355-227 (.610, 8th most Wins ever)
4 Cy Youngs
3.16 ERA
3,371 Strikeouts (10th all-time)
Greatest pitcher ever? I say top five for sure.
Wow, one more win than Clemens. Anyway, I’d take Clemens for best-of-era (better ERA despite pitching in DH leagues most of his career, only 90 less innings out of 5000), but Maddux is darn close. And both of them are clearly top-10, and probably top-5.
An amazing pitcher. I had the good fortune of seeing him play many times. It’s hard to imagine such a gifted athlete could look so ordinary. (And I’ll take Maddux over Clemens, since Greg’s performance was clearly not… enhanced.)
Who are your other four?
Not to speak for Justin, but a reasonable top-5 would be Walter Johnson, Cy Young, Lefty Grove, Clemens, and Maddux. (Seaver is #6.)
In no order…
Cy Young (for longevity and having the award named after him)
Sandy Koufax (for his stretch of pure, unbridled domination)
Nolan Ryan (because, on any given day, he could throw a no-hitter)
Tom Seaver (because of overall greatness)*
- And because he was a New York Met for most of his career.
So between you, you’ve named seven pitchers who are better (I agree with every one but Ryan) than Maddux, and I’d definitely add Christy Mathewson and Pete Alexander to your lists. There are probsably several others I could add as well.
Justin, I’d be interested in your making Maddux’s case against Johnson and Grove, just for starters. Tell me why you think he’s better than they were.
No love for Pedro.
Oh Greg Maddux, the consummate professional. I remember my period of annoyance with the Braves for seemingly being on TV more than the local team, but when I saw Greg pitch, I couldn’t help but admire him for his control, craftiness and overall efficiency. He didn’t seem to have any monster pitches (no Randy fastball, Pedro curveball, etc.), but in the 90s, he used his tools in concert to devastating effect. I’m not sure if he deserved those Gold Gloves, but he definitely knew took pains to take command of his defensive position. In addition, his games were usually short, and he never (AFAIK) blew up like a prima donna, and he seemed to really get the concept of “team” by working closely with and helping the other pitchers on the staff. And of course, until the tail end of his career, he put up consistently great (and for a few seasons, out of this fucking world) numbers.
I don’t know where he stands in the overall pitching pantheon (I’ll leave that to people who really know how to dissect stats from different eras), but my hat’s off to one of the finest and most valuable ballplayers the game has seen.
Well personally my heart wants to give Maddux a special bonus. Kind of an actual pitching performance divided by physical abilities you were born with standard.
I just have to love a guy who hit the very top levels of success, while pitching with his head more than a magic arm he happened to have.
I wouldn’t rank Mathewson ahead of Maddux. I think there’s a pretty good argument to be made Maddux is more impressive, in context; he put up an essentially comparable ERA with more innings pitched in a home run era, when you couldn’t throw as many innings in a season as you could in Mathewson’s day.
If I absolutely, positively had to rank them, I’d have Maddux ahead.
Alexander I’d put just a hair ahead of Maddux. They’re all very similar, though, once you adjust for their pitching in different times.
Assuming I can’t pick Satchel, I’d go:
- Big Train
- Cy Young
- Rocket
- Lefty Grove
- G.C. Alexander
- Maddux
- Mathewson
- Tom Terrific
Sandy Koufax and Pedro I’d have on my “Short but brilliant career” list; it’s worth noting that Koufax, in a much shorter career, **actually had a slightly better adjusted ERA than Koufax did retiring in his prime. ** It’s hard to argue Koufax was better than a guy who was just as effective in a career almost twice as long.
You’d take Koufax over Maddux? Don’t get me wrong, Koufax had a great peak, but that’s all he had, and Maddux arguably (better peak ERA+, but fewer innings) had a better peak than Koufax did.
Maddux’s top-5 ERA+: 271, 262, 189, 187, 171 (or 166 if you want a five-consecutive-year peak)
Koufax’s top-5 ERA+: 190. 187. 160. 159. 141
Heck, even comparing raw ERAs, Maddux’s two best ERAs, pitching in the 90s in Atlanta, were better than Koufax ever did in the 60s in LA.
I also don’t really see the case for Tom Seaver, great though he was. Not as many innings, not as many wins, peak not as good, ERA+ not as good.
I WOULD argue with this if I knew what the hell you were trying to say.
I’m not sure I can against Johnson. The man is in the unfortunate position of being overshadowed in the dead ball era by Cy Young, but his numbers truly speak for themselves. I think the only thing that really makes me feel like Maddux deserves the edge is because he pitched in the era of steroids and to do what he did, for as long as he did, using his precision pitches deserves a spot in the pantheon.
As for Lefty Grove, I know why he’s considered a king of the mound, but I’ve always looked at his career the way a lot of people look at Nolan Ryan’s. His longevity (and a 30 win season) pushed his numbers to the Hall of Fame level as opposed to the Hall of Very Good.
But as Windwalker said, I’m not enough of a stathead to argue greatness among players from different eras.
The case for Koufax is simple, and to some unpersuasive: once you’ve met a subjective threshold of “no fluke” peak performance is the subject of greatness. Longevity is fine, and impressive in itself, but compiilng numbers, even spectacular numbers, takes a back seat to true, sustained greatness.
Hypothetical: Say someone comes along who no one can hit. Literally. Guy throws no-hitter after no-hitter, and then quits. How long would he have to pitch before you’d call him the greatest pitcher ever. Me, I’d make the case after less than a full season of no-hitters. Does this guy have Cy Young’s career numbers? Obviously not. But do I think this guy was a better pitcher than Young and Koufax and Pedro? No question. Maybe for you, he’d have to pitch a full season, or three seasons, or five. But I think every fan in the world would waive all other claims after a very short career.
That’s Koufax’s argument. Pitching side to side with Gibson, Marichal, Ford, everyone conceded he was the best of the best year after year. I don’t require a lot of years to be persuaded he was the best.
With Maddux, not so much. Some years, Johnson was clearly better, some years it was Clemens, some years it was Pedro. He was never the no-brainer answer to “Who’s the best pitcher in the world?” and that is the way to frame the question, to me.
Well, but on the other hand, there’s the same argument to be made about a really consistently great pitcher, too. How many seasons in a row of being the second or third best in the world would it take before you acknowledged that there was something especially valuable about Maddux? 25? 30? 40? At least arguably, at some point he’s had a “better” career than the guy with 40 straight no-hitters, right?
1994-95, Maddux was absolutely no questions asked the best pitcher in the world.
Once in a while, there is karma in baseball. Maddux’s four Cy Young years would probably compare extremely well to anybody’s, so I don’t but that he was never the best pitcher in that time period.
See, I consider longevity to be a skill. I consider health to be a skill. Part of being great is the ability to stay on the field.
Maddux won four Cy Young awards in a row. He put up two of the best 5 or 6 seasons ever in a row. Unlike Koufak, he didn’t do it in a pitchers park in a pitchers era. I’m not sure what more you want.
Well, for starters, Koufax’s three Cy Youngs were won when the award applied to both leagues, so all of Maddux’s are slightly diminished by someone winning the same award in the AL thast year, making him one of the two best pitchers in baseball.
And longevity is a skill, an important one. But clearly dominating your game is, to me, far more important in determining the best of the best than mere sustained excellence.