Top 10 poll: #8 player ever

[LHG]

SERIOUSLY discussed…

He should already be ranked by now. I'm seriously considering dropping out. This poll has lost all credibility.

 

[chappee11]

I am listing them based on how many votes the received in the previous round. That tends to put the more likely candidates at the top. And I don’t know who I will be adding at the bottom until I get there.

Cheerfully withdrawn!

 

[chappee11]

Well, he should have been off the boards a couple rounds ago....

This is so difficult. Especially since none of us ever saw him play. Who are you bumping from the current list, though?

 

[calsnowskier]

No pitcher, in my mind, should get in on this list before Johnson.
166.9 career WAR (only Ruth bests that among any MLB players ever to have played)
91.1 WAR7 (best in MLB history, even better than Ruth's)
147 ERA+ (4th best in history)
Still holds the record for most career shutouts
Held the most strikeouts in a career record for nearly 40 years
Largely the only really good pitcher on the Senators for a long time
I think he should have been getting serious consideration at the number 3 spot so its borderline criminal that he isn't running away with it at 8th

My 2nd vote is for Cy Young. I don't how devalued wins are now, 511 is legendary. His career WAR (163.6) is just a notch below Johnson's. The dude has a freaking award named after him. How many other players can claim that kind of legendary status (or could, if they were still alive)?

My 3rd vote is for Rogers Hornsby. Best position player left on the board, in my opinion.

And I think Speaker (who is a step ahead, not below Wagner, remember we had this conversation in a previous thread. I thought you acknowledged that), Musial and Wagner are all a bit higher than Mantle (although it is really close between Musial, Wagner and Mantle). Roger Clemens also enters the conversation with Musial, Wagner and Mantle.

We had the WAR discussion regarding pitchers either here or on the Giants board recently. Personally, I dont like WAR for pitchers. Pitching is just way to specialized to use as a comparative stat.

Not that I disagree with your conclusion that Johnson should be considered. I just don’t subscribe to the arguments you are using to get there.

 

[calsnowskier]

He should already be ranked by now. I'm seriously considering dropping out. This poll has lost all credibility.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

No pitcher, in my mind, should get in on this list before Johnson.
166.9 career WAR (only Ruth bests that among any MLB players ever to have played)
91.1 WAR7 (best in MLB history, even better than Ruth's)
147 ERA+ (4th best in history)
Still holds the record for most career shutouts
Held the most strikeouts in a career record for nearly 40 years
Largely the only really good pitcher on the Senators for a long time
I think he should have been getting serious consideration at the number 3 spot so its borderline criminal that he isn't running away with it at 8th

My 2nd vote is for Cy Young. I don't how devalued wins are now, 511 is legendary. His career WAR (163.6) is just a notch below Johnson's. The dude has a freaking award named after him. How many other players can claim that kind of legendary status (or could, if they were still alive)?

My 3rd vote is for Rogers Hornsby. Best position player left on the board, in my opinion.

And I think Speaker (who is a step ahead, not below Wagner, remember we had this conversation in a previous thread. I thought you acknowledged that), Musial and Wagner are all a bit higher than Mantle (although it is really close between Musial, Wagner and Mantle). Roger Clemens also enters the conversation with Musial, Wagner and Mantle.

well, he has been the only pitcher getting to the next round... and looks to remain that way...

but you have to also realize that the only knock on him is when he played...

he played in an era where there was no HOME RUNS( all his best seasons were from 1910-1919), he played in an era with only 8 AL Teams, he played in an era where pitchers pitched over 300 innings per season... he pitched in an era without any minorities...

no, he shouldnt get penalized for playing when he did... but you also have to identify that his numbers are certainly exaggerated due to when he played...

 

[TheGoodMan19]

Saw him at the Roundabout Theatre back in the day, tremendous show…..

The man played one game in his sock and no one can say his name without saying "Shoeless". As if he legally changed it like Marvelous Marvin Hagler. To call him Crooked Joe Jackson would be more appropriate

 

[MilkSpiller22]

The man played one game in his sock and no one can say his name without saying "Shoeless". As if he legally changed it like Marvelous Marvin Hagler. To call him Crooked Joe Jackson would be more appropriate

true... nobody calls Curt Schilling Ketchup socks....

 

[LHG]

We had the WAR discussion regarding pitchers either here or on the Giants board recently. Personally, I dont like WAR for pitchers. Pitching is just way to specialized to use as a comparative stat.

Not that I disagree with your conclusion that Johnson should be considered. I just don’t subscribe to the arguments you are using to get there.

well, he has been the only pitcher getting to the next round... and looks to remain that way...

but you have to also realize that the only knock on him is when he played...

he played in an era where there was no HOME RUNS( all his best seasons were from 1910-1919), he played in an era with only 8 AL Teams, he played in an era where pitchers pitched over 300 innings per season... he pitched in an era without any minorities...

no, he shouldnt get penalized for playing when he did... but you also have to identify that his numbers are certainly exaggerated due to when he played...

I think WAR is nebulous enough that it should get equal footing for hitters and pitchers. If you look at pitchers, in general, their career WAR is lower than hitters with the same amount of playing time, so I am fine using it.

