Baseball Fans: Pedro Martinez HOFer?

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Pedro without a doubt is first ballot. I was watching a game a month or so ago and they compared his stats RIGHT NOW to Sandy Koufax... He already has better numbers than Koufax, granted he hasn't won the WS yet. Factor in what others said above, his ERA vs the League/his peers and he's got to be top 5 most dominant pitchers of ALL TIME (stuff wise).

.

I don't think he'd be one of the 5 most dominate pitcher of the 60's let alone of all time. I'd take Koufax, Marichal,Drysdale,Gibson and Denny Mclain over him

There are two ways you can look at this, if you had a WS and could only pitch 5 pitchers, who would they be (spanning across all eras). Or you could look at the 5 most dominant pitchers relative to their respective eras. Pedro has FIVE pitches he can get you out on, whereas guys from other eras typically only had 2 or 3... there was no such thing as a screw ball, forkball, or splitter in some of those guys you mentioned's eras. Pedro has to pitch in a predominantly geared hitter's era, not pitchers. The hitters are stronger, faster, and take supplements. True, the pitchers do too, but do they throw any harder than the past? You can make an argument that even back in the day there were 100mph pitchers, just as there are today so the argument that better training doesn't work for pure talent alone (maybe longevity).

I will stick to my opinion that Pedro would get Babe Ruth out (many of those K's) 9 out of 10 times if the Babe were alive today... This is to prove a point, that the best pitcher of our era (which is probably the best hitting era ever, look at the Red Sox, they have just set the record for most extra base hits, and slg %), could easily handle the best hitter of past eras IMO. The Babe never saw a 95mph heater and on the next pitch, a 75mph changeup at different eye levels, and both with movement... This is how I've come to the conclusion that Pedro is top 5 most dominant pitchers of all time stuff wise.

You forgot the most important aspect, toughness and compared to the 5 I mentioned Pedro is a wuss.

 

[dman]

This season he'd have a few more wins if the closers didn't suck so bad.

His lifetime ERA should be enough to get him into HOF. Especially compared to most others.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Pedro (at this point in his career) is often compared with Koufax because Koufax had a relatively short career for a HOF pitcher, 12 seasons, 165 wins.

If you want to argue that Pedro doesn't deserve to get in YET because he hasn't played long enough, well, i'd say compare his numbers to Koufax and they are very similar with Pedro having the edge quite a few times. I can't argue toughness, it's always difficult to compare a primarily AL pitcher (tho pedro did spend almost half his career so far in the NL) with an NL pitcher.

AL pitchers are like DH's they have soo many advantages, the DH for one is an advantage, they will never get pulled out of a game in order to get a better hitter in the lineup etc.

and AL pitchers don't have to hit against their counterparts meaning they can throw at people without fear of reprisal (the biggest knock against clemens yes?) at least pedro spent 5 or 6 seasons in the NL.

the ONLY knock against pedro up to now, is his lack of toughness, he spends too much time on injury reserver, people have surmised that part of the problem is he's generating too much velocity from what is really by power pitcher standards a pretty small body.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Pedro (at this point in his career) is often compared with Koufax because Koufax had a relatively short career for a HOF pitcher, 12 seasons, 165 wins.

If you want to argue that Pedro doesn't deserve to get in YET because he hasn't played long enough, well, i'd say compare his numbers to Koufax and they are very similar with Pedro having the edge quite a few times.

How many No Hitters and Perfect Games has Pedro Pitched? How Many Cy Young Awards (Keep in mind when Koufax won all of his it was for the best Pitcher in Baseball, not per League) Alsao how manyWS Games has Pedro Won? I can assure you that the Red Sox of Pedro's tenure were/are a much better offensive team than the Dodgers were during Koufax's era.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I haven't read this whole thread, but here's my opinion and I'm not sure if it's been stated before.

If Pedro Martinez retired today, he would be a first ballot hall of famer. Sandy Koufax was inducted because of his greatness over a 6 year period. Koufax is considered a legend and some people say he was the most dominant pitcher ever. But you know what? Pedro Martinez has a far more dominant 6 year span than Koufax does. Most people don't want to admit this probably because of the legend that Koufax became and how some people view Pedro as arrogant (similar to how people hate Bonds), but if you look at the statistics, it's true. To me, Koufax is fairly overrated. Most people don't even realize that he pitched in a great pitcher's park for his great years. Just look at a comparison of their ERA+ (not the greatest but a quick glimpse)...ERA+ (the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average).

