Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rube Waddell - most underrated pitcher ever?

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by torez77
    However, saying that Joss has no business in the HOF is ridiculous. His 1.89 ERA is 2nd all-time, adjusted ERA+ of 142 is 10th all-time. His 8.7 baserunners per 9 innings happens to be 1st all-time. He had a short career, but it was an excellent one, HOF worthy without question.

    ......
    I feel that Joss, Waddell, and other pitchers from that era such as Ed Walsh, Mordecai Brown and Smokey Joe Wood don't get the credit they deserve. They shouldn't be mentioned quite in the same breath as the Big 4 from that era (Johnson, Alexander, Mathewson, Young), but they are just below them IMO. I may be stretching it with Smokey Joe, but at his peak he was awesome and Walter once said no man alive can throw harder than Smokey Joe.
    Well, I'm glad we don't have to debate that at least Walter Johnson, Mathewson and Cy Young are all superior to Joss. Joss finishes 11th among pitchers in the decade 1900-09 behind those three, McGinnity, Waddell, Vic Willis, Plank, Three Finger Brown, Chesbro, Doc White and Jack Powell. I can see putting Joss ahead of White and Powell on peak performance. I look at six categories for guys in this era: Black Ink, Gray ink, HOF standards, career win shares, win share total in his best three seasons, and best win share total in five consecutive seasons. We'll go through the comparison to Chesbro in detail below in a moment. Of the HOFers (thus leaving out White and Powell), Joss can only edge Plank in gray ink, tie Waddell in HOF standards, and get Willis in HOF standards and best five consecutive, at least in that decade. He gets swamped on career wins shares by every one of them and often is significantly behind these guys in at least most of these categories. Even if we cut it down to 8 seasons in the decade like Joss (who only managed 7 more win shares from 1910 on), these guys are still beating him.

    The real coup de grace for Joss's case in my mind, though, is the comparison to Jack Chesbro:

    ......................................Chesbro..... .............Joss
    black ink..................................27........... ...........19
    gray ink.................................130........... ..........143
    HOF standards..........................40............. .........47
    career win shares.....................209.................... 191
    win shares in 00-09..................203.....................184
    win shares in best 8 yrs.............195.....................184
    best 3 yrs of win shares.............103.......................88
    best 5 consecutive win shares.....143.....................131

    I threw in the decade and best 8 seasons figures to try and give Joss a break, but it did no good. There's 130 years of baseball, and we've got 70 major league pitchers or so in the Hall. That works out to about a decade on average if we leave out the last decade. If you want to push it to 7 or 8 by taking fewer 19th century guys and eliminating duplicates, OK--but we already have 8 from the decade before getting to Joss versus Chesbro. The selection of Chesbro has drawn a lot of flak, but if we're only going to take Chesbro or Joss, I take Chesbro hands down.

    I might add that only three of the ten most similar pitchers to Joss are in the HOF, and two of them are Candy Cummings (for his supposed invention of the curve) and Monte Ward (who had about two other HOF caliber careers in baseball, one as a shortstop and another as a executive type).

    Jim Albright
    Last edited by jalbright; 02-27-2006, 02:40 PM.
    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

    Comment


    • #17
      wow - the history of the game and the value of individuals boiled down to a few numbers - my least favorite aspect of bbf

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by leecemark
        --He's definately considered by pretty much everyone at least one notch below Johnson, Mathewson and Alexander becasue he didn't excell nearly as long as they did. He is somewhat comparable to Sandy Koufax in that regard.
        --There is a(nother) debate currently in progress about wether Koufax is overrated (or underrated). I think 50 years from now when everybody who actually saw Koufax pitch is gone you could start a thread asking the exact same question about Sandy you just asked about Rube. Less the comment about his lack of mental prowess of course.

        That's my take

        To me Koufax and Waddell are so similiar

        They are all time greats, but the truly greats have dominace AND longevity

        So basically my all time favorite ballplayer (I can cite off any Waddell story and he is how I started researching deadball and 19th century baseball) just has that one knock on him

        He was a little inconsistent as well...which is amazing...imagine how good he could of been? But then again...if he wasn't so eccentric would he have ever been as great?
        Hmmmmm

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bkmckenna
          wow - the history of the game and the value of individuals boiled down to a few numbers - my least favorite aspect of bbf

          wow, and I thought you and I wouldn't see eye to eye on alot of issues...at least we agree on this one.

