Most Dominant Pitcher In This Era?

[CalifYanksFan]

Just a little food for discussion!

As much as I like Roger Clemens I'd have to say the most dominant pitcher of his era is Randy Johnson. He is another physical phenom who is still throwing 'em in the upper 90's. He's done something that only one other pitcher in history has done and that's win 4 Cy Youngs in a row. He also won pitching's equivalent of the triple crown with wins, ERA and strikeouts. Incredible for a guy who is approaching 40. He is a fierce competitor who doesn't give in and hates to lose. He will go down as the greatest lefty of all time.

Like Roger, he will be a first ballot HOF'er. Congratulations Randy.

P.S. Roger is still better looking though.

[Hitman23]

I'm probably going to get laughed at for saying this, but my pick is a little biased because I'm such a big fan of his. Greg Maddux! Best pitcher I've seen in my years of watching baseball.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Originally posted by Hitman23
I'm probably going to get laughed at for saying this, but my pick is a little biased because I'm such a big fan of his. Greg Maddux! Best pitcher I've seen in my years of watching baseball.

No laughter from me. He'd probably be my vote too. RJ has had too many seasons where he wasn't exceptional, and especially earlier in his career did not have very good control. I'd go with Maddux over Unit without hesitation. When on, Unit is untouchable, and better than Maddux at his best, but over his career Maddux has been much more consistently excellent than Unit has. Clemens is a tough call. I think I again go with Maddux because he has been so consistently outstanding while Rocket has had his share of unimpressive seasons. I think Rocket edges Unit because he didn't have the control problems Unit did early in his career, but against Maddux it really is impressive how consistent he's been from year to year, which neither Unit nor Rocket can match.

On the other hand, both Rocket and Unit have the strikeout as a weapon which Maddux doesn't in the same way. That's a big deal to be able to reach back in a tough situation and blow a guy away keeping the ball out of play. A strikeout pitcher gives you a nice advantage in a tight spot with runners on. Nonetheles, I think I'd come down casting my vote with you Hitman and going with Maddux. But it'd be damm close, and like CalifYanksFan said, 1st ballot HOF'ers all, so there's really no bad choice.

[Hitman23]

Originally posted by Mr. Mxylsplk
On the other hand, both Rocket and Unit have the strikeout as a weapon which Maddux doesn't in the same way. That's a big deal to be able to reach back in a tough situation and blow a guy away keeping the ball out of play.

I'm glad you agree with me! I too was basing alot of my decision on the consistancy of his career. But the part I quoted you on I wanted to comment. I don't think I have ever seen a pitcher lock a guy up like Maddux can. True the other guys can blow a batter away, but nobody in the game can find that 1 millimeter of the black part of the plate and get that call better then Maddux. He is a surgeon. It's almost like he can just will the ball where he wants. The guy has so much respect by umpires, I think his plate is 24"!!!

[deranged2005]

Even though Maddux was god, he has lost his touch. I remember when he would shutout teams and give up only a few hits and it'd be somewhat normal.

Johnson though, he's still dominating. Still throwing high 90s. Can throw 120 pitches a game. He's a workhorse during the game. Plus all the strikeouts, the wins, the ERA, he's great.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Originally posted by deranged2005
Even though Maddux was god, he has lost his touch last his touch. I remember when he would shutout teams and give up only a few hits and it'd be somewhat normal.

Johnson though, he's still dominating. Still throwing hugh 90s. Can throw 120 pitches a game. He's a workhorse during the game. Plus all the strikeouts, the wins, the ERA, he's great.

Johnson has certainly been better in the past few seasons. But saying a guy who this year had an era in the 2's and an opposing ops in the low 600's (better than Johnson's this season by the way) has lost his touch is beyond extreme. I couldn't argue that Maddux has been better the past 4 seasons. He hasn't. But this year he was more or less back to as good as ever, and in my opinion the last few years don't make up for the years earlier in their careers when Maddux was dominating and Johnson wasn't.

[WindRavenX]

AL: Pedro
NL: Johnson

When Pedro was healthy ( I mean, completely healthy) he could've beaten anyone.
With Johnson...it's almost a crime to people if he doesn't K at least 10 a start...

