Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

13th Greatest Pitcher

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

  • #16
    1. Bob Feller
    2. Smokey Joe Williams
    3. Kid Nicholls
    4. Carl Hubbell
    5. Bob Gibson
    "(Van) Mungo and I get along fine. I just tell him I won't stand for no nonsense, and then I duck."
    Casey Stengel

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by AstrosFan View Post
      Since this is a greatest pitchers series, I judge them entirely on how they performed as pitchers, not as overall players. I would only include offense if the thread creator asked specifically for it to be included, not the other way around.

      Gibson was a great postseason pitcher, but Hubbell was pretty good himself. Because of that, there's simply no way Gibson can make up much ground there without putting enormous weight on playoff performance. I factor it in, but it doesn't put Gibson ahead.
      4) Gibson - nobody gets a bigger boost from post-season play
      ______________________

      Gibson was 7-2 in the post season but he gets three easy wins in 1967 vs a Red Sox team that

      a) had to pitch a journeyman with a career record of 13-19 going into 1967 in 2 starts
      2) had to pitch a rookie with 42 IP of ML experience in another start
      3) had to pitch an unrested Cy Young WInner in a fourth start

      Gibson benefitted from these factors in all three games he pitched

      he also faced a Red Sox team that had the worst win% of any team in modern history (pre-playoffs)

      and a team that had to play without its second best player, 1965 home run champ and 1967 all-star Tony Conigliaro

      Gibson also benefitted with two games of 7 and 10 run support

      my question is who would not win 3 games against this team and these circumstances

      take out these three wins and Gibson is a 4-2 post season pitcher who almost blew a G7 6-0 lead giving up 5 runs and three home runs, and lost another G7 4-1.

      he beat a weak red Sox team that was not able to start a a rested Lonborg (or even a decent starter) in all three games he (Gibson) pitched
      Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 06-19-2009, 02:18 PM.
      1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
      2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
      3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

      Comment


      • #18
        1 Ed Walsh, THE alltime ERA leader, and no 3 in ERA +, last 40 game winner,
        The next four, very close and some very fine hurlers left out.
        2 Carl Hubbell
        3 Addie Joss
        4 Juan Marichal
        5 Moe Brown

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
          4) Gibson - nobody gets a bigger boost from post-season play
          ______________________

          Gibson was 7-2 in the post season but he gets three easy wins in 1967 vs a Red Sox team that

          a) had to pitch a journeyman with a career record of 13-19 going into 1967 in 2 starts
          2) had to pitch a rookie with 42 IP of ML experience in another start
          3) had to pitch an unrested Cy Young WInner in a fourth start

          Gibson benefitted from these factors in all three games he pitched
          You're using wins to measure his performance, which is a weak argument to begin with.

          he also faced a Red Sox team that had the worst win% of any team in modern history (pre-playoffs)
          What constitutes modern for you? The 1959 Dodgers had a worse winning percentage. Or are you talking post-expansion, up to that point? That's a very small span, and the 1967 Red Sox only take the top spot due to a series of teams far outperforming their Pythagorean W-L%, which is usually a better predictor of future performance.

          and a team that had to play without its second best player, 1965 home run champ and 1967 all-star Tony Conigliaro
          George Scott was their second best position player in 1967. Better offensively and defensively.

          Gibson also benefitted with two games of 7 and 10 run support
          Yes, a guy who pitches three complete games while allowing three runs total was dependent on such great offensive support.

          my question is who would not win 3 games agaisnt this team and these circumstances
          My question is, who would beat Bob Gibson the way he was pitching? Even without Conigliario, the Red Sox were a contender for best offensive team in the AL that year, and that's accounting for park adjustments. Your argument is to compare him to the pitchers he faced off against, and try to use that to suggest that his wins were easy. That misleads the reader, because it fails to account for how great Gibson was that series.

          take out these three wins and Gibson is a 4-2 post season pitcher who almost blew a G7 6-0 lead giving up 5 runs and three home runs, and lost another G7 4-1.
          You still haven't given a good reason to take out those three wins. Gibson's 1967 WS is one of the greatest of all time, based on actual performance, not on how many games he won. In 1968, he beat 31 game and Cy Young winner Denny McLain twice, but you don't bring up the quality of the pitcher there. Got outpitched by Lolich in game seven, but Gibson carried the Cards staff that series. With him, 32 ER in 62 IP. Without, 27 ER in 35 IP. He had a magnificent postseason, and losing game seven to a pitcher who went 3-0 in the series and was named MVP doesn't change that.

          he beat a weak red Sox team that was not able to start a a rested Lonborg (or even a decent starter) in all three games he (Gibson) pitched
          Again, irrelevant, as the quality of the opposing pitchers had no bearing on the quality of his pitching. Gibson's 1967 is one of the greatest of all time, and there's no reason to ignore it.