          I despise that a number is the tell all can't argue metric

          "figures don't lie but liars figure"

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by 538280
            Joss is extremely overrated. He had a very short career because of his premature death of course, and he really wasn't nearly as dominant in that time as he's made out to be. Is it possibly for such a dominating pitcher to only have 19 points of black ink? Robin Roberts had 62 points of black ink in his peak, and actually pitched a little bit after his peak (unlike Joss), and yet we have lots of people rating Joss ahead of him in the pitcher poll.

            He really has no business in the HOF, and Rube Waddell may not deserve it either, although he is very close and with all the fame he has may be a worhty selection.

            Joss was not only the most feared of his time, moreso then Ed Walsh and his new trick pitch but was so beloved the very 1st 'all star' game was played in his honor

            If that doesn't convince you that they thought highly of him then here is a number for you


            42

            (see if anyone gets that reference)

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Imapotato
              Joss was not only the most feared of his time, moreso then Ed Walsh and his new trick pitch but was so beloved the very 1st 'all star' game was played in his honor
              Joss may very well have been the most feared pitcher of his time, but that really doesn't mean anything to me. He didn't last nearly as long, and in reality he wasn't as good as guys like Walsh, Plank, Chesbro, Brown, Willis, and more. There's a difference between perception and reality, and if we know the reality I really don't care about the perception.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by bkmckenna
                wow - the history of the game and the value of individuals boiled down to a few numbers - my least favorite aspect of bbf
                Why is it some people have such a resentment to numbers? Maybe what Jim is saying is very reasonable, logical, and even right, but the fact he used numbers just makes it all irrelevent to you. You have to realize that value to a baseball team can be quantified. Of course, you probably HOPE than it can't.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by 538280
                  Why is it some people have such a resentment to numbers? Maybe what Jim is saying is very reasonable, logical, and even right, but the fact he used numbers just makes it all irrelevent to you. You have to realize that value to a baseball team can be quantified. Of course, you probably HOPE than it can't.

                  or maybe its the fact that I have seen the same amount of 'formulas' contradict another set of 'formulas'

                  Fact is if you go looking, someone out there will have something that contradicts Jim's numbers

                  and the FACT remains, that if any deadballers were still alive and you gave them the list of P's you mentioned

                  They have and would say that Joss was the best

                  Plank, McGinnity, Brown, Willis and Chesboro had better squads, the latter 2 dominant Pirate clubs...and that means alot in the deadball era..whether you pitch hard because you might have a 1-0 score or your team scores 5 in the 1st and you can breeze through the game

                  I mean couldn't you use just logic and see Joss have a 1.16 ERA with 2x as many runs as earned runs...and he went 24-11 and say "how the heck did that happen??"

                  ERA was the measuring tool of an era that runs were at a premium
                  Last edited by Imapotato; 02-27-2006, 06:03 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by bkmckenna
                    i think waddell is actually very well respected - best strikeout per game ratio prior to wwii - to me i always thought addie joss was the most overlooked pitcher of the 20th century
                    Did anyone else read that SABR Research Journal article awhile back about Dazzy Vance being the greatest strikeout pitcher of all time?

                    I'd say that everywhere else but here, Vance is probably the most overlooked (and possibly underrated) pitcher in history.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by csh19792001
                      Did anyone else read that SABR Research Journal article awhile back about Dazzy Vance being the greatest strikeout pitcher of all time?

                      I'd say that everywhere else but here, Vance is probably the most overlooked (and possibly underrated) pitcher in history.
                      I agree Vance is extremely underrated. He also got worse run support than any HOF pitcher. I would say he is the most underrated pitcher of all time, but that is before I've seen how Robin Roberts is doing in the pitcher poll. We're on poll #20 and many people still don't have him on their ballot! Bill still has him like 15 spots away!

                      Fergie Jenkins is really underrated too IMO.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by csh19792001
                        Did anyone else read that SABR Research Journal article awhile back about Dazzy Vance being the greatest strikeout pitcher of all time?

                        I'd say that everywhere else but here, Vance is probably the most overlooked (and possibly underrated) pitcher in history.
                        Vance had 3 great, great years, but was nothing spectacular beyond that. Short career, less than 3000 IP, fewer than 200 wins, only 4 seasons with over 120 ERA+. I agree that Vance is underrated by the general public, but would contest that he is maybe a little overrated around here...even taking in account for lack of run support. I like Vance, so it is nothing personal. I guess those who love 3 year peaks and/or k rates would have him ranked in the top 20 all-time, but I tend to look at top 10-12 years when rating a pitcher.
                        Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 02-27-2006, 06:43 PM.
                        1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                        1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                        1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                        The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                        The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Double post. Sorry!