[Jersey Yankee]

End in '00, I'd put Roger pretty high on my list. He's been dominant most of his career, and if looking at his postseason, the back-to-back performances in '00 vs SEA in LCS and NYM in WS, that's gotta be considered very strongly.

[staticm]

i've got to go with clemens and maddux for consistency and longevity.

if the question was "most dominant over the last 5 years" then pedro and johnson are your men.

[Stick Michael]

All things being equal I'd have to pick Randy Johnson, although Pedro Martinez, when healthy, dominated even more than the Big Unit does. It's hard to make that argument now, however, since Pedro, overpowering as he is, has become a six inning pitcher that has to be treated with kid gloves if his arm is to last an entire season.

James

[Danmel]

Originally posted by CalifYanksFan
Just a little food for discussion!

As much as I like Roger Clemens I'd have to say the most dominant pitcher of his era is Randy Johnson. He is another physical phenom who is still throwing 'em in the upper 90's. He's done something that only one other pitcher in history has done and that's win 4 Cy Youngs in a row. He also won pitching's equivalent of the triple crown with wins, ERA and strikeouts. Incredible for a guy who is approaching 40. He is a fierce competitor who doesn't give in and hates to lose. He will go down as the greatest lefty of all time.

Like Roger, he will be a first ballot HOF'er. Congratulations Randy.

P.S. Roger is still better looking though.

Russ, there aren't many people who aren't better looking than Randy Johnson- I think that is part of his cache- batters can't stand to look at him, so they miss the pitch !!!!

He is one hell of a pitcher though.

[RootN4Rocket]

What a wonderful time to be a baseball fan!

Someday when we are all old and grey, people will want to hear about Clemens, Martinez, Johnson, and Wakefield. Imagine, we saw them all!

[SanFrANSKY]

R2R, very true and similar to me wanting to hear all about Spahn, Koufax, and Gibson.

[Stick Michael]

Originally posted by RootN4Rocket
Someday when we are all old and grey, people will want to hear about Clemens, Martinez, Johnson, and Wakefield. Imagine, we saw them all!

With all due respect, R4R, one of those pitchers doesn't belong to be mentioned in the same breath as the others!

James

[Nome]

For a six year period, no pitcher in history was as dominating as was Sandy Koufax.

Andy

[KLJ]

roger clemens.... hands down..... don't let his mediocre 3 out of 4 seasons in n.y. fool you

[rocket]

Agree with NOME no pitcher was as dominant as Koufax and that includes Randy Johnson! His season that he retired he had 27 wins. Pitched a world Series gave on two days rest and threw a complete game. No way will Johnson ever be the best lefthander ever is baseball that will always be Sandy Koufax's title period!

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Originally posted by rocket
Agree with NOME no pitcher was as dominant as Koufax and that includes Randy Johnson! His season that he retired he had 27 wins. Pitched a world Series gave on two days rest and threw a complete game. No way will Johnson ever be the best lefthander ever is baseball that will always be Sandy Koufax's title period!

As Nome said, Koufax was the most dominating over a particular period of time. Koufax had 5 seasons with an era under 3. Johnson has had 6, and has had 3 more seasons under 3.3, while Koufax had none. Over a career, Koufax is not the greatest left hander of all time, and Johnson has already surpassed him in my opinion. Bill James talks about peak value and career value. For peak value, I agree that no one touches Koufax, but career he's not at the top.

[Yanksagain]

Without a doubt Koufax was the most dominating pitcher of his respective ERA. X-mas gift on everyone's wishlist should be the new book about Koufax. Great read.

Currently -
AL - Pedro
NL - Big Unit

[nicky_d]

Originally posted by Nome
For a six year period, no pitcher in history was as dominating as was Sandy Koufax.

Andy

Amen to that.........NOBODY comes even close........

[DJeter1287]

Originally posted by WindRavenX
AL: Pedro
NL: Johnson

When Pedro was healthy ( I mean, completely healthy) he could've beaten anyone.
With Johnson...it's almost a crime to people if he doesn't K at least 10 a start...

Ditto..My picks are the same. Obviously I'm not a large fan of Pedro but I have to admit...he's got great stuff!

[CalifYanksFan]

Originally posted by SanFrANSKY
R2R, very true and similar to me wanting to hear all about Spahn, Koufax, and Gibson.