Koufax:
124
143
161
187
160
190

Pedro:
221
160
245
285
189 (half season)
196

In 2000, the league average ERA was 4.97. Pedro had a 1.74 ERA.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Pedro (at this point in his career) is often compared with Koufax because Koufax had a relatively short career for a HOF pitcher, 12 seasons, 165 wins.

If you want to argue that Pedro doesn't deserve to get in YET because he hasn't played long enough, well, i'd say compare his numbers to Koufax and they are very similar with Pedro having the edge quite a few times.

How many No Hitters and Perfect Games has Pedro Pitched? How Many Cy Young Awards (Keep in mind when Koufax won all of his it was for the best Pitcher in Baseball, not per League) Alsao how manyWS Games has Pedro Won? I can assure you that the Red Sox of Pedro's tenure were/are a much better offensive team than the Dodgers were during Koufax's era.

red sox THIS season may have been a far superior offensive team, but you can't say the same for every season i'm sure.

Koufax 137 CG to Pedro 41 CG (not a fair comparison because the Closer didn't even exist as we know it now back then).

Shutouts Koufax 40 to Pedro 15

ERA Koufax 2.76 to Pedro 2.59 with ironically his BEST years coming in the AL. AL pitchers will consistently put up higher ERA's than NL pitchers all other factors equal because of the DH.

K's Koufax 2396 Pedro 2424

IP Koufax 2324 Pedro 2076

so, they are pretty comparable. WS is a function of TEAM and not Player, one dominant pitcher CANNOT win the WS, unless he pitches 3 games in a 5 game series and 4 games in a 7 game series.

 

[Ynog]

I have to say you cannot throw in No Hitters and Perfect Games in there.

Example - Clemens - 0, Pedro - 0, Maddux - 0, Drysdale - 0 and more if I look.

Yet you have Nomo - 2, Lowe - 1.

No Hitters and Perfect Games have a bit of luck involved in them. So you cannot
measure pitchers on them. Otherwise you say that Nomo and Wells are better than Clemens and Pedro.
I don't think so.

And you really cannot blame a pitcher for his team. How many WS rings does Ted Williams own. Is he
still not one of the best hitters to play the game. If Pedro had played in the World Series and lost. Then
yes. But he cannot be held accountable for the games he doesn't pitch.

I'm not necessarily saying Pedro is better, just you cannot blame him for things that aren't in his control.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I haven't read this whole thread, but here's my opinion and I'm not sure if it's been stated before.

If Pedro Martinez retired today, he would be a first ballot hall of famer. Sandy Koufax was inducted because of his greatness over a 6 year period. Koufax is considered a legend and some people say he was the most dominant pitcher ever. But you know what? Pedro Martinez has a far more dominant 6 year span than Koufax does. Most people don't want to admit this probably because of the legend that Koufax became, but if you look at the statistics, it's true. To me, Koufax is fairly overrated. Most people don't even realize that he pitched in a great pitcher's park for his great years. Just look at a comparison of their ERA+ (not the greatest but a quick glimpse)...ERA+ (the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average).

Koufax:
124
143
161
187
160
190

Pedro:
221
160
245
285
189 (half season)
196

In 2000, the league average ERA was 4.97. Pedro had a 1.74 ERA.

That's due to expansion and watered down talent. I remembered when Koufax played and there was no doubt what a Phenom he was. Pedro is great and should eventually be in the HOF but he is no Koufax. Also keep in mind that Koufax quit when he was in his prime due to arm problems. He could have had many more great years but quit because Doctors warned him that if he continued pitching it could have an adverse effect on his arm (like he wouldn't be able to use it) when he was older. If they had the Medical Technology back then that they had now he would of had at least 5 more great/good years in the Show

 

[RabidMongoose]

PlatinumGold, don't forget about the era that each pitcher played in. When Koufax was pitching great, the average league ERA was usually around 3.00-3.200. He also pitched in a very good pitcher's park.

While Pedro has been pitching, the average league ERA has been around 4.50-5.00.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I haven't read this whole thread, but here's my opinion and I'm not sure if it's been stated before.

