Ok, in the purest sense of the word, yes I was comparing them. However I was doing so to differentiate between the two.
I’m a little late to this party, but I’d like to examine the case of Bert Blyleven vs. Jim Kaat and Tommy John, since they all seem to be often mentioned in the same breath.
ERA
Blyleven finished in the top ten in ERA ten times. Seven times, he was in the top five. Twice, he was second.
Jim Kaat finished in the top ten in ERA three times. His best finish was sixth, which he accomplished twice.
Tommy John finished finished in the top ten six times. His best finish was second.
Strikeouts
Blyleven finished in the top ten in strikeouts fifteen times. He lead the league in 1985, finished second three times, third twice, and fourth six times. Often he was second to Nolan Ryan. His 3,701 career strikeouts place him fifth all-time.
Kaat finished in the top ten in strikeouts four times. His best finish was second in 1965. His 2,461 career strikeouts place him 31st all-time.
John never finished in the top ten. His 2,245 career strikeouts place him 47th all-time.
Wins
Blyleven finished in the top ten in wins six times. He won twenty in 1973, good for seventh place. His 287 career wins place him 25th all-time.
Kaat finished in the top ten in wins seven times. He won 25 in 1966, leading the league. He also won twenty in two other seasons. His 283 career wins place him 29th all time.
John finished in the top ten six times. He finished second twice, with 21 and 22 win seasons in 1979 and 1980. He also finished third in 1977, with twenty wins. His 288 career wins place him 24th all-time.
Innings Pitched
Blyleven finished in the top ten in innings pitched eleven times, leading the league twice. His 4,970 career innings place him 13th all-time.
Kaat finished in the top ten in innings pitched six times, leading the league once. His 4,530.1 career innings place him 25th all-time.
John finished in the top ten four times. His best mark was a second-place finish in 1979. His 4,710.1 career innings place him 18th all-time.
My analysis
If you go by the three most traditional measuring sticks for pitchers’ effectiveness (strikeouts, wins, and ERA) then I think, from those numbers, it’s hard not to conclude that Blyleven is better than John and Kaat.
Blyleven dominates the other two in strikeouts, no question. And he was more constantly among the league leaders in ERA than the other two. I’ve also included innings pitched totals, which show that Blyleven was much more of a workhorse as well, tossing way more innings per season.
So if you