I saw them too. I hate to admit that. Along with Ford, Drysdale, Marichal, Jenkins and others. Boy am I dating myself.

[Nome]

Russ,

don't date yourself. Girls are better.

Andy

[clacson]

Toss-up between Clemens and Maddux.

Johnson doesn't have their long track records.

[RootN4Rocket]

Originally posted by Stick Michael


With all due respect, R4R, one of those pitchers doesn't belong to be mentioned in the same breath as the others!

James

Guess you have not sat behind the plate and seen that knuckle ball dance. Name one other pitcher that that can win a start, win in long relief, and get a save in the same week? I strongly feel he is the most valuable pitcher on the Red Sox.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Originally posted by RootN4Rocket
Guess you have not sat behind the plate and seen that knuckle ball dance. Name one other pitcher that that can win a start, win in long relief, and get a save in the same week? I strongly feel he is the most valuable pitcher on the Red Sox.

One could make an argument that he was the most valuable pitcher on the Sox this season, though I think it's pretty clearly a losing argument. Regardless of that, dancing knuckle ball or not, he's a mediocre pitcher over his career, as Stick Michael said does not belong mentioned in the same breath as the other pitchers, and "someday" no one other than his kids and grandkids will want to hear about his career.

[Slippery Elm]

Originally posted by Nome
For a six year period, no pitcher in history was as dominating as was Sandy Koufax.

Such is the Legend.

But in 1961 he went 18-13 with a 3.52 ERA. Nice, but hardly dominating by 1961 standards.

In 1962 he was injured for almost half the year, and finished 14-7 and 2.51. Very good; not dominating.

For the remaining FOUR years he was from another planet.

[NYYRules#1]

Pedro and clemens

[djhitman01]

My vote goes to Roger Clemens. 6 cy's, struck out 20 batters not once, but twice, won an mvp in 86 even though it should have been the "Hitman". He's been to 4 ws's, has 2 rings, and has a career era of in 1.56 in ws's play. Simply awsome, it doesn't get better then that, 6 cy's and 2 rings.

[Jeter&Johnson]

I think Pedro's last 6 years could have been stronger than Koufax's best or 5 or which ever years you look at.
Koufax's top 5 ERA:
2.54
1.88
1.74
2.04
1.73
Pedro's:
1.90
2.89
2.07
1.74
2.26

Koufax's ERA numbers are marginally better, but when you take into account the league the played in. It is much easier to pitch in NL where you have 1 spot in lineup which is basically an automatic out, vs. a slugger. And our current times are much more offense prone.
League ERA during seasons:
Koufax:
3.63
3.02
3.25
3.25
3.28
Pedro's:
4.21
4.61
5.07
4.46

The average ERA in Koufax time would have led the league in most of the past few seasons. Pedro was head and shoulders above the rest of the league by large margins. Enjoy Pedro, because he may be the best pitcher to ever play.

[DJeter1287]

Originally posted by Jeter&Johnson
I think Pedro's last 6 years could have been stronger than Koufax's best or 5 or which ever years you look at.
Koufax's top 5 ERA:
2.54
1.88
1.74
2.04
1.73
Pedro's:
1.90
2.89
2.07
1.74
2.26

Koufax's ERA numbers are marginally better, but when you take into account the league the played in. It is much easier to pitch in NL where you have 1 spot in lineup which is basically an automatic out, vs. a slugger. And our current times are much more offense prone.
League ERA during seasons:
Koufax:
3.63
3.02
3.25
3.25
3.28
Pedro's:
4.21
4.61
5.07
4.46

The average ERA in Koufax time would have led the league in most of the past few seasons. Pedro was head and shoulders above the rest of the league by large margins. Enjoy Pedro, because he may be the best pitcher to ever play.

Thanks for the stats J&J...welcome to the forum!

[Gringaloca]

How can anyone forget Nolan Ryan?? 27 years in the "bigs". Ok.. started with the "Mutts" in '66 but we can't hold that against him.
From the Mets to the Angels to the Astros and ended his career with the Rangers..and could still throw some "smoke"..

To quote Reggie Jackson: "(Nolan) Ryan's the only guy who puts fear in me. Not because he could get me out, but because he could kill me.You just hoped you could mix in a walk and have a good night and go 0 - 3" (Baseball-Almanac.com)

[Looie #19]

The one thing with looking at Pedro's numbers versus Koufax' is not just the league he is pitching in, but more importantly how his ERA compares to the league average.

