Bob Gibson------Pete Lacock

[BigRon]

It's not worth it...

Very funny!! Good one, Los Bravos!

[sandy1]

I am pretty sure he said headhunter (maybe 90% sure)

also Mays played in 2 of 3 games gibson pitched against SF in 1970 and 1 of 3 in 1971 so I am not really buying the second part, he was 40 years old in 1971 (2 of 4 in 1969 as well)

So Mays missed 50% of the games Gibson pitched from 1969-1971..if he wasnt ducking him maybe his managers were keeping him safe. Mays" lifetime against Gibson

108PA/.196/315/304/619

That is Mays worst OPS of anyone he faced over 100 PA

[Victory Faust]

We'll all believe what we want. I believe that Gibson was basically amoral in his approach to the game- that is, he had no sense of ethics. He had a win at all costs mentality. He was going to do whatever he could to win, and super intimidation was a big part of it. He wasn't going to stop until forced to, and in the strange logic of the time, he never was forced to. Great pitcher, definitely not a great person- in my opinion.

An opinion I wholeheartedly agree with. Anyone willing to give guys like Drysdale and Gibson a free pass because "that's just the way it was in those days" must also extend the same courtesy to Ty Cobb when it came to brawling and racism. Sure, Ty was among the worst offenders, but there were certainly a gaggle of other deadball-era players who got into brawls and hated black people. That's just the way it was in those days. Just as Ty was among the worst offenders in his time, so were Drysdale, Gibson, Maglee, etc.


These guys had a "win at all costs" mentality -- and, ironically, the greatest pitcher in history never threw at batters. And none of the aforementioned headhunters could carry Walter Johnson's jockstrap.

[nerfan]

Couple of things.

First of all, the greatest pitcher of all time was Roger Clemens, and he most certainly was a headhunter. Even admitted it in an interview. If you don't like Clemens, plenty of pitchers have an argument as greatest ever who were, if not headhunters, inside throwers - Lefty Grove, Cy Young, Pedro Martinez, perhaps Randy Johnson. Seaver and Maddux are in the discussion for greatest pitcher ever, but despite being "old-school", they weren't really inside throwers and didn't have reps as inside throwers.

Secondly, Walter Johnson was in the former group. You don't get to 205 hit batsmen without throwing inside once in a while. And given that Johnson led the league in K/BB ratio 9 times, I'd say his control was fairly good.

[ol' aches and pains]

Seaver and Maddux are in the discussion

I have never seen or heard anything about Greg Maddux being accused of throwing at hitters. To paint him with the same brush as Gibson and Drysdale is irresponsible. He simply didn't have that reputation. Nor did Seaver as far as I can remember.

[Bothrops Atrox]

Literally speaking, "headunter" implies throwing at heads. That was not Maddux's niche. I never remember one incident of him hitting a guy in the head and there being controversy following it.

However, Maddux was the master at allowing an absurdly low number of walks per season, but after hitting a batter who followed up a guy who homered, said that the pitch was and "accident". Yeah right - Maddux could throw the ball anywhere he wanted.

[Beady]

Well, Koufax is one who did not throw at hitters, but then he was Koufax. Let the batter lean over the plate and try to hit that big curve ball if he wanted, and good luck to him. Assuming it's true that some of the greatest pitchers didn't throw at batters, it might just mean that when you're immensely talented you can get by doing things in a way lesser players can't afford. And I also suspect that Koufax' exceptional talent meant other players would accept behavior that in an ordinary pitcher would have been regarded as weak, even cowardly, and as a refusal to back up his teammates.

[StanTheMan]

Every pitcher in the history of the game has thrown at batters. If Gibson did so more often than 95% of them, and/or has no problem talking about it, fine. If John Tudor couldn't break 85 on the radar gun and decided to knock people down at the rate of 5% of what Gibson did, that is fine by me. An 82 mph four seamer aimed so as to just miss the ribs does not have the same effect as a 93 mph 2 seamer that rides up and in from the letters towards the front shoulder.