                          As far as most underrated pitcher, I would go with Nichols. He is as almost unknown to the general public as Vance, but had a far superior career.
                          Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 02-27-2006, 06:35 PM.
                          1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                          1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                          1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                          The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                          The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Imapotato
                            wow, and I thought you and I wouldn't see eye to eye on alot of issues...at least we agree on this one.

                            I despise that a number is the tell all can't argue metric

                            "figures don't lie but liars figure"
                            It would be easy to interpret the above as saying something derogatory about me. I choose to believe it is, instead, horribly careless and insensitive writing on your part. Regardless of what you think of the numbers I quoted, I have not attempted to distort anything, much less prevaricate. Please be more careful about the language used in your postings in the future.

                            Jim Albright
                            Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
                            Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
                            A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by jalbright
                              Well, I'm glad we don't have to debate that at least Walter Johnson, Mathewson and Cy Young are all superior to Joss. Joss finishes 11th among pitchers in the decade 1900-09 behind those three, McGinnity, Waddell, Vic Willis, Plank, Three Finger Brown, Chesbro, Doc White and Jack Powell. I can see putting Joss ahead of White and Powell on peak performance. I look at six categories for guys in this era: Black Ink, Gray ink, HOF standards, career win shares, win share total in his best three seasons, and best win share total in five consecutive seasons. We'll go through the comparison to Chesbro in detail below in a moment. Of the HOFers (thus leaving out White and Powell), Joss can only edge Plank in gray ink, tie Waddell in HOF standards, and get Willis in HOF standards and best five consecutive, at least in that decade. He gets swamped on career wins shares by every one of them and often is significantly behind these guys in at least most of these categories. Even if we cut it down to 8 seasons in the decade like Joss (who only managed 7 more win shares from 1910 on), these guys are still beating him.

                              The real coup de grace for Joss's case in my mind, though, is the comparison to Jack Chesbro:

                              ......................................Chesbro..... .............Joss
                              black ink..................................27........... ...........19
                              gray ink.................................130........... ..........143
                              HOF standards..........................40............. .........47
                              career win shares.....................209.................... 191
                              win shares in 00-09..................203.....................184
                              win shares in best 8 yrs.............195.....................184
                              best 3 yrs of win shares.............103.......................88
                              best 5 consecutive win shares.....143.....................131

                              I threw in the decade and best 8 seasons figures to try and give Joss a break, but it did no good. There's 130 years of baseball, and we've got 70 major league pitchers or so in the Hall. That works out to about a decade on average if we leave out the last decade. If you want to push it to 7 or 8 by taking fewer 19th century guys and eliminating duplicates, OK--but we already have 8 from the decade before getting to Joss versus Chesbro. The selection of Chesbro has drawn a lot of flak, but if we're only going to take Chesbro or Joss, I take Chesbro hands down.

                              I might add that only three of the ten most similar pitchers to Joss are in the HOF, and two of them are Candy Cummings (for his supposed invention of the curve) and Monte Ward (who had about two other HOF caliber careers in baseball, one as a shortstop and another as a executive type).

                              Jim Albright
                              In Bill James Historical Abstract, I see Joss averaging more Win Shares (31.51) for his career than McGinnity (29.52), Waddell (30.59) , and Plank (30.08), and I don't see Willis, Chesbro, White or Powell listed among the top pitchers in WS. Average win shares matters more than career win shares, especially versus most of the pitchers you listed, since their careers were equally or close to equally as short as Joss'. Forgive me, but I don't understand the logic of comparing the WS total of their best 3 seasons and their best WS total in 5 straight seasons, when Joss averages more WS for his total career. BTW, from what source are you getting this information?
                              Red, it took me 16 years to get here. Play me, and you'll get the best I got.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by csh19792001
                                Did anyone else read that SABR Research Journal article awhile back about Dazzy Vance being the greatest strikeout pitcher of all time?

                                I'd say that everywhere else but here, Vance is probably the most overlooked (and possibly underrated) pitcher in history.
                                I also agree that Vance is underrated. He was like Waddell in that he was a strikeout artist ahead of his time.
                                Red, it took me 16 years to get here. Play me, and you'll get the best I got.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X