If Pedro Martinez retired today, he would be a first ballot hall of famer. Sandy Koufax was inducted because of his greatness over a 6 year period. Koufax is considered a legend and some people say he was the most dominant pitcher ever. But you know what? Pedro Martinez has a far more dominant 6 year span than Koufax does. Most people don't want to admit this probably because of the legend that Koufax became, but if you look at the statistics, it's true. To me, Koufax is fairly overrated. Most people don't even realize that he pitched in a great pitcher's park for his great years. Just look at a comparison of their ERA+ (not the greatest but a quick glimpse)...ERA+ (the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average).

Koufax:
124
143
161
187
160
190

Pedro:
221
160
245
285
189 (half season)
196

In 2000, the league average ERA was 4.97. Pedro had a 1.74 ERA.

That's due to expansion and watered down talent. I remembered when Koufax played and there was no doubt what a Phenom he was. Pedro is great and should eventually be in the HOF but he is no Koufax. Also keep in mind that Koufax quit when he was in his prime due to arm problems. He could have had many more great years but quit because Doctors warned him that if he continued pitching it could have an adverse effect on his arm (like he wouldn't be able to use it) when he was older. If they had the Medical Technology back then that they had now he would of had at least 5 more great/good years in the Show

There has been expansion, but the talent pool is much more deep now than it was before. The fact that Koufax QUIT before he could put up more stats does NOT help his case. If anything, it hurts him. Pedro has already eclipsed Koufax's stats and is now just adding more to the pile.

Sure, IF they had better medical technology then maybe Koufax would have been even better. But IFs don't count.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Ynog
I have to say you cannot throw in No Hitters and Perfect Games in there.

Example - Clemens - 0, Pedro - 0, Maddux - 0, Drysdale - 0 and more if I look.

Yet you have Nomo - 2, Lowe - 1.

No Hitters and Perfect Games have a bit of luck involved in them. So you cannot
measure pitchers on them. Otherwise you say that Nomo and Wells are better than Clemens and Pedro.
I don't think so.

You make a good point except when you take into consideration the Koufax threw 4 No No's in 5 years (including a Perfect Game) When a Pitcher is that dominating then it's more than luck.

And you really cannot blame a pitcher for his team. How many WS rings does Ted Williams own. Is he
still not one of the best hitters to play the game. If Pedro had played in the World Series and lost. Then
yes. But he cannot be held accountable for the games he doesn't pitch.

I'm not necessarily saying Pedro is better, just you cannot blame him for things that aren't in his control.

Nobody is blaming him, he just hasn't been in the ultimate pressure situations and dominated like Koufax did.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
PlatinumGold, don't forget about the era that each pitcher played in. When Koufax was pitching great, the average league ERA was usually around 3.00-3.200. He also pitched in a very good pitcher's park.

While Pedro has been pitching, the average league ERA has been around 4.50-5.00.

agreed.

i personally HATE pedro, i think he's a whiner, a biatch of the highest order, but i can't deny what he's done with the baseball.

and there have been some really really good pitchers in his generation too, the league is watered down thing is only partially true.

johnson, clemons, maddux, glavine, mussina . . . all will go down as great pitchers and there are tons more.

one of my favorite pitchers and in his prime as good as anyone, David Cone, will probably not even be remembered.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Here's another interesting stat: In 2000 (his best year) Pedro put up a 1.74 ERA. The next highest was Clemens at 3.70. In 1966 (arguably Koufax's best year), he put up a 1.73 ERA and the next highest was 2.22.

 

[PlatinumGold]

for what it's worth.

I'm a braves fan, have been ALL my life. grew up in georgia, lived there 20 years of my life.

but i'd take pedros 6 years of excellence over madduxs 18 years of VERY VERY Goodness ANY DAY.

If we had had pedro during his 6 years of dominance, the braves would have won at least one more WS.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I haven't read this whole thread, but here's my opinion and I'm not sure if it's been stated before.

If Pedro Martinez retired today, he would be a first ballot hall of famer. Sandy Koufax was inducted because of his greatness over a 6 year period. Koufax is considered a legend and some people say he was the most dominant pitcher ever. But you know what? Pedro Martinez has a far more dominant 6 year span than Koufax does. Most people don't want to admit this probably because of the legend that Koufax became, but if you look at the statistics, it's true. To me, Koufax is fairly overrated. Most people don't even realize that he pitched in a great pitcher's park for his great years. Just look at a comparison of their ERA+ (not the greatest but a quick glimpse)...ERA+ (the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average).

