Roger Clemens

[andyfox]

Has started 15 games this year and given up 17 earned runs.

[Aytumious]

I think it's time he finally hung em up, don't you think, Andy?

[Kevin]

This is the anti-2001. The year he started 20-1, finished 20-3 and had a 3.51 era. Everyone had him as a shoo-in for the Cy Young that year, but I remember an article late in the year comparing his WHIP, K's, etc to one of the Oakland guys. That year, he was annointed early as the CY and they were saying that it was a horse race between Schilling and Johnson - when in fact, when you looked behind the numbs, it was Johnson by far (and he won). Their point was, the A.L. should have been tighter, and Johnson should have been ahead.

I really dig the rocket, he continues to amaze and I am beginning to think that he is the greatest pitcher of all time - all things considered (the last decade of slow pitch softball type offensive numbers, international influence, etc.), and while his record should be much better than 6-3, he probably shouldn't have been 20-3 in 2001. Very long winded way of saying that baseball is the ultimate long run game - both inside a season and a career. (of course, he was incredible in '90 21-6 1.93 - singlehandedly pitched boston to the playoffs - broke down late in the season and Bob Welch got 27 wins and they changed an earned run to an unearned run to get his ERA under 3 so he probably had the '01 Cy coming to him)

[Jack of Arcades]

You could make a case for Mulder or Garcia in 2001, but Clemens was hurt by that defense behind him.

[andyfox]

Yeah, he wasn't even the best pitcher on his team that year (Mussina), much less the league. But he probably did indeed get shafted out of a couple of Cy Young awards earlier in his career, so I suppose we can cut him some slack.

Bill James also thinks there's an argument to be made for him being the greatest pitcher ever. I think he falls short, but he's probably in the top five.

[Jack of Arcades]

You're right, Mussina was better..

As for "greatest pitcher ever," he's certainly the best post-war pitcher.

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
he's certainly the best post-war pitcher

[/ QUOTE ]

Ever heard of Koufax? Gibson? Feller?

Maybe longevitywise but despite all of his Cy Young awards he has more than a couple mediocre/average seasons in there. Even in his own generation strong arguments can be made for Pedro or Maddux. Back in Maddux's heyday he was so dominate over all his peers in ERA it was ridiculous and more recently Pedro is the same way.

This and last season Clemens has been freakishly astonsihing for his age (or any age). Not sure how he continues while all others breakdown repeatedly.

His claim to fame will be his longevity rather than his pitching ability because there have been a lot better pitchers but none of them were constructed from titanium.

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
Ever heard of Koufax? Gibson? Feller?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they don't toch Clemens at all.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe longevitywise but despite all of his Cy Young awards he has more than a couple mediocre/average seasons in there.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Koufax *doesn't*? Koufax only had 6 truly effective seasons.

Gibson had 2 slightly above average seasons, one below-average season, and one horrible season.

What about Feller? 1949 was nothing special, and 1951-1953 were actually, altogher, below average.

Roger Clemens has thrown a) an ever-increasing greater number of innings than those three you listed and b) at an ever-increasing greater rate of performance than those you listed.

Roger also has some ridiculous seasons; nothing quite like Pedro, Gibson, or Maddux - but certainly better than anything Koufax or Feller put up.

Roger had a 1.93 ERA in 1990, and a 2.05 ERA in 1997. Those two seasons are better than ANY Koufax or Feller. Pedro has one season better than Roger's best. Maddux has two. Gibson has one.

Gibson can't TOUCH Roger. Gibson WISHES he were Roger. Gibson's top two seasons in ERA+ are 258 and 164. Roger's are 226 and 211. Then? 177, 176, 175, and 169. That's right; Roger's third, fourth, fifth, sixth, AND seventh best years are better than Gibson's SECOND best, and his eighth is the same. He'll most undoubtedly add another. Roger's current ERA+ is somewhere around 285, which is Pedro's best season...

But your claim that there have been "a lot better pitchers" is just plain wrong. Since WWII, only two starters have a better ERA+ than Roger: Pedro and Randy. The gap between Roger and Randy is very small and ever-closing...

(Maddux, too, had plenty of mediocre seasons. He was a full-time starter early on and wasn't a very effective pitcher until he took off at 26... Roger was effective earlier on. Maddux has also benefited from a pretty good defense.)

[andyfox]

I'm with Jack of Arcades here. I rank Clemens above Koufax, Gibson and Feller. The only three who might approach Clemens, in my estimation, are Spahn, Seaver and Maddux. But I think Clemens now ranks above all three.

[Matt Williams]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, he wasn't even the best pitcher on his team that year (Mussina), much less the league. But he probably did indeed get shafted out of a couple of Cy Young awards earlier in his career, so I suppose we can cut him some slack.

Bill James also thinks there's an argument to be made for him being the greatest pitcher ever. I think he falls short, but he's probably in the top five.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Walter Johnson is the best pitcher of all time but yea Clemens is in the top 5.