Yankees and Starting Pitching

[LouGehrig]

http://baseballpiggies.blogspot.com/

[Yankee Legend]

I agree and disagree with you.

Yes I do agree that johnson is getting older but he does look like a pitcher to me than can excel in his early 40's. look if he preformes the way he did last august and september he'll be fine. mussina's main problem is consistency. in some days he pitched, he got 6 or 7 solid innings. in others he got killed in the first 2. i think this a problem with all the yankees starters...consistency. i disagree, they do have talent. but they need to preform consistently evey time its their turn in the rotation. this is the major promblem the rotation had in 2005. pavano i dont trust. i think we should trade him for a better pitcher. wang is a good young pitcher who, with a little experience, can be a reliable starter. chacon is very good. he is a pitcher who can excel in the AL. he is the only starter here thats preformed consistently every game he pitched. i dont think wright is bad, just that he shouldn't be a starter. he has a hard-throwing arm that will fit in well in our bullpen. he looks like the guy we can use for the 6th/7th inning. i mean he certainly is better than tanyon sturtze. But again, yakees starters do have the talent. They just need to use this talent every time they start.

Also, shouldn't this be in the yankees forum????

[Tinyballer]

If Wang Chien Ming regains the stuff he has had in the past he not only will be a reliable pitcher but one who could end up like Roger Clemens. Similar fastball heater when he was young if wang regains his forum Wang Sinker Clemens Splitter hey who knowes maybe Wang can become an ace if he does regain the nasty stuff he once possessed.

[LouGehrig]

Comparing Wang to Clemens is like comparing Chacon to Ryan.

[DoubleX]

Comparing Wang to Clemens is like comparing Chacon to Ryan.

Agreed. Comparing Wang to Clemens is a bit of a stretch. I think there might be only one pitcher ever that could be reasonably compared to Clemens, and he last pitched in 1927 (Walter Johnson).

[LouGehrig]

At his peak, for a few years and certainly for ONE game that must be won, Koufax destroys Clemens.

[DoubleX]

At his peak, for a few years and certainly for ONE game that must be won, Koufax destroys Clemens.

Destroys Roger Clemens? I'm as big a Koufax fan as anyone, but even when comparing peaks, Clemens comes out ahead. Before I get to some actual statistics, three things to consider about the players:

1) Koufax played in the most pitcher friendly era since the deadball-era. The raised mounds gave pitchers an advantage during Koufax's career.

2) Dodger Stadium is a very pitcher friendly park. The same cannot be said of Fenway, Skydome, and whatever the park is now called in Houston.

3) For more than half of his career, Clemens pitched in an era dominated by offense, making his accomplishments that much more spectacular.

Now for some stats. I'll just stick with top 10 ERA+ seasons:

Sandy Koufax: 190, 187, 161, 160, 143, 124, 107, 104, 102, 92

Roger Clemens: 226, 221, 211, 177, 176, 175, 169, 164, 154, 145

For as good as Koufax was, Clemens has a sizeable lead in peak years. Factor in that Clemens Peak is more than 3x longer than Koufax's, and it's really no contest at all.

As for career ERA+, Koufax is 131, while Clemens is 143, despite nearly 2500 innings more than Koufax (Koufax didn't even pitch 2500 innings in his career). For a guy to be that good for that long is incredible, and Koufax really isn't any competition, even when comparing peak performance.


Koufax five year run was incredible, but Clemens has been doing it for 20. There is a reason Clemens has won 7 Cy Youngs.

[LouGehrig]

As Mark Twain said, There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

How can a valid comparison be make if one defines peak years as ten seasons?

Koufax was at his peak starting in 1963. After four peak seasons, he retired.

For those four seasons, Koufax was better than anyone who ever pitched, including Clemens.

In real life, he was virtually unhittable when he had to be. If the hitter doesn't hit the ball, the hitter can't do much damage.

Koufax had ERA's of 1.88, 1.74, 2.04, and 1.73 in CONSECUTIVE years.

Koufax's WHIPS in those years were 0.875, 0.928, 0.855, and 0.985.

He struck out 382 hitters when hitters didn't strike out as they have for much of Clemens' career.

When facing the best of the other league, Koufax allowed 0.95 earned runs a game. It took Willie Davis and a total of two runs in four games in the 1966 WS to beat Koufax.

Clemens has not exactly been Mr. Clutch in the WS. (See the 1986 Mets and the 2001 Diamondbacks).

You can take Clemens. Those who select Koufax will have made a superior selection.

