltst01.shtml)

so then steve carlton has to be considered.

Of course!

i didnt say anything against Carlton, just dont think, persoanlly, that he did it long enough to jump up in here. Plus, I mean he was from Philly. That alone loses him like 40000% of his votes

You're misguided hate for Philly is irrelevant here.

Granted his dominance didn't have the consistency as Pedro's, he was still a force to be reckon with for many seasons. If anything would take away votes, it would be his pride. He should have retired in '84 (and gone out on a high note - I remember the game he hit a grand slam to win it!) but he stuck around for another 4 embarrassing years.


http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=68672&rendTypeId=4

[PD]

http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/rank?versionId=1&listId=97