POLL Top 10 poll: #28 player in history - Runoff

[calsnowskier]

The Koufax triple crowns were MLB not just NL
The Koufax Cy Young’s were MBB not just NL.

Great point. But Koufax played pre-expansion, so it isn’t like the CY pool was 28 teams deep. There only 20 teams in all of MLB in ‘66. Sure, that’s more than the 15 team-pool that Kershaw competed in, but let’s understand what we are saying here.

I will absolutely concede your point, though.

 

[calsnowskier]

I think a lot of people have been doing the 'if I could have this pitcher for one game' test and in that case I could see a lot of people taking Koufax over Kershaw. Kershaw definitely had the better career, though

I don’t understand that stance. How do you not go with Juan Marichal if that is your criteria? Or Kerry Wood or Harvey Haddix?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

One of the legs of the pitchers triple crown is wins.

The defense rests, your honor.

And one of the legs for offense is rbis. Both have team factors to it.

Is wins a perfect stat?? Absolutely not. But pretending it is a zero stat is just as wrong.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Great point. But Koufax played pre-expansion, so it isn’t like the CY pool was 28 teams deep. There only 20 teams in all of MLB in ‘66. Sure, that’s more than the 15 team-pool that Kershaw competed in, but let’s understand what we are saying here.

I will absolutely concede your point, though.

I made that point earlier. You are right there is a difference. But the argument against it which was made when I made the same argument you are now was that the added teams would not have added on the best player in baseball it would have added more lower level players.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

And for argument’s sake, let’s say that Koufax’s 5-years = Kershaw’s 5-years.

Than the argument is over. Kershaw was a still a very good to great pitcher outside of ‘11-‘15. Koufax was a #3/#4 pitcher outside his 5-year run.

Hell, you want to argue that Koufax’s run was actually 6 years instead of 5 (a valid argument, btw)? Fine. Would you rather add 2010 or 2016 to Kershaw’s run? Both are superior to Koufax’s 1961 season. Heck, you could argue that Kershaw’s consecutive peak ran from ‘09 - ‘19. His ‘20 was solid, but he only made 10 starts that year (for some reason).

Take away Koufax’s legend factor (well earned, btw), and remove any anti-recency bias, and there really isn’t any comparison between the two.

But it’s not just the 5 seasons. It’s the accomplishments he had in those 5 seasons. What he did in those 5 years is more than most did in their career. Including kershaw(although kershaw is almost a tie).

 

[LHG]

And one of the legs for offense is rbis. Both have team factors to it.

Is wins a perfect stat?? Absolutely not. But pretending it is a zero stat is just as wrong.

I think you are the only one who talks RBIs in these posts.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I think you are the only one who talks RBIs in these posts.

What’s your point?? Sure I brought up rbis before in here. But that wasn’t the context here.

I posted to Cal for saying that pitcher triple crowns don’t matter because of wins. And pointed out that hitters triple crown used rbis. And both have a team factor.

 

[calsnowskier]

And one of the legs for offense is rbis. Both have team factors to it.

Is wins a perfect stat?? Absolutely not. But pretending it is a zero stat is just as wrong.

I don’t remember touting the hitter’s triple crown. Heck, BA is an antiquated stat, imho.

 

[Hbomb]

But it’s not just the 5 seasons. It’s the accomplishments he had in those 5 seasons. What he did in those 5 years is more than most did in their career. Including kershaw(although kershaw is almost a tie).

Those 5 were great although 2 of them were cut short due to injuries so who knows how much more we could have seen.

That bonus baby nonsense halted his development. He did have a great 1959 World Series so there were glimpses early.

His short career shouldn’t take away from his greatness. Bobby Orr and Mario Lemieux are both considered top 5 all time despite short careers due to injury.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I don’t remember touting the hitter’s triple crown. Heck, BA is an antiquated stat, imho.

Never said you were touting it. But last thread when we mentioned Frank Robinson doing it you never commented negatively to it.

