Best pitcher in the 80's

[Clarkmeister]

I took the 3 mentioned below (Morris, Stieb and Ryan) and added the 2 next best based on the stats for every pitcher in the 80's (Fernando and Gooden).

The results are at this link (long as URL):

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats_historical/mlb_historical_player_stats.jsp?section2=null&stat Set2=null&statType=2&sortByStat=W&timeFrame=1&time SubFrame=1980&timeSubFrame=1981&timeSubFrame=1982& timeSubFrame=1983&timeSubFrame=1984&timeSubFrame=1 985&timeSubFrame=1986&timeSubFrame=1987&timeSubFra me=1988&timeSubFrame=1989&baseballScope=mlb&prevPa ge2=1&readBoxes=true&subScope=posCode&teamPosCode= 1&HS=true&box1=XXXX119399detX&box2=XXXX122791torX& box3=XXXX123619lanX&box10=XXXX121597houX&box14=XXX X114947nynX&compare.x=22&compare.y=7


Hard to argue against Morris, though Gooden was so brilliant that he makes the list having missed the first 4 years of the decade.

[andyfox]

FWIW:

Total Baseball gives the following Total Pitcher Index ratings for the 1980s:

Morris: 9.5
Stieb: 24.2
Valenzuela 14.5
Ryan 6.8
Gooden 15.6

Bill James credits them with the follwoing Win Shares for the 1980s:

Morris: 154
Stieb: 175
Valenzuela 135
Ryan 123
Dwight Gooden 103

I'll stick with my choice of Stieb.

[B-Man]

I can't argue with that. However, none of those pitchers are as good as more recent pitchers who may not have had their period of dominance coincide with a particular decade (i.e. Pedro, Clemens, Maddux and Randy Johnson are much better than anyone on that list).

If Clemens was born 2-3 years earlier he would have been the best pitcher of the 80s, but as it is, he was the best pitcher from 1985-1995 (and probably from 1985-present).

Maddux was the best pitcher of the 90s.

Pedro was the best pitcher from 1995 - present.

Randy Johnson is the best pitcher of the 2000s (so far).

[Clarkmeister]

The mlb stats site is one of the best sites on the web....I diddled around after reading your post and found something rather surprising.

Tom Glavine has 40 more wins than anyone from 1990-present.

I never would have guessed that.

[B-Man]

i dont agree on maddux. i would go with clemens and i it is close. maddux had a higher peak, but clemens played on worse teams in a much worse park and in my view was better. but it is close.

Pat

[B-Man]

Pat, I am a Red Sox fan, so I have mixed feelings on Clemens, but I think Maddux was clearly better from 1990 - 1999. Maddux record was obviously much better because he played for better teams, so I won't rely on that. But Maddux' ERA was 2.34, Roger's 3.05. Maddux had a 4-year stretch in the early 90s when his cumulative ERA was below 2.00. He was consistently excellent throughout the decade, while Clemens had some off years (he was 40-39 his last 4 years with Boston, and in 99 his ERA with the Yankees was worse than the league average).

Here is the stat comparison for the 1990s:

1990s Pitching Comparison (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats_historical/mlb_historical_player_stats.jsp?section2=null&stat Set2=null&statType=2&sortByStat=IP&timeFrame=1&tim eSubFrame=1990&timeSubFrame=1991&timeSubFrame=1992 &timeSubFrame=1993&timeSubFrame=1994&timeSubFrame= 1995&timeSubFrame=1996&timeSubFrame=1997&timeSubFr ame=1998&timeSubFrame=1999&baseballScope=mlb&prevP age2=1&readBoxes=true&sitSplit=&subScope=teamCode& teamPosCode=all&HS=true&box1=XXXX114849atlX&box2=X XXX122477atlX&box6=XXXX116615seaX&box7=XXXX118120a tlX&box12=XXXX112388bosX&compare.x=15&compare.y=4)

[Clarkmeister]

Re: Maddux vs Clemens in the 90's.