The following numbers are his ERA, and then the league average, and then the differential, just to have it illustrated.

Pedro
-------------
1997: 1.90 / 4.21 / -2.31
1998: 2.89 / 4.61 / -1.72
1999: 2.07 / 5.07 / -3.00
2000: 1.74 / 4.97 / -3.23
2001: 2.39 / 4.53 / -2.14
2002: 2.26 / 3.94 / -1.68

Koufax
---------------
1961: 3.52 / 4.35 / -0.83
1962: 2.54 / 3.63 / -1.09
1963: 1.88 / 3.02 / -1.14
1964: 1.74 / 3.25 / -1.51
1965: 2.04 / 3.25 / -1.21
1966: 1.73 / 3.28 / -1.55

Pedro's "worst" year in terms of differential, was better than Koufax' best year.

Koufax was a bitter rival to the Yanks just like Pedro is. But these two should be cherished by fans of the game, and their accomplishments treasured, no matter what team you follow. If you are familiar with ERA+, it takes into account park factors, ERA compared to offense put together by the rest of the league, etc. Pedro has the best ERA+ in the history of the game. He is easily the most dominant pitcher I have ever seen, and is truly amazing.

Watch ESPN Classic at 1pm tomorrow to see why. He took a potent World Champion Yankees lineup and made them look human. And whenever the game is on the line, he never relents. He is probably one of the best big game pitchers the world has seen, and his fire and pride in his game is matched by few. Being extremely injured in the Division Series in 1999 and coming in to relieve for 6 no hit innings was truly remarkable. And watching him give his all in the 1999 All Star game, making future Hall Of Famers look like fools on the big stage was pretty amazing also. Like Koufax, it's a shame to see such incredible careers be hampered by injuries. After his nearly career-ending injury last year, I think it's a shame no one cares about what he did this year.

[CalifYanksFan]

Interesting points Looie, but those statistics can be taken different ways. What it says to me is look at the league averages for those sets of six years. It says that the pitching in the Koufax years was better than it is in the Pedro years. 4.56 ERA (Pedro) vs 3.55 ERA (Koufax). That's an average of a run better during Koufax's time. If you reversed the pitchers Koufax blows by Pedro. His combined ERA is 2.24 vs Pedro's 2.40. Taken in overall differential numbers Sandy Koufax in his time is -1.31 and Pedro in his time is -2.16. Reverse those numbers and Koufax is -2.32 and Pedro is -1.15. Koufax clearly would have the better numbers.

Also, what all this tells me is that with the expansion of the leagues the talent pool has become deluted. Players were better then than now. A lot of players in MLB today wouldn't have been playing back in Sandy Koufax's time.

[Jeter&Johnson]

Originally posted by CalifYanksFan
Reverse those numbers and Koufax is -2.32 and Pedro is -1.15. Koufax clearly would have the better numbers.

Also, what all this tells me is that with the expansion of the leagues the talent pool has become deluted. Players were better then than now. A lot of players in MLB today wouldn't have been playing back in Sandy Koufax's time.

Why are you reversing those numbers, that makes no sense. You compare a player to how well he pitched compared to the rest of his own league. It's harder to pitch now in this offensive era, and you can see how much better Pedro is than the rest of his league.

The league has expanded but so has the talent pool, just look at the number of foreign players today, compared to the numbers then.

[DJeter1287]

Every time I look at this I think Most Dominant Pitcher in this Earned Run Average!

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Originally posted by CalifYanksFan
Interesting points Looie, but those statistics can be taken different ways. What it says to me is look at the league averages for those sets of six years. It says that the pitching in the Koufax years was better than it is in the Pedro years. 4.56 ERA (Pedro) vs 3.55 ERA (Koufax). That's an average of a run better during Koufax's time. If you reversed the pitchers Koufax blows by Pedro. His combined ERA is 2.24 vs Pedro's 2.40. Taken in overall differential numbers Sandy Koufax in his time is -1.31 and Pedro in his time is -2.16. Reverse those numbers and Koufax is -2.32 and Pedro is -1.15. Koufax clearly would have the better numbers.