I'm curious how you two would measure pitchers' effectiveness through stats. Do you just keep pushing them down the list because they are pitchers? Yes, they only contribute once every 5 days but good pitchers are contributing more on those games than any hitter would (with exceptions, of course).

As for the era, yes, there were fewer teams, but I think that balances out a bit the fact that minorities didn't play then. The idea is that lack of minorities caused diluted talent in the league but people also say expansion dilutes the talent in the league. Can you really have it both ways? And ERA+ is supposed to be independent of the quality of the league anyway. It shows dominance relative to the rest of the league so, when comparing ERA+ , it can be determined if a guy who dominated in the 90s versus a guy who dominated in the 30s was better or worse.

 

[Wazmankg]

Pitchers should have their own category imo. I went with Hornsby.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I think WAR is nebulous enough that it should get equal footing for hitters and pitchers. If you look at pitchers, in general, their career WAR is lower than hitters with the same amount of playing time, so I am fine using it.

I'm curious how you two would measure pitchers' effectiveness through stats. Do you just keep pushing them down the list because they are pitchers? Yes, they only contribute once every 5 days but good pitchers are contributing more on those games than any hitter would (with exceptions, of course).

As for the era, yes, there were fewer teams, but I think that balances out a bit the fact that minorities didn't play then. The idea is that lack of minorities caused diluted talent in the league but people also say expansion dilutes the talent in the league. Can you really have it both ways? And ERA+ is supposed to be independent of the quality of the league anyway. It shows dominance relative to the rest of the league so, when comparing ERA+ , it can be determined if a guy who dominated in the 90s versus a guy who dominated in the 30s was better or worse.

i am ok having a pitcher be in the top 10... i aint pushing down the position... the problem with pitcher is the who do you start with question is just not as clear... and then there is Clemens, who gets the same negativity as Bonds... so people might have a hard time starting with him...

it is an accepted belief that when you compare eras, that elites would have been elites no matter when they played, but the average and below average players have gradually been improving

i brought this up earlier, in an earlier thread.... but it is not a coincidence that the last .400 BA was in 1941... stats are just so much harder to reach now... that is not saying elite players now are better than they were back then either...

But ERA+ is just as flawed as a statistic as any other... there has not been any good stat to compare different eras... so it is all up to you and how you want to judge...

 

[calsnowskier]

And I think Speaker (who is a step ahead, not below Wagner, remember we had this conversation in a previous thread. I thought you acknowledged that), Musial and Wagner are all a bit higher than Mantle (although it is really close between Musial, Wagner and Mantle). Roger Clemens also enters the conversation with Musial, Wagner and Mantle.

I THINK what I said was that I was moving Wagner above Hornsby, but that Speaker was below both. I would need to find that discussion to refresh my memory, though. I think that was in the #7 nom thread…

 

[MilkSpiller22]

also, it is weird... Walter Johnson, is argued to be the best pitcher of all time... but he doesnt have legend... the average fan doesnt even know who Johnson is...

but they have heard of CY young, Sandy Koufax, Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, etc...

 

[Cedrique]

also, it is weird... Walter Johnson, is argued to be the best pitcher of all time... but he doesnt have legend... the average fan doesnt even know who Johnson is...

but they have heard of CY young, Sandy Koufax, Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, etc...

I think Johnson actually has more legend than Cy Young. But at some point, someone decided the Walter Johnson Award was too clumsy of a name to honor pitchers. So here we are....

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I think Johnson actually has more legend than Cy Young. But at some point, someone decided the Walter Johnson Award was too clumsy of a name to honor pitchers. So here we are....

of course the award is going to make Young more recognized... but i just dont think Johnson has much of a legend... He has only one one WS, and was not the reason they won, as he had a losing record in that WS...

 

[Clayton]

If we're talking legends we're talking Mantle, Musial, and Clemente, I'd imagine.

 

[jon2tanman]

I've seen Ichiro change up his swing during batting practice and he hit about 8 out in a row. As far as ohtani goes it is way too early for him to even be considered. Trout has a better career if they both retired today, and like someone posted earlier we have seen hall of fame talent fizzle. Darryl Strawberry for instance

 

[calsnowskier]

also, it is weird... Walter Johnson, is argued to be the best pitcher of all time... but he doesnt have legend... the average fan doesnt even know who Johnson is...

but they have heard of CY young, Sandy Koufax, Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, etc...

CY has the award. Koufax had a great run in LA. Randy and Clemens are recent.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

CY has the award. Koufax had a great run in LA. Randy and Clemens are recent.

i know... but my point was simply, for an all time great, he has a very quiet legend... i find it weird...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I've seen Ichiro change up his swing during batting practice and he hit about 8 out in a row. As far as ohtani goes it is way too early for him to even be considered. Trout has a better career if they both retired today, and like someone posted earlier we have seen hall of fame talent fizzle. Darryl Strawberry for instance

ohtani is only getting the votes because he has done things that none of us ever saw... and that by itself is good reason to over-rate him...

but i think we all know that we are over-rating him...