The Best Pitcher Ever

**Chi_archie** · 07-18-09, 11:33 PM

in those 7 years, I think the number of batters that hit over 10 HR's was about 3

God Bless home run Baker

**cocknocker** · 07-19-09, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by gummo

Walter Johnson went 7 straight years where is ERA was never above 1.90. Career ERA of 2.17.

That's why he was number 1 for me with no question from any era!

**lakerboy** · 07-19-09, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by cocknocker

That's why he was number 1 for me with no question from any era!

Rivera is the greatest ever ck now go to sleep brethren

**Chi_archie** · 07-19-09, 12:05 AM

not as hard to have an era under 2, when the tator tot is taken out of the equation

**Shortstop** · 07-19-09, 12:10 AM

Nolan Ryan.

End of conversation.

**lakerboy** · 07-19-09, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by Shortstop

Nolan Ryan.

End of conversation.

Dont worry nobody was talking to you anyway. Then again nobody is talking here anyway.

**Shortstop** · 07-19-09, 12:18 AM

Yes. It's Nolan Ryan.

End of conversation.

**Chi_archie** · 07-19-09, 12:20 AM

Nolan was the greatest pitcher ever when he was really really on.... which was 1% of the time

and was one of the greatest when he was really on which was 5% of the time....

he was really good when he had his good stuff which was 10% of the time....

and he was better than most when he had his typical stuff 50% of the time.....

the other 50% of the time he was avg to below avg due to his control

**ABEHONEST** · 07-19-09, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by Chi_archie

Nolan was the greatest pitcher ever when he was really really on.... which was 1% of the time

and was one of the greatest when he was really on which was 5% of the time....

he was really good when he had his good stuff which was 10% of the time....

and he was better than most when he had his typical stuff 50% of the time.....

the other 50% of the time he was avg to below avg due to his control

Are you sure this isn't Lakerboy's post...sure looks like one ?

**Chi_archie** · 07-19-09, 12:27 AM

never heard of laker's boy... but it could be his post, i'm not sure

**Chi_archie** · 07-19-09, 12:35 AM

could never say that Nolan was the best ever, when he was NEVER even the best pitcher in any given year.... just a above avg pitcher with super longevity and super unhittable stuff 1% of the time

**Shortstop** · 07-19-09, 12:39 AM

7 No-Hitters means nothing.

**Chi_archie** · 07-19-09, 12:41 AM

it means 1% of the time or less he was unhittable.... not what i'm looking for, if i'm starting a staff from scratch and can pick any pitcher all time

**Shortstop** · 07-19-09, 12:44 AM

I was responding to jello's thread title.

**Chi_archie** · 07-19-09, 12:45 AM

best pitcher ever?

can't give the title to the guy that was never even the best pitcher in any single year he pitched....

best WITH longevity......... Nolan is up there

**Shortstop** · 07-19-09, 12:49 AM

Too broad and subjective of a question. Too many great ones to narrow it down to one.

**ABEHONEST** · 07-19-09, 12:56 AM

Originally posted by Chi_archie

Nolan was the greatest pitcher ever when he was really really on.... which was 1% of the time

and was one of the greatest when he was really on which was 5% of the time....

he was really good when he had his good stuff which was 10% of the time....

and he was better than most when he had his typical stuff 50% of the time.....

the other 50% of the time he was avg to below avg due to his control

Originally posted by Shortstop

Too broad and subjective of a question. Too many great ones to narrow it down to one.

You seem like a sensible fellow .Or is it just that calm, solid looking figure on your avatar ?
Just go with what I posted on page 2...you can't go wrong .

**reno cool** · 07-19-09, 05:29 AM

Originally posted by Chi_archie

Nolan was the greatest pitcher ever when he was really really on.... which was 1% of the time

and was one of the greatest when he was really on which was 5% of the time....

he was really good when he had his good stuff which was 10% of the time....

and he was better than most when he had his typical stuff 50% of the time.....

the other 50% of the time he was avg to below avg due to his control

yes, people tend to forget how bad he was at times. He was sort of a laughing stock before moving to the Rangers.

**reno cool** · 07-19-09, 05:35 AM

When I saw the name of this thread, Maddux was the name that came to mind. I would agree that he's the best of his era. Longevity at a high level does count.

**obamaismyuncle** · 07-19-09, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by Chi_archie

Nolan was the greatest pitcher ever when he was really really on.... which was 1% of the time

and was one of the greatest when he was really on which was 5% of the time....

he was really good when he had his good stuff which was 10% of the time....

and he was better than most when he had his typical stuff 50% of the time.....

the other 50% of the time he was avg to below avg due to his control

You are exactly correct on this. Nolan had some pretty bad years as well.

**thebestthereis** · 07-19-09, 07:52 AM

17 gold gloves says it all

**MartinBlank** · 07-19-09, 07:55 AM

Anyone here remember Steve Carlton's 1972 year?

Try this one on.

He played on a team that was 59-97.

And these were his numbers...

27 Wins
30 Complete Games
310 K's
1.87 ERA

Career

322 Wins
4136 K's
3.12 ERA

**jellobiafra** · 07-19-09, 09:24 AM

I started this thread the other night just to pay homage to my favorite player of all time, on the night his number was retired in ATL. The only thing I'll say about the subsequent chatter is that I don't believe you can compare athletes from the early 1900's (or even later era's) with the athletes of today. Cy Young and Walter Johnson - GUYS NOBODY HERE EVER SAW PITCH - have incredible numbers that are hard to ignore. But the game was entirely different back then - from the mound, to the ball, to the park, to the training, to the scouting, to the score/record keeping, to the talent and ability of the hitters. None of the things I just mentioned can be underestimated for their effect on making the game much more pitcher-friendly in the past.

In 1968 Bob Gibson had a 1.12 ERA and Denny McClain won 31 games. Loius Tiant had an ERA of 1.60 and in all there were 17 pitchers with an ERA below 2.50. After that season, baseball lowered the mound from 15 inches to 10. Ever since then the league has steadily insitiuted changes (from discouraging inside pitches to allowing body armor to shrinking the strikezone) in favor of hitters and to the detriment of it's pitchers.

I just can't ever be convinced that these relics from past eras would have nearly the success they had in today's game - with todays hitters, rules, equipment and parks. In 1968, Carl Yazstremski led the AL in hitting with a .301 average. He was the only player to hit over .290 that season. The entire league ERA was around 3.20. In 1994 and 1995 (the years Maddux posted 1.66 and 1.53 ERA's respectively) the league ERA's were well over 4.00. That should give some perspective to his accomplishments.

355 wins. 3.12 career ERA. 18 gold gloves. 4 Cy Young awards. Sure some pitchers had better short term success. Certainly many were more dominant. But if we are talking about an entire career's worth of performance and achievement, I still stand by my initial statement: Greg Maddux is the best pitcher to ever play the game.