          Career postseason: 81 IP, 9 GS, 8 CG, 2 SHO, 7-2, 1.89 ERA. 92 K, 17 BB. Two World Series MVPs.

          Your argument is to falsely represent how impressive Gibson's pitching in 1967 was by noting the Red Sox did not have a great starting staff going into the series, while ignoring how well he actually pitched. Then you remove that series entirely from his postseason record based on that erroneous approach, and use selective sampling to mislead the reader on how good he was in 1964 and 1968. The first was his worst postseason, but he won the WS MVP, and the second was brilliant, but he lost out to a killer performance by Mickey Lolich. Of course, the Tigers had a better team that year, and were quite a bit better offensively. Gibson had tougher competition to face. Switch the support, and he likely goes 3-0 and has a third WS MVP.
          "Any pitcher who throws at a batter and deliberately tries to hit him is a communist."

          - Alvin Dark

          Comment


          • #20
            I think a rested Lonborg beats Gibson in G1

            Lonborg pitched a 1 hit shutout in G2

            do that in G1 and Gibson loses

            who is to say a rested Lonborg would not have done the same (beat Gibson) in Game 4 and 7

            I will take Conigs RBI and HR totals over Scotts in 200 less AB any day of the year

            I have made a comparison to Gibson's 1968 regular and post season on another thread, please see my reference to is Bob Gibson over rated thread and near the end my comparison of 1963 Koufax and 1968 gibson

            these facts are unrefuted:
            1) Gibson never faced a quality starter in the 1967 world series, twice a
            journeyman reliever pushed into emergency starts and once a non rested Lonborg

            2) the red Sox played without Conig, you can argue Scott was better, I will take Conig, he finished second on the team in HR despite missing appx 200 AB

            3) the Red Sox were a weak team, made weaker by no Conig and not having a rested Lonborg available

            heck they were so short of pitching they had to start a rookie with 42 IP in the mL in Game 6, they had no option but to start a non rested Lonborg in G7

            I stand by my assessment

            Gibson was 2-1 in 1964 and the Cards won G7 in spite of him not because of him



            you can argue Gibson would have beat anyone, it is an opinion
            1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
            2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
            3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

            Comment


            • #21
              note I was questioning whether NO ONE GETS A BIGGER BOOST FROM POST SEASON PLAY

              I do not concede that

              beating a .568 team three times without their second best player and without a rested Lonborg challenging Gibson in any game, let alone a possible three does not make Gibson's 1967 world series impress me, ,I will leave aside he was able to rest all year (his arm) due to the Clemente line drive

              sorry thats how I feel

              you admit 1964 he was not that good and 1968 he lost to a better pitcher

              heck the Tigers hit .235 as a team during RS and had no SS
              1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
              2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
              3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

              Comment


              • #22
                What constitutes modern for you?

                My memory is the 1967 Red Sox at .568 had the lowest win % of any AL pennant winner from 1901 to the creation of division play in 1969.

                Only the war year Browns (1944) and Tigers (1945) were even close but even they had better winning %

                by definition (lowest win %) they were a weak pennant winner, not even taking into the account missing Conigliaro and having Lonborg unavailable for either G1, G4 or a rested G7
                1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
                2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
                3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

                Comment


                • #23
                  1. Bob Feller
                  2. Bob Gibson
                  3. Steve Carlton
                  4. Kid Nichols
                  5. Carl Hubbell

                  As always, apologies to potentially deserving 19th century guys and Negro Leaguers.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Nichols
                    Hubbell
                    Gibson
                    Ford
                    Feller

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Hi

                      Nichols
                      Hubbell
                      Gibson
                      Rivera
                      Feller
                      You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the $%#%! plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all. ~Earl Weaver

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Three-Finger Brown
                        Bob Gibson
                        Hubbell
                        Ford
                        Marichal
                        SJ Williams

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          1 Ryan
                          2 Koufax
                          3 Carlton
                          4 Feller
                          5 Gibson

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Nichols
                            Feller
                            S.J. Williams
                            Hubbell
                            Bob Gibson

                            I'm voting to help out the cause, but this is a pretty old ranking for me. I have been contemplating moving the big IP guys like Carlton, Ryan, Perry, Neikro up.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              1. Bob Gibson
                              2. Steve Carlton
                              3. Smokey Joe Williams
                              4. Robin Roberts
                              5. Kid Nichols

                              Next up Bob Feller, Gaylord Perry, Fergie Jenkins, Carl Hubbell, Dazzy Vance.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                This one is a real nail-biter. We'll almost unquestionably need the full 20.
                                "Any pitcher who throws at a batter and deliberately tries to hit him is a communist."

                                - Alvin Dark

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X