that's a joke, right?

Posted by sjpoker on 4/23/2017 8:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by thejuice6 on 4/23/2017 8:03:00 PM (view original):
As great as Willie Mays was, someone could make an argument for Christy Mathewson as well. Granted, Baseball-Reference.com isn't the beat-all-end-all of argument solvers but still...

Mays: 12 times was the teams best player - went to three World Series - won one.
Mathewson: 10 times was the teams best player - went to five World Series - won one (includes 1904 when there was no World Series but the Giants would have been the N.L. representative).

I still think Mays wins this one but to me it's closer than some may think...

Agreed. Mathewson was considered the best pitcher of his time. You could argue he STILL is the greatest pitcher ever.

Was he, though? About 60% of Mathewson's career coincided with Walter Johnson's early dominance of the AL. By a few years into that I think most people thought Walter Johnson was the best pitcher going.

Moreover, evaluating players primarily by how they were perceived in their own time and ignoring what we know about baseball now is somewhat negligent. Mathewson pitched for the best team in baseball at a time when wins and losses were considered the most important pitching stats. On the basis of run prevention, Mathewson is not on par with Johnson, Ed Walsh, Joss, Cy Young, Smoky Joe Wood, or even Mordecai Brown. You might still rank him ahead of some of those guys because of his longevity, but he wasn't really a standout pitcher at the time. He was one of the best but not an outlier. You compare that to guys like Walter Johnson, Lefty Grove, Tom Seaver, Pedro, or Kershaw who were for at least portions of their career clearly head-and-shoulders better than the rest of the league and I don't see much of an argument for him as the "greatest pitcher ever." Or even the top 10.

I'll agree that I wouldn't consider Mathewson as GOAT pitcher, but he certainly was a standout pitcher in his day. He led the NL in all the key metrics of the day (wins, ERA, strikeouts) multiple times. Even using modern day metrics, he stands out among his peers.

Posted by bad_luck on 4/18/2017 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/18/2017 1:13:00 PM (view original):
Cobb vs Kaline vs Trammel

Trammel doesn't even belong in that group. I think it's Cobb, 100%, but you could argue some for Kaline. That would be akin to me saying "Well, I'd go with Ruth but Gehrig and Mantle need to be in there. That said, those dudes played a long time ago. JETER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

And that is kinda dumb.

Jeter and Trammell as rough equivalents, me and mike finally agree.

I agree that Jeter and Tramm are roughly equivalent, but neither of them is a pimple on the *** of Ruth or Cobb.

If we define greatness based on what if sports salaries, for example lets say a great season is a $9 million dollar or more:
Young 17 seasons (9 of them in the 19th century)
Johnson 14 seasons
Mathewson 12 seasons
Alexander 8 seasons
Walsh 7 seasons
Joss 5 seasons
Maddux 5 seasons
Three Finger Brown 5 seasons
Koufax 4 seasons
Pedro 3 seasons
Joe Wood 2 seasons
I think some of you are vastly under-rating Matty. To say some of the greats above were much better is absurd. Big 6 was widely acknowledged as the finest pitcher in the game for 10 years. He certainly merits top 5 of all time discussion.

First 5 Players voted into the Hall of Fame: Ruth, Cobb, Wagner, Johnson, Mathewson.

Matty's lifetime k/w ratio of 2.9564 is 58th all time which may not sound like much, but it was the best in Baseball History for over 50 years, when Marichal and Jenkins came along (not counting Tommy Bond (1876-1884) who pitched his entire career from 50 feet away from the plate). Better than Koufax, Johnson, better than anyone.

Better ERA AND WHIP than Johnson. Averaged 24.8 wins per year for 15 equivalent full seasons, Johnson, 21.8 wins per year over 19 equivalent seasons. Matty's career was cut short when he got a sniff of poison gas in France. The time away from the game at his age may have lead to a rapid decline anyway, but he was never the same. When Johnson finished his career in 1927 Matty had been in the grave for two years.

Comparing WHIP, ERA, or even wins for guys who played in different leagues at different times is virtually meaningless.

For his career, Mathewson's ERA was 35% better than the league average over the same span. Walter Johnson's was 47% better. The only starters with better career ERA+ than Johnson are Kershaw, Pedro, and Lefty Grove.

HOF voting is also largely irrelevant for the reasons I outlined before. WIS salary is heavily volume-dependent and era-dependent. Being a $9 million pitcher in the deadball era was not a major achievement. Close to half of the #1 starters from the 1900s are around that number or better. Being a $9 million pitcher any time after 1920 becomes a huge accomplishment. There are 199 guys in the database with a salary of $9 million+ during Matty's career (1900-1916). There are 180 from 1920-present.

The best point you made was K/BB. That's a pretty legitimate point in Matty's favor. He really didn't walk anybody.