Koufax:
124
143
161
187
160
190

Pedro:
221
160
245
285
189 (half season)
196

In 2000, the league average ERA was 4.97. Pedro had a 1.74 ERA.

That's due to expansion and watered down talent. I remembered when Koufax played and there was no doubt what a Phenom he was. Pedro is great and should eventually be in the HOF but he is no Koufax. Also keep in mind that Koufax quit when he was in his prime due to arm problems. He could have had many more great years but quit because Doctors warned him that if he continued pitching it could have an adverse effect on his arm (like he wouldn't be able to use it) when he was older. If they had the Medical Technology back then that they had now he would of had at least 5 more great/good years in the Show

There has been expansion, but the talent pool is much more deep now than it was before. The fact that Koufax QUIT before he could put up more stats does NOT help his case. If anything, it hurts him. Pedro has already eclipsed Koufax's stats and is now just adding more to the pile.

Sure, IF they had better medical technology then maybe Koufax would have been even better. But IFs don't count.

Being a Sox Fan who should know better about if's not counting than you Me saying that Koufax wasa Phenom is like a Sox Fan saying Stienbrenner is the Man. I watched Koufax out duel my Giants time and Time again and back then the Giants had great offensive teams, probably better than most teams in the last 20 years (not to mention great Pitchers in Marichal and Perry)

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
PlatinumGold, don't forget about the era that each pitcher played in. When Koufax was pitching great, the average league ERA was usually around 3.00-3.200. He also pitched in a very good pitcher's park.

While Pedro has been pitching, the average league ERA has been around 4.50-5.00.

agreed.

i personally HATE pedro, i think he's a whiner, a biatch of the highest order, but i can't deny what he's done with the baseball.

and there have been some really really good pitchers in his generation too, the league is watered down thing is only partially true.

johnson, clemons, maddux, glavine, mussina . . . all will go down as great pitchers and there are tons more.

one of my favorite pitchers and in his prime as good as anyone, David Cone, will probably not even be remembered.

I'm with you on this...I don't like Pedro...I don't really like Bonds either....but I don't let personal feelings about players get in the way. And Cone was one of my favorites too

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
PlatinumGold, don't forget about the era that each pitcher played in. When Koufax was pitching great, the average league ERA was usually around 3.00-3.200. He also pitched in a very good pitcher's park.

While Pedro has been pitching, the average league ERA has been around 4.50-5.00.

agreed.

i personally HATE pedro, i think he's a whiner, a biatch of the highest order, but i can't deny what he's done with the baseball.

and there have been some really really good pitchers in his generation too, the league is watered down thing is only partially true.

johnson, clemons, maddux, glavine, mussina . . . all will go down as great pitchers and there are tons more.

one of my favorite pitchers and in his prime as good as anyone, David Cone, will probably not even be remembered.

I'm with you on this...I don't like Pedro...I don't really like Bonds either....but I don't let personal feelings about players get in the way. And Cone was one of my favorites too

Didn't cone have 2 perfect games?

Cone in 5 WS appearances

5 World Series 5-0 6 2.12 2-0 0 0 29.7 16 7 20 19


pretty good numbers, 5-0 with a 2.12 era.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Here's another interesting stat: In 2000 (his best year) Pedro put up a 1.74 ERA. The next highest was Clemens at 3.70. In 1966 (arguably Koufax's best year), he put up a 1.73 ERA and the next highest was 2.22.

The reason for that is that there were better Pitchers back in Koufax's era. For example, Juan Marichal, Bob Gibson and Don Drysdale. Those three would have dominated todays watered down talent of hitters more than they dominated back in the 60's. Sure they would of had problems with Bonds just like they had Problems with Willie Mays but I doubt the Johnny Damon and the David Ortizes would have much success against them.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I haven't read this whole thread, but here's my opinion and I'm not sure if it's been stated before.

If Pedro Martinez retired today, he would be a first ballot hall of famer. Sandy Koufax was inducted because of his greatness over a 6 year period. Koufax is considered a legend and some people say he was the most dominant pitcher ever. But you know what? Pedro Martinez has a far more dominant 6 year span than Koufax does. Most people don't want to admit this probably because of the legend that Koufax became, but if you look at the statistics, it's true. To me, Koufax is fairly overrated. Most people don't even realize that he pitched in a great pitcher's park for his great years. Just look at a comparison of their ERA+ (not the greatest but a quick glimpse)...ERA+ (the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average).