You can bet your behind that were Tudor or any other soft tosser able to get to 95, they would have thrown inside more often, especially if they played in Gibson's era....

[Bothrops Atrox]

Every pitcher in the history of the game has thrown at batters. If Gibson did so more often than 95% of them, and/or has no problem talking about it, fine. If John Tudor couldn't break 85 on the radar gun and decided to knock people down at the rate of 5% of what Gibson did, that is fine by me. An 82 mph four seamer aimed so as to just miss the ribs does not have the same effect as a 93 mph 2 seamer that rides up and in from the letters towards the front shoulder.

You can bet your behind that were Tudor or any other soft tosser able to get to 95, they would have thrown inside more often, especially if they played in Gibson's era....

1. Yes, but the fact that every pitcher has... does not make it okay.
2. Some pitchers did so much more often and with worse intents.

I am inclied to agree that the MPH difference is not the mitigating moral factor. Someone who shoots a friend with a pistol does not deserve less jail time than somebody who shoots a neighbor with an oozie.

[Bothrops Atrox]

Well, Koufax is one who did not throw at hitters, but then he was Koufax. Let the batter lean over the plate and try to hit that big curve ball if he wanted, and good luck to him. Assuming it's true that some of the greatest pitchers didn't throw at batters, it might just mean that when you're immensely talented you can get by doing things in a way lesser players can't afford. And I also suspect that Koufax' exceptional talent meant other players would accept behavior that in an ordinary pitcher would have been regarded as weak, even cowardly, and as a refusal to back up his teammates.

So Koufax was so good that he didn't need to hit batters to be effective, but guys like Gibson, Drysdale, Clemens, Ryan, and Maddux (apparanlty) did?

[BigRon]

So Koufax was so good that he didn't need to hit batters to be effective, but guys like Gibson, Drysdale, Clemens, Ryan, and Maddux (apparanlty) did?

Not sure what your point is. It's a fact- well known and documented- that Koufax didn't throw at batters, basically for fear that he might hurt somebody. It's also a fact- well known and documented, that once he became experienced, he was overwhelmingly successful with his style of pitching.

It's also a fact- well known and documented- that Gibson and Drysdale had just about the "top" reputations in their time as guys who would buzz you. How frequently they would really try to hit a guy may be open to some debate, but their actions are not. they both were also very successful pitchers. it's impossible to know if they would have been as/less successful had they been less aggressive. In any case, both (and some others) chose to use the heavy duty brushback/flattener as an integral part of their arsenal.

For anyone to assert that Maddux was an intimidator is laughable. I have no doubt that he threw some purpose pitches in his lengthy career, but what he would do is not remotely close to what Gibson, Drysdale, and some others did.

Clemens and Ryan have well deserved reputations as more modern pitchers who use the intimidation of high hard ones. Both also had the luxury of playing most/all of their careers in the AL, where they were completely safe from any personal retaliation.

[StanTheMan]

Not sure what your point is. It's a fact- well known and documented- that Koufax didn't throw at batters, basically for fear that he might hurt somebody. It's also a fact- well known and documented, that once he became experienced, he was overwhelmingly successful with his style of pitching.

"Throwing at batters" is MUCH more than trying to knock a guy down by aiming at the head and shoulders (or ribs/hip) and making him get the heck out of the way of the pitch. Throwing "at" batters includes anything more than X inches inside. Each person may have a different interpretation as to what constitutes far enough inside to be considered "at" the batter.

It is well known, and a documented fact, that Koufax HIT BATTERS. Pitchers cannot claim to have exceptional control, hit pinpoint spots regularly, be one of the best control pitchers of all time (once he "became experienced" to use your own term... and then claim that every hit batsman was simply "one that got away." No dice, and no smart baseball fan in my opinion, will buy it.