In fact when I made the comment that Koufax had 3 ( most in MLB history) compared to Robinson 1 you commented that you didn’t know Koufax was a hitter. Implying that the offense triple crown has more merit(whether that’s how you meant it or not is irrelevant).

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Those 5 were great although 2 of them were cut short due to injuries so who knows how much more we could have seen.

That bonus baby nonsense halted his development. He did have a great 1959 World Series so there were glimpses early.

His short career shouldn’t take away from his greatness. Bobby Orr and Mario Lemieux are both considered top 5 all time despite short careers due to injury.

I don’t care whether kershaw beats Koufax. I just find it funny that the rub on Koufax is that he did it for such a short period of time. But those 5 seasons might have been the most accomplished 5 seasons in MLB history(and more accomplishments than any other quesitonable BPA pitcher careers)

3 CY (1 MVP)
3 triple crowns( most in MLB history)
2 BPOT
2 ws mvps

If 5 seasons of your career matchup with everyone else’s career numbers then yes you do belong. If not should be the next best pitcher.

The legend status he earned should increase his value.

 

[eaglesnut]

Analytics are silly if they are trying to ignore hitting and base runners.

Hitting and base running IS the offensive game of baseball.

Batting average and RBIs matter.

 

[eaglesnut]

I don’t care whether kershaw beats Koufax. I just find it funny that the rub on Koufax is that he did it for such a short period of time. But those 5 seasons might have been the most accomplished 5 seasons in MLB history(and more accomplishments than any other quesitonable BPA pitcher careers)

3 CY (1 MVP)
3 triple crowns( most in MLB history)
2 BPOT
2 ws mvps

If 5 seasons of your career matchup with everyone else’s career numbers then yes you do belong. If not should be the next best pitcher.

The legend status he earned should increase his value.

No way is this exercise an exercise in best primes.

If koufax deserved this spot on the list then he would have taken ibuprofen every five days and kept pitching.

Not giving us longevity is taking something away from the game of baseball, not adding to it. Koufax added to it for 5 years. Most of the guys on this list so far have added to the game of baseball for 15+ years.

 

[redseat]

Voted

 

[chappee11]

I’m pretty sure that Kershaw >>> Koufax(and it doesn’t look particularly close, either). But I’m not sure I’d take Kershaw over Verlander(and probably Carlton and Seaver, too). Regardless, Koufax seems way early at these levels. He would fit nicely in the 40’s somewhere.

 

[msgkings322]

Just want to remind everyone...actual baseball has technically started but for real it starts in 4 days

This is excellent news!

 

[calsnowskier]

I’m pretty sure that Kershaw >>> Koufax(and it doesn’t look particularly close, either). But I’m not sure I’d take Kershaw over Verlander(and probably Carlton and Seaver, too). Regardless, Koufax seems way early at these levels. He would fit nicely in the 40’s somewhere.

I have Bench, Yogi, Ott and Kershaw definitely over Koufax. Maybe Trout, Verlander and Alexander. I think putting him in the 40s is a bit extreme, but agree with your broader point.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I’m pretty sure that Kershaw >>> Koufax(and it doesn’t look particularly close, either). But I’m not sure I’d take Kershaw over Verlander(and probably Carlton and Seaver, too). Regardless, Koufax seems way early at these levels. He would fit nicely in the 40’s somewhere.

im stumping Koufax because i do think his achievements make him belong in question for next pitcher...

but i think i have said this already that my next pitcher is Seaver...

but i do think i have Koufax over Kershaw... but to me that is so close, that i can change my mind regularly...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I have Bench, Yogi, Ott and Kershaw definitely over Koufax. Maybe Trout, Verlander and Alexander. I think putting him in the 40s is a bit extreme, but agree with your broader point.

my next offense is Morgan... i am very down on trout... but at this point i dont know if i am being too hard on trout...

my thing about trout is that he has such an incomplete career... sure, he hasnt retired yet so he can definitely complete it...

but he lacks all three of my checkmarks to overlook any shortcomings: BPOT, longevity milestones, and any single season with SPECIAL numbers...