Now, I am NOT saying that Koufax had a better career. I AM saying that at his peak, Koufax was better than Clemens. Why, Don Sutton had a better career than Koufax in many ways.

Comparing Seaver, Ryan, and Clemens would produce a closer contest. None of them was a good as Koufax, but that is redundant because I already have claimed that at his peak, no one had more talent nor applied it as did Koufax.

Finally, I find it fascinating that some scouts and teams are stating that evaluating talent the old way---by observing---is once again being employed to a great degree because it is difficult to evaluate statistics since one cannot know how such statistics were produced.

Did Mr. McGwire or Mr. Bonds or Mr. Clemens have special help?

The point is not whether a player should be given special help. The point is that statistics, especially in the last few years, have had variables introduced that cannot be controlled.

[DoubleX]

As Mark Twain said, There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

How can a valid comparison be make if one defines peak years as ten seasons?

Koufax was at his peak starting in 1963. After four peak seasons, he retired.

For those four seasons, Koufax was better than anyone who ever pitched, including Clemens.

In real life, he was virtually unhittable when he had to be. If the hitter doesn't hit the ball, the hitter can't do much damage.

Koufax had ERA's of 1.88, 1.74, 2.04, and 1.73 in CONSECUTIVE years.

This is why we use ERA+. Koufax's ERA's were so low because the league as an average posted much lower ERAs in the 60's due to the raised mound. Clemens may never have strung together 4 seasons as strong as Koufax's, but at his peak, Clemens has better seasons according to ERA+. Koufax's high ERA+ was 190; Clemens has eclipsed that three times, going as high as 226, 221, and 211. That's incredible. Koufax never had one year like that, much less three. The fact that Clemens did it for 3x longer than Koufax also says a lot.

Like I said, I'm a big Koufax fan, and would like to have seen him pitch longer, especially considering his last year, 1966 was his greatest. But Clemens, is quite possibly the best pitcher that ever lives, and at his best, has performed better than Koufax (though Koufax did string together 4 consecutive years of greatness, whereas Clemens best years are scattered a bit throughout his career).

[moebarguy]

If Wang Chien Ming regains the stuff he has had in the past he not only will be a reliable pitcher but one who could end up like Roger Clemens. Similar fastball heater when he was young if wang regains his forum Wang Sinker Clemens Splitter hey who knowes maybe Wang can become an ace if he does regain the nasty stuff he once possessed.

I actually laughed out loud when I read this...Wang had 65 K's in 150 IP between Triple-A and the Yanks. He'll be lucky to be a quarter of the pitcher Clemens was and is.

[Tinyballer]

Not like Roger Clemens interms of strike out but if his arm heals he could have similar power arm and stuff he jus seems to be satisfied with a ground ball and thats what it sayz in a few scouting reports that he looks to be a pitcher like roger clemens with similar stuff

[Mattingly]

Agreed. Comparing Wang to Clemens is a bit of a stretch. I think there might be only one pitcher ever that could be reasonably compared to Clemens, and he last pitched in 1927 (Walter Johnson).

How about another Johnson, who last pitched in 2005? Rumor has it that he's 6'10" and is a southpaw. Can he be compared to Clemens?

[Mattingly]

I actually laughed out loud when I read this...Wang had 65 K's in 150 IP between Triple-A and the Yanks. He'll be lucky to be a quarter of the pitcher Clemens was and is.

I remember the Mets advertised about 2 winters ago some "Japanese Nolan Ryan". I'd have remembered his name if he were as advertised, but that's about the same thing.

Wang is very good, but unless he heavily improves upon his 2005 rookie season, I'd say he'll be a good #4-5 pitcher for awhile. He won't overpower opponents, won't throw any unhittable "Lord Charles" curves, but he won't exactly hurt the team either.

If he can improve to being a #3 pitcher, and given that there's a strong enough staff to warrant such a number, I'd be very impressed. However, I'm of the "show me something" variety, in that I'll voice my support of this only after he's demonstrated that he's worthy.

[DoubleX]

How about another Johnson, who last pitched in 2005? Rumor has it that he's 6'10" and is a southpaw. Can he be compared to Clemens?

Nope...

[moebarguy]

Not like Roger Clemens interms of strike out but if his arm heals he could have similar power arm and stuff he jus seems to be satisfied with a ground ball and thats what it sayz in a few scouting reports that he looks to be a pitcher like roger clemens with similar stuff

Doesn't have nearly as powerful of a fastball. He'll be lucky to repeat his rookie season.