Can you explain this, I don't understand your point at all. It seems to me that Koufax was less dominant compared to his contemporaries than Pedro has been. What is this reversal of numbers?

[A_Nussblood]

Without a doubt - its Pedro.

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by CalifYanksFan
...Also, what all this tells me is that with the expansion of the leagues the talent pool has become deluted. Players were better then than now. A lot of players in MLB today wouldn't have been playing back in Sandy Koufax's time.

If you ever have the chance to meet someone who is good at analyzing baseball film, ask them to compare the players of today to those of yesteryear. I've met three people who do this, and they all said there is no doubt that today's players, especially the hitters, are better.

[patrick.o]

It's a close race, but I would say Pedro is the best of the best.

Thanks to those who pointed out Pedro's numbers vs Koufax, you saved me the time of posting them myself. Pedro's numbers as compared to his comtemporaries blows Koufax's away. It's a different day in baseball. Look at Koufax's famous 27 win season. There were 4 man rotations back then and Koufax got 41 starts. In '99 Pedro won 23 games in only 29 starts! Take those same years and Koufax struck out 317 in 323 innings. Martinez struck out 313 in 213.3 innings! 4 less K's, 100 less innings!

Koufax was great, but Martinez has been better. He may be the most dominating pitcher ever.

[Quick]

Koufax pitched from a higher mound and pitched to pitchers. He had an advantage and baseball execs took those away from Roger and Pedro and they still dominated for 10+ years.

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by patrick.o
It's a close race, but I would say Pedro is the best of the best.

Thanks to those who pointed out Pedro's numbers vs Koufax, you saved me the time of posting them myself. Pedro's numbers as compared to his comtemporaries blows Koufax's away. It's a different day in baseball. Look at Koufax's famous 27 win season. There were 4 man rotations back then and Koufax got 41 starts. In '99 Pedro won 23 games in only 29 starts! Take those same years and Koufax struck out 317 in 323 innings. Martinez struck out 313 in 213.3 innings! 4 less K's, 100 less innings!

Koufax was great, but Martinez has been better. He may be the most dominating pitcher ever.

Do you honestly think Pedro would even have a career if he had to pitch 300 innings in a season?

That year that Sandy won 27 games, he also pitched 27 COMPLETE GAMES. Pedro's pitched 38 CG's in his entire ML life.

Don't you think Pedro, Roger, et al would pitch a little differently if they knew they we're at least expected to pitch for 9 innings? Don't you think they'd blow people away a little less, not go for the K as often knowing they'd need something for the later innings?

If Pedro and Roger tried to pitch 20+ complete games a season pitching the way they do, they'd be getting shelled in the eighth and probably land on the disabled list by the ASG.

[patrick.o]

As I said, it's a different day in baseball. Men who play the same positions have different expectations put on them. Many consider Mo the greatest reliever ever, but he only get 3, 4,or 5 outs per appearance as compared to yesterday's relivers who pitched for 3, 4, or 5 innings per arrearance. Many compare today's post season numbers to players who only had one round of playoffs. Or 162 game seasons to 154 game seasons.

Today's ball is clearly more lively than Koufax's. The parks are smaller than when he pitched. Players understand their health better and are bigger without losing flexability or hand speed. As Quick pointed out the mound is lower and Koufax never heard of a DH. Batter's wear body armor and are much less afriad to crowd the plate.

Do I think Pedro could have thrown 300+ innings a year? I don't know. Serious arm injuries seemed a whole lot less common when pitchers were in 4 man rotations from the minors on up, and when they were trained to finish what they started. Perhaps Pedro would have broken down, perhaps his arm would have be stronger and more durable.

The one thing I do know is that with all the disadvantages Pedro has vs the conditions Koufax pitched in, Pedro's numbers vs his contemporaries are better. And yes, I think he's the better pitcher.

[CalifYanksFan]

Originally posted by patrick.o
It's a close race, but I would say Pedro is the best of the best.

Thanks to those who pointed out Pedro's numbers vs Koufax, you saved me the time of posting them myself. Pedro's numbers as compared to his comtemporaries blows Koufax's away. It's a different day in baseball. Look at Koufax's famous 27 win season. There were 4 man rotations back then and Koufax got 41 starts. In '99 Pedro won 23 games in only 29 starts! Take those same years and Koufax struck out 317 in 323 innings. Martinez struck out 313 in 213.3 innings! 4 less K's, 100 less innings!