Koufax:
124
143
161
187
160
190

Pedro:
221
160
245
285
189 (half season)
196

In 2000, the league average ERA was 4.97. Pedro had a 1.74 ERA.

That's due to expansion and watered down talent. I remembered when Koufax played and there was no doubt what a Phenom he was. Pedro is great and should eventually be in the HOF but he is no Koufax. Also keep in mind that Koufax quit when he was in his prime due to arm problems. He could have had many more great years but quit because Doctors warned him that if he continued pitching it could have an adverse effect on his arm (like he wouldn't be able to use it) when he was older. If they had the Medical Technology back then that they had now he would of had at least 5 more great/good years in the Show

There has been expansion, but the talent pool is much more deep now than it was before. The fact that Koufax QUIT before he could put up more stats does NOT help his case. If anything, it hurts him. Pedro has already eclipsed Koufax's stats and is now just adding more to the pile.

Sure, IF they had better medical technology then maybe Koufax would have been even better. But IFs don't count.

Being a Sox Fan who should know better about if's not counting than you Me saying that Koufax wasa Phenom is like a Sox Fan saying Stienbrenner is the Man. I watched Koufax out duel my Giants time and Time again and back then the Giants had great offensive teams, probably better than most teams in the last 20 years (not to mention great Pitchers in Marichal and Perry)

And I've watched Pedro dominate more so than most other pitchers, too. I'd say anyone that dominates like this is considered a phenom. I think you're OBVIOUSLY letting sentimental thoughts getting in the way of real objectivity. Opinions and memories shouldn't count more than the statistics.

I find it hard to believe that the Giants of Koufax's time had one of the greatest offensive teams ever. Why? Because it doesn't show. They led their league in runs/game only ONCE (in 1962) during Koufax's time of dominance.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Here's another interesting stat: In 2000 (his best year) Pedro put up a 1.74 ERA. The next highest was Clemens at 3.70. In 1966 (arguably Koufax's best year), he put up a 1.73 ERA and the next highest was 2.22.

The reason for that is that there were better Pitchers back in Koufax's era. For example, Juan Marichal, Bob Gibson and Don Drysdale. Those three would have dominated todays watered down talent of hitters more than they dominated back in the 60's. Sure they would of had problems with Bonds just like they had Problems with Willie Mays but I doubt the Johnny Damon and the David Ortizes would have much success against them.

Do you have proof that today's talent is watered down? I don't think that you can provide any type of evidence, besides your opinion again. Show the numbers/evaluation, I'm not going to take your opinion as fact. You can argue that expansion has watered down the system, but I could argue that player evaluation/talent acquisition has gone up significantly in that time.

Pedro has had plenty of great pitcher's against him in this time, too. Naming a few doesn't prove anything.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I haven't read this whole thread, but here's my opinion and I'm not sure if it's been stated before.

If Pedro Martinez retired today, he would be a first ballot hall of famer. Sandy Koufax was inducted because of his greatness over a 6 year period. Koufax is considered a legend and some people say he was the most dominant pitcher ever. But you know what? Pedro Martinez has a far more dominant 6 year span than Koufax does. Most people don't want to admit this probably because of the legend that Koufax became, but if you look at the statistics, it's true. To me, Koufax is fairly overrated. Most people don't even realize that he pitched in a great pitcher's park for his great years. Just look at a comparison of their ERA+ (not the greatest but a quick glimpse)...ERA+ (the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. > 100 is above average and < 100 is below average).

Koufax:
124
143
161
187
160
190

Pedro:
221
160
245
285
189 (half season)
196

In 2000, the league average ERA was 4.97. Pedro had a 1.74 ERA.

That's due to expansion and watered down talent. I remembered when Koufax played and there was no doubt what a Phenom he was. Pedro is great and should eventually be in the HOF but he is no Koufax. Also keep in mind that Koufax quit when he was in his prime due to arm problems. He could have had many more great years but quit because Doctors warned him that if he continued pitching it could have an adverse effect on his arm (like he wouldn't be able to use it) when he was older. If they had the Medical Technology back then that they had now he would of had at least 5 more great/good years in the Show

There has been expansion, but the talent pool is much more deep now than it was before. The fact that Koufax QUIT before he could put up more stats does NOT help his case. If anything, it hurts him. Pedro has already eclipsed Koufax's stats and is now just adding more to the pile.