Koufax threw inside regularly. Koufax threw at batters. Every pitcher who has ever took the mound in a MLB game has done so. Believing anything else is silly. On any given hit batter, he may have not been aiming for the fourth rib and hit the fifth, but if he is trying to waste a pitch inside, way inside, and it starts three inches more inside than he wanted, moves another two more than he wanted, and hits the guy, then that is indeed throwing at the batter. It was a pitch that had at least some likelihood of hitting him. Period, fact, no doubt about it. Of course trying to hit him and indeed hitting him will be the other extreme of throwing at people.



As for the 95 mph/82 mph and pistol/uzi comparison.... uh... nothing could be more off base, even a bit contrived. THIS would work better....

A neighbor who owns a BB gun (Tudor with his 82 mph heat) is less likely to kill anyone than the neighbor who owns 10 guns (Gibson and his 95). Neither are pre-disposed to become murderers, however. Maybe Tudor and Gibson will be guest stars on Criminal Minds and we can sort it out.

[Bothrops Atrox]

Not sure what your point is. It's a fact- well known and documented- that Koufax didn't throw at batters, basically for fear that he might hurt somebody. It's also a fact- well known and documented, that once he became experienced, he was overwhelmingly successful with his style of pitching.

It's also a fact- well known and documented- that Gibson and Drysdale had just about the "top" reputations in their time as guys who would buzz you. How frequently they would really try to hit a guy may be open to some debate, but their actions are not. they both were also very successful pitchers. it's impossible to know if they would have been as/less successful had they been less aggressive. In any case, both (and some others) chose to use the heavy duty brushback/flattener as an integral part of their arsenal.

For anyone to assert that Maddux was an intimidator is laughable. I have no doubt that he threw some purpose pitches in his lengthy career, but what he would do is not remotely close to what Gibson, Drysdale, and some others did.

Clemens and Ryan have well deserved reputations as more modern pitchers who use the intimidation of high hard ones. Both also had the luxury of playing most/all of their careers in the AL, where they were completely safe from any personal retaliation.

Read Beady's post that I commented on. He pretty much inferred that Koufax didn't need to hit batters because he was so great. I do not think that was why he didn't throw at batters. I never said that Koufax did hit batters on purpose or that Drysdale/Gibson did not. In fact, I infered the opposite earlier. Not sure why you mentioned all of that in your post.

[Bothrops Atrox]

"Throwing at batters" is MUCH more than trying to knock a guy down by aiming at the head and shoulders (or ribs/hip) and making him get the heck out of the way of the pitch. Throwing "at" batters includes anything more than X inches inside. Each person may have a different interpretation as to what constitutes far enough inside to be considered "at" the batter.

It is well known, and a documented fact, that Koufax HIT BATTERS. Pitchers cannot claim to have exceptional control, hit pinpoint spots regularly, be one of the best control pitchers of all time (once he "became experienced" to use your own term... and then claim that every hit batsman was simply "one that got away." No dice, and no smart baseball fan in my opinion, will buy it.

Koufax threw inside regularly. On any given hit batter, he may have not been aiming for the fourth rib and hit the fifth, but if he is trying to waste a pitch inside, way inside, and it starts three inches more inside than he wanted, moves another two more than he wanted, and hits the guy, then that is indeed throwing at the batter. Of course trying to hit him and hitting him the other extreme of throwing at people.



As for the 95 mph/82 mph and pistol/uzi comparison.... uh... nothing could be more off base, even a bit contrived. THIS would work better....

A neighbor who owns a BB gun (Tudor with his 82 mph heat) is less likely to kill anyone than the neighbor who owns 10 guns (Gibson and his 95). Neither are pre-disposed to become murderers, however. Maybe Tudor and Gibson will be guest stars on Criminal Minds and we can sort it out.

Well, an 82 MPH fastball is a lot closer to 95 than a BB gun to a real gun. If Tudor intentionaly hit people with his 85 MPH ball, he could hurt people and it would be wrong.

[StanTheMan]

Well, an 82 MPH fastball is a lot closer to 95 than a BB gun to a real gun. If Tudor intentionaly hit people with his 85 MPH ball, he could hurt people and it would be wrong.

True... but metaphorically speaking, it is more accurate than pistol vs uzi.