People have forgotten how poorly Clemens pitched in his last 4 years at Boston. The thing I have learned from all this is just how much I have underrated Glavine's career. Here are the most prominent pitchers in the 90's:

1990-1999:
Glavine 180-94, 3.24 ERA, 1580 SO
Smoltz 146-98, 3.32 ERA, 1950 SO
Maddux 143-62, 2.43 ERA, 1396 SO
Nagy 126-92, 4.28 ERA, 1172 SO
Mussina 136-66, 3.50 ERA, 1325 SO
Johnson 123-65, 3.34 ERA, 2058 SO
Hentgen 105-76, 4.14 ERA, 995 SO
Clemens 97-66, 3.05 ERA, 1375 SO

I agree that Roger Clemens is a great pitcher during the regular season but he seems to choke in the playoffs. Do you have stats on this?

[B-Man]

I think this was true until he got to the Yankees (when he no longer had the same pressure on him because he had so many great teammates).

With Boston, in 9 postseason starts Clemens was 1-2 with an ERA over 4. Now, his career postseason numbers are 6-6 with a 3.33 ERA in 21 starts. So he has been better for NY than he was for Boston (Toronto never made the playoffs when he was there).

Contrast this with Pedro, who in 4 postseason starts is 3-0 with a 1.12 ERA (24 innings, 11 hits, 6 walks, 31 strikeouts) and has not allowed a run in 17 consecutive innings (it might be more, but I know he gave up zero runs in the 1999 playoffs).

[Ed Miller]

The Red Sox terminate your contract if you don't choke in the playoffs...

[Glenn]

I'll go with Stieb too. Morris had a lot of wins and innings, but was not as dominant, even looking at adjusted numbers. I just wanted to bring up Ryan because everyone dismisses him. Bill James is pretty anti-Ryan, and lots of people seem to follow this. While I enjoy reading his stuff, I don't agree with some of his methods. When I hear Reggie Jackson or Pete Rose say that Ryan was the best, that means a lot to me too. I mean, I am probably better at math than Doyle Brunson, but who would you trust to pick the best high stakes poker player?

[Dynasty]

Your long link is pissing me off. It's so hard to read this thread.

[John Cole]

B-Man,

Take a look at Clemen's numbers in 1996 and 2001, in which he went 10-13 and 20-3 respectively. His stats are nearly the same. Also note that in '96, Wakefield went 14-13 with an ERA nearly 1.5 higher than Clemen's. I watched most of the games during those "off" years Roger had with Boston, and estimate that his team's horrible middle relief and mediocre, at best, defense cost him at least 15-20 wins. (The closers weren't so hot, either.)

John

[Clarkmeister]

Say it cost him 15-20 wins. That still puts him 15-20 behind the Unit for the 90s. And he's still light yeras behind the top guys.

And over the course of a career, those "fewer wins than he deserved" seasons are countered by the "way more than he deserved" seasons. The two you cited are perfect examples. Clemens wasn't even the best starting pitcher on his team the year he went 20-3. Mussina outperformed him all year, but Rocket got the crazy run support and on he went. That stuff is going to balance out in the end for the most part.

[John Cole]

I agree, in part, but "light years" is quite the exaggeration (note ERA). I'm not quite sure what to make of this, but if you look at the number of wins per start, except for Maddux, who I agree is the best pitcher of the 90's, all are roughly the same.

John

[B-Man]

John,

I watched many of those games, too. In 1996 he should have had a better record, based on his ERA. But what about 1993 and 1995, when his ERA was over 4? He was basically an average pitcher those years. His ERA was also over 4 his first year with the Yankees. His career, overall, has been amazing, but it is not unblemished. Greg Maddux didn't have any off-years in the 1990s, his record and ERA are far superior to Clemens' during that stretch, and that is why I think he is the pitcher of the 90s. Clemens has probably had a more impressive career... but not from 1990-1999.