Because some people feel the need to dismiss someone else’s opinion in favor of their own when it comes to a demonstrably great pitcher. It’s not enough that both pitchers were great, it’s important that one pitcher is greater than the other, thus we have the usual trainwreck.
Maddux had a great career. First-ballot, possibly unanimous HOFer. Not quite sure he’s Top 5 all time, but he’s in the discussion.
I am familiar with the assertion that, at least later in his career, Maddux shut it down early as soon as he felt fatigued. To that point, he had a long, relatively healthy career. Koufax pitched many, many more complete games and retired early due to arm problems, no? That doesn’t make Maddux a better pitcher, but it sure makes him look smart in the end.
Actually, I went and re-checked the facts (something I should do before I post…) and see that Koufax’s arm trouble was the direct result of an in-game injury (diving into a base), not from over-use. I retract my previous statement about Maddux being “smarter.”
Seems to me that means Koufax was picking up more wins because he was forced to pitch complete games. Had Maddux been forced to pitch complete games (against other pitchers in the league being forced to do the same) he’d have more wins.
First of all, I never said you “invented” it. But I’ve never heard it before. Now that you give me these cites, I understand why:
See, these are not the kinds of sources I would normally peruse to get my baseball fix. I’ve personally never heard this accusation from a sportscaster, a sports commentator, or any baseball fans that I personally know (granted, my friends are generally not at the level of baseball geekdom where they would be playing fantasy baseball, nor reading fantasy baseball messageboards). And, as Marley pointed out, one of the cites specifcially says that Maddux wasn’t begging out of games, just that his conditioning wasn’t great.
I believe that you did not invent the idea, and I believe that you’ve heard it/read it places, but as far it being a well-known and well-documented widespread opinion, I also remain unconvinced.
And who would that be? Certainly not me, who’s maintaining that in some ways Koufax has the edge (at peak) and in other areas (career totals) it’s clearly Maddux. I’m taking issue with those who want to argue that Maddux is a better pitcher at both peak and career, which is more plainly untenable the tighter you define “peak.”
Allow me to present the 1936 HOF Class
Name Percent of vote
Ty Cobb 98.23%
Walter Johnson 83.63%
Christy Mathewson 90.71%
Babe Ruth 95.13%
Honus Wagner 95.13%
If one of those didn’t garner 100%, (and Ted Williams only got 93%), I doubt Maddux does.
That said, I used to have enough stats rolling around in my head to make cases about all time pantheons, but that day is passed, so I’ll just say he’s probably been my favorite pitcher to watch year in and year out during his career. Never as electric as Pedro or Johnson or Clemens, but if you wanted to see someone throw a 80-some pitch complete game whilst not breaking 90mph, he was your man. And there is genius in that, much genius, when you consider that there are thousands of people in this country who could throw harder than him, but he was among the most effective pitchers at the highest level.
The story related about his calling pitches for Penny cuts to the heart of it-the man was a student of the game, perhaps the greatest student of the game, and thus elevated himself from the journeyman pitcher his talent dictated he be to someone mentioned alongside the all-time legends, himself now a legend, and rightly so.
No one is ever getting 100%, period. Hall voters are insane.
So you want what? Hard news articles formally charging Maddux with violating his contract by refusing to pitch when his manager demanded it?
Because anything short of that would be along the lines of what I’m providing and what I’ve claimed to be able to provide: general fan speculation that Maddux seeems to ask out of games he plainly “should” be continuing to pitch in. Where on earth would I get proof of that? Maddux hasn’t confessed “Yep, I’m a total wimp,” his managers have very strangely refused to accuse one of their star payers of jaking it, his teams have refused to suspend him or fine him officially for requesting that he be taken out of games–all you would have is what I’ve provided, evidence that fans have noticed this tendency and have discussed it. If I find a few cites on the internet easily, I think it’s safe to say that fans have discussed it among themselves, on talk radio, etc. over the years. Most places where I’ve actually read about it–like on NY Mets and Braves’ fan sites–don’t seem to have searchable databases.
I was pretty clear about what I would consider credible or worthwhile. It’s right there in the post you just quoted.
What I assumed regarding the cite that you claim “says the opposite of what you said” was the context would persuade. That cite, the one from baseball musings, is headed “More On Maddux,” and the author was plainly responding to the fact that fans were discussing Maddux’s begging out of games, and defending him from those charges. Ergo, those charges had been made.
But since you seem to think that I’ve provided a defense against a charge that no one had ever made (!?) I searched a few days further back and found this, at Baseball Musings: Old Man II :
“Greg Maddux is 37 years old, and all he can throw is 82 pitches? Do you see Moyer or Clemens coming out of games after 82 pitches? I’ve been a big fan of Maddux for a long time, and I always thought Bobby Cox managed him poorly by taking him out of games too soon. But now I’m wondering if it’s been Greg all along taking himself out too soon to protect his ERA? Maybe my respect was misplaced? Maddux should want to complete games, should not want to leave his W-L record in the hands of his bullpen. I’m very disappointed.”