Sure, IF they had better medical technology then maybe Koufax would have been even better. But IFs don't count.

Being a Sox Fan who should know better about if's not counting than you Me saying that Koufax wasa Phenom is like a Sox Fan saying Stienbrenner is the Man. I watched Koufax out duel my Giants time and Time again and back then the Giants had great offensive teams, probably better than most teams in the last 20 years (not to mention great Pitchers in Marichal and Perry)

And I've watched Pedro dominate more so than most other pitchers, too. I'd say anyone that dominates like this is considered a phenom. I think you're OBVIOUSLY letting sentimental thoughts getting in the way of real objectivity. Opinions and memories shouldn't count more than the statistics.

I find it hard to believe that the Giants of Koufax's time had one of the greatest offensive teams ever. Why? Because it doesn't show. They led their league in runs/game only ONCE (in 1962) during Koufax's time of dominance.

I said Great Offensive Team, not one of the Greatest. Hell that would include to many Yankee Teams, Old Connie Mack A's Teams, the 1954 Indians Team, etc. The Giants had Mays, McCoVey, the Alou Brother, Boby Bonds, Alvin Dark and Orlando Cepeda to name a few, Compared to the weak hitting Dodgers teams of the 60's those guys were monsters.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Here's another interesting stat: In 2000 (his best year) Pedro put up a 1.74 ERA. The next highest was Clemens at 3.70. In 1966 (arguably Koufax's best year), he put up a 1.73 ERA and the next highest was 2.22.

The reason for that is that there were better Pitchers back in Koufax's era. For example, Juan Marichal, Bob Gibson and Don Drysdale. Those three would have dominated todays watered down talent of hitters more than they dominated back in the 60's. Sure they would of had problems with Bonds just like they had Problems with Willie Mays but I doubt the Johnny Damon and the David Ortizes would have much success against them.

Do you have proof that today's talent is watered down? I don't think that you can provide any type of evidence, besides your opinion again. Show the numbers/evaluation, I'm not going to take your opinion as fact. You can argue that expansion has watered down the system, but I could argue that player evaluation/talent acquisition has gone up significantly in that time.

Pedro has had plenty of great pitcher's against him in this time, too. Naming a few doesn't prove anything.

You being a Homer let alone a Red Sox Fan obviously clouds your objectivity.

 

[RabidMongoose]

OK, but that still doesn't prove anything. All you're saying is that one team has had a higher offensive output than Koufax's team, which isn't saying anything. Pedro hasn't exactly pitched on consistently great offenses either.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Here's another interesting stat: In 2000 (his best year) Pedro put up a 1.74 ERA. The next highest was Clemens at 3.70. In 1966 (arguably Koufax's best year), he put up a 1.73 ERA and the next highest was 2.22.

The reason for that is that there were better Pitchers back in Koufax's era. For example, Juan Marichal, Bob Gibson and Don Drysdale. Those three would have dominated todays watered down talent of hitters more than they dominated back in the 60's. Sure they would of had problems with Bonds just like they had Problems with Willie Mays but I doubt the Johnny Damon and the David Ortizes would have much success against them.

Do you have proof that today's talent is watered down? I don't think that you can provide any type of evidence, besides your opinion again. Show the numbers/evaluation, I'm not going to take your opinion as fact. You can argue that expansion has watered down the system, but I could argue that player evaluation/talent acquisition has gone up significantly in that time.

Pedro has had plenty of great pitcher's against him in this time, too. Naming a few doesn't prove anything.

You being a Homer let alone a Red Sox Fan obviously clouds your objectivity.

WTF are you talking about? I'm a Red Sox fan? If you're saying that b/c I have Boston in my profile - well I've only been here for a MONTH.

Sorry to tell you this, but I'm a Mets fan and will always have the Mets as my #1 team. And I would say that I'm hardly a homer as I usually never go with solely opinion.

Also, how does one being a fan of a team cloud the objectivity of STATISTICS?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
OK, but that still doesn't prove anything. All you're saying is that one team has had a higher offensive output than Koufax's team, which isn't saying anything. Pedro hasn't exactly pitched on consistently great offenses either.

Dude, how many Complete games does Pedro have compared to Koufax? You think if he played back in the era were there really wasn't any Closers he would of had such great numbers for an ERA? The good pitchers back then often pitched well into the 8th inning and those like Koufax pitched into the 9th or complete games and still had unbelievable ERAs.