Koufax was great, but Martinez has been better. He may be the most dominating pitcher ever.

And look how often Pedro breaks down too. Do you think that in the days when you had a starter who was expected to go 9 innings every start and you if you didn't you relied on an ace long reliever Pedro would excel? Pitchers today aren't expected to pitch complete games. And as far as hitters being better today, I think a lot of that can be attributed to many things. More understanding of working out, diets, etc., plus most of your power hitters are taken some kind of supplements (some illegal) that weren't around in Koufax's era. Plus I say pitchers were better overall than now. The reason I reversed the numbers was to show that Koufax would've excelled today too. I SAW Koufax pitch and there was no one who was more dominant then than he was. And I don't necessarily buy the pitching to pitchers theory either. If he's getting out the 1 through 8 hitters what makes you think he wouldn't get the 9th? I think Koufax today would benefit even more by having an extra days rest and not being expected to finish games. Less wear and tear on his arm. He retired because of continuing tendonitis in his pitching elbow. I'll take Koufax, Drysdale, Ford, Gibson, Spahn and others of that day against any of the pitchers today.

[NYYFAN]

I have to go with Randy Johnson. Not so much on the numbers but the way he personally stopped the Yankees twice in the post season. 1995 and 2001...

[Looie #19]

As far as Pedro breaking down, I think the fact that they've lowered the mound quite a bit since 1969 has a lot to do with pitcher's endurance and durability these days. It takes a lot more to throw the ball over the plate, and over the course of 100 or so pitches, and 200+ innings the amount of torque pitching from a lower mound will build up. Up until the 1968, pitchers used to typically pitch around 300 innings. If you want to nitpick about pitcher's endurance now, pitchers in the 1800s would pitch 450+ innings in a season. In 1884, Old Hoss Radbourn led the World Champion Providence Grays. He pitched 678 2/3 innings, went 59 and 12 and struck out 441 batters while only walking 98.

[NYYFAN]

Originally posted by Looie #19
Old Hoss Radbourn led the World Champion Providence Grays. He pitched 678 2/3 innings, went 59 and 12 and struck out 441 batters while only walking 98.

And he was their long relief guy...

[hugelongtermdeal]

Originally posted by CalifYanksFan
Interesting points Looie, but those statistics can be taken different ways. What it says to me is look at the league averages for those sets of six years. It says that the pitching in the Koufax years was better than it is in the Pedro years. 4.56 ERA (Pedro) vs 3.55 ERA (Koufax). That's an average of a run better during Koufax's time. If you reversed the pitchers Koufax blows by Pedro. His combined ERA is 2.24 vs Pedro's 2.40. Taken in overall differential numbers Sandy Koufax in his time is -1.31 and Pedro in his time is -2.16. Reverse those numbers and Koufax is -2.32 and Pedro is -1.15. Koufax clearly would have the better numbers.

Also, what all this tells me is that with the expansion of the leagues the talent pool has become deluted. Players were better then than now. A lot of players in MLB today wouldn't have been playing back in Sandy Koufax's time.

this post makes absolutely no sense.

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by Looie #19
As far as Pedro breaking down, I think the fact that they've lowered the mound quite a bit since 1969 has a lot to do with pitcher's endurance and durability these days. It takes a lot more to throw the ball over the plate, and over the course of 100 or so pitches, and 200+ innings the amount of torque pitching from a lower mound will build up. Up until the 1968, pitchers used to typically pitch around 300 innings. If you want to nitpick about pitcher's endurance now, pitchers in the 1800s would pitch 450+ innings in a season. In 1884, Old Hoss Radbourn led the World Champion Providence Grays. He pitched 678 2/3 innings, went 59 and 12 and struck out 441 batters while only walking 98.

ROFLMAO!

[Slippery Elm]

Originally posted by Looie #19
. . .Old Hoss Radbourn led the World Champion Providence Grays. He pitched 678 2/3 innings, went 59 and 12 and struck out 441 batters while only walking 98.

You ever see that classic team photo with him in it? He is giving the finger to everyone. In the 1880's!