Is that any better? If could search more, with a wider variety of terms (all these cites come from “‘Greg Maddux’ ‘begging out’”–I’m sure I could search for other derogatory terms as well) I’d get some more. I remember a Mets fan site was gleeful over the vanity, the stats-protecting, the team-last attitude they perceived in Maddux’ early exits, but I have no way to search that site.
Here’s a different, searchable NY Mets fansite–look at the second post in this very recent thread, and the way the poster introduces the joke about Maddux’s retirement. Apropos of nothing, not needing to provide the least context for the wisecrack, he notes that at his retirement party, Maddux probably will “show up but only stick around for half the press conference.” Note, too, that none of the succeeding posts ask him “Huh?” or “What does that mean?” or “What are you implying about Maddux with that weird remark?” They all understand exactly what that comment refers to. What does that tell you about the widespread reputation Maddux had for not finishing what he started?
“Multiple columns”? Reporting on someone’s reputation? Who writes those? The Reputation Times? The Ballplayers’ Character Journal? You’re demanding something that doesn’t exist–documented reports of a libelous nature. That fans speculated on Maddux’ failure to finish games for years, and castigated him for begging out of games, is something that can only be found on websites, fan blogs and the like, reflecting the many more conversations on the radio, on TV, in bars and ballparks, that have taken place–and you ask me to document this stuff? One would almost think that you were defining your standard so that you would never find the evidence acceptable.
I’m just talking about a column or an item by a baseball writer - you know, somebody with a name and a byline and whose expertise I can evaluate rather than some guy on the baseballmusings site. Taking my comment on “documentation” that literally doesn’t make any sense. I didn’t ask for an affidavit, I asked for someone writing about it with a little more context than just taking a stab at Maddux.
I said “I didn’t accuse you of making it up, and I never thought you invented it.” Can I be any clearer on this point?
You could read clearer. I’m no longer discussing whether I made up this reputation Maddux had–I’m referring to your claim (in the post solely about baseball musings, # 91 in this thread) that the baseballmusings cite “says the opposite of what * said.” Yes, but it clearly refers to an earlier discussion which it refutes (and which I’ve provided a link to and a quote from in post #91) that wonders if Maddux was taking himself out of games “too soon to protect his ERA.” That is the citation of a defense that clearly implied that a charge against his character had been been made at some earlier point, just as I said.
Did I ever say that professional writers would ever speculate in print libelous remarks about a professional ballplayer for which they lacked (and indeed could probably never have, short of a confession) reliable evidence? I never claimed that I could cite the sort of 'story" you’re now claiming to need, only that fans widely discussed Maddux’s habit of removing himself games all the time, which I’ve now provided copious evidence of.
Incensed:
The earliest Hall of Fame votes are a little unfair to use as a comparison. With the Hall brand-new, the voters, still limited like modern voters to 10 choices, had everyone in baseball history to choose from. I don’t imagine anyone back then would have said that Cobb or Ruth do not belong in a baseball Hall of Fame, merely that at the time they thought there were 10 players in all of baseball history who were better. These people were obviously in the extreme minority, but I imagine a genuine argument could have been made.
Nowadays, the greats are all in, and the real voting is only to choose the newly-available. I still don’t know who the idiots are who didn’t have Seaver, Ryan, Brett etc on their ballots. But there’s no real reason for a true great to not get 100%. Just a few morons who have some instinctive “no one should ever be unanimous” hang-up.
Maddux wasn’t an especially good hitter, even for a pitcher. His career OPS was .396, essentially nothing. There are worse, but there are many better. Tom Glavine was a better hitter. John Smoltz was just as good, probably better.
Koufax was legitimately an awful hitter, but really, there isn’t a huge amount of difference there.
I don’t mean to be an ass, but I’m not sure that is true either. If it were, Maddux, a starting pitcher, should have more games played than pitched, since those would inflate his games played - but he does not. His ratio of sacrifice hits to plate appearances is not unusual for a pitcher.
Just to point something out. PRR, you claim that your entire point is to defend Koufax’s peak vs. Maddux’s peak. And I think there’s definitely a good argument to be made that Koufax’s peak was better. But you can’t then buttress your argument with claims about Maddux’s stamina backed up by cites from his later years. It’s only a useful point of comparison if Maddux was known for begging out of games during his peak. I think that’s clearly not the case.
I was originally going to include a parenthetical comment about how there are always a few HOF voters who abuse their power and act silly for personal reasons, but I didn’t have any facts handy to back it up. cmkeller summed up my thoughts on the matter.
You’re right --I was discussing two more-or-less separate phases of Maddux’s career here:
an early phase when Maddux was leading his league in IP (with 100 fewer IP than a league-leader in the 1960s would have had) and a later phase when he was calling it a day after hitting the mid-double digits in pitch count. These are two separate issues, having in common only a (relatively or absolutely) unimpressive number of IP. I should have kept them clearly separated as to which I was arguing when. They were by no means simultaneous.