Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Roger Clemens vs. Nolan Ryan?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sabo-metrics
    replied
    I had heard it mentioned once before, and the late career success does put up a flag in my mind...

    I guess I personally don't think Ryan used PEDs, but I'd be curious to know if anyone has had the guts to ask him to his face.

    * He also has the record for 3-hitters with 31!

    Nolan Ryan threw 69 complete games where he allowed three or fewer hits. That’s more than Roger Clemens … and Pedro Martinez … and Randy Johnson. COMBINED.

    Leave a comment:


  • SamtheBravesFan
    replied
    That is indeed a big assumption. It's casually accepted by a chunk of people that Ryan was on PEDs in Texas.

    Leave a comment:


  • sturg1dj
    replied
    Originally posted by Sabo-metrics View Post
    Clemens hit the juice when he went to Toronto in 1997. If you look at what he did in Boston, he was a great pitcher, potentially one of the best of all-time, but his career was winding down. I think without PEDs, he would have been considered great, but lacking the longevity to be a top 10 all-time Starting Pitcher.

    A lot of people are religiously tied to the numbers, which is natural given that it's black and white data. But I look at Ryan as a special case. His pitching numbers will never hold up because of the walks, but the man threw the 7 no hitters, 12 1-hitters, and 18 2-hitters. Yes he was wilder than anyone, but more intimidating than anyone ever.

    Clemens was better at pitching, but Ryan was a better Starting Pitcher in my opinion. The longevity without PEDs, the ridiculous K records and no-hitters... One game to win with clean Clemens, good luck. One game to win with Ryan any year between '72 and '91... he might just walk out of the building with another painted baseball. Ryan had the potential every single night to completely take over.

    I vote Ryan
    Big assumption that Ryan did so without PED's

    Leave a comment:


  • SamtheBravesFan
    replied
    Don't you think even with "normal" training methods that Clemens could have resurrected his career? It's not impossible is it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sabo-metrics
    replied
    Clemens hit the juice when he went to Toronto in 1997. If you look at what he did in Boston, he was a great pitcher, potentially one of the best of all-time, but his career was winding down. I think without PEDs, he would have been considered great, but lacking the longevity to be a top 10 all-time Starting Pitcher.

    A lot of people are religiously tied to the numbers, which is natural given that it's black and white data. But I look at Ryan as a special case. His pitching numbers will never hold up because of the walks, but the man threw the 7 no hitters, 12 1-hitters, and 18 2-hitters. Yes he was wilder than anyone, but more intimidating than anyone ever.

    Clemens was better at pitching, but Ryan was a better Starting Pitcher in my opinion. The longevity without PEDs, the ridiculous K records and no-hitters... One game to win with clean Clemens, good luck. One game to win with Ryan any year between '72 and '91... he might just walk out of the building with another painted baseball. Ryan had the potential every single night to completely take over.

    I vote Ryan

    Leave a comment:


  • JessePopHaines16
    replied
    Nolan was great but him never winning a Cy Young and possibly not having a 20 K game (even though he had 3 19 K games in one season) hurts him a bit. Probably the starting pitcher on the all durable team in the live ball era with Gehrig at first and Ripken at shortstop.

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Decided to look at some sOPS+ with the bases empty which is basically a players OPS+ allowed among the split compared to all pitchers with the bases empty.

    I picked out the first 4 seasons that came to mind and Ryan came in at

    '72: 51
    '81: 42
    '87: 51
    '89: 42

    Obviously OPS+ has flaws expecially down in the very low range, but he is basically allowing 40-50% of the league offense as measured by OPS+ in those season (similar to posting 200-250 ERA+s)

    For Clemens I checked 2 years:

    '87: 87
    and 2005: 56

    Ryan may have been the best pitcher of all time when no one was on base.

    He may even have a better OPS+ allowed for all batters faced than Clemens, but his poor splits with MOB did more than their share of damage because they contained the vast majority of run opportunities.

    I think that Ryan's career OPS+ allowed for all splits was around 68. Seaver's was around 80. Most great pitchers were even better with MOB relative to the league.

    Did Ryan have the best relative "stuff" of all time? Was he the hardest pitcher to face one on one with the bases empty? Possibly.

    Leave a comment:


  • sturg1dj
    replied
    Originally posted by brett View Post
    Given Kevin Brown's outcome I doubt he gets any support.
    it will give some perspective how

    1) Being a yankee

    2) Not being perceived as a jerk (like Brown) can impact voting

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
    Yeah, I'm kind of looking for stuff like that. Pettitte, ultimately, is a borderline Hall of Famer. What's left now is to see if he gets support.


    Given Kevin Brown's outcome I doubt he gets any support.

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Was Ryan comparable to Clemens with the bases empty? (League relative?). I know that Ryan had a better wRC+ allowed than Seaver and even better with the bases empty. In a single pitcher batter matchup with no oe on base he may have been the toughest pitcher to beat but he was much worse with MO, from the stretch and allowing baseruning advances (where he may have been the worst of all time).

    Leave a comment:


  • JessePopHaines16
    replied
    Nolan probably could have had better numbers in some areas if he played for better teams but going to Houston and Texas was all his choosing. Great power pitcher with maybe above average control. All time leader in strikeouts and walks by miles in both.

    Leave a comment:


  • SamtheBravesFan
    replied
    Yeah, I'm kind of looking for stuff like that. Pettitte, ultimately, is a borderline Hall of Famer. What's left now is to see if he gets support.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
    Petitte, to me at least, is kind of like Bernie Williams. Sure he was part of that Yankee dynasty, but he was just "there", if that makes any sense.
    I am now on the Pettitte bandwagon. HIs BBRef numbers are pretty borderline, but he looks like a no-brainer looking at FG, BBGauge, and BBPro. Throw in the postseason resume and leading the league in wins for a decade (have a bone, friends), and I think he is just over the line.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by sturg1dj View Post
    right, but before game of shadows people talked about Bonds' head size. Then when someone hit a bunch of home runs they would whisper about them. Yet, for some reason the amount of starters that pitched well-into their 40s with success in the late 90's to mid-2000's is not something discussed as much.

    Other than Clemens who has some evidence against him, not many pitchers have had the same scrutiny as batters. Hell, Andy Pettite admitted to using HGH and nobody seems to care.
    As expressed by others...I don't think nobody cares...I think nobody thinks it will be pertinent.

    The only player than nobody in the press really seems to care about heavily-implied PED use is David Ortiz.

    Leave a comment:


  • SamtheBravesFan
    replied
    It's fine, kind of like Maddux's. It pushes him over guys over Jim Kaat and Tommy John. MAYBE that makes him a Hall of Famer, but... I don't know, I think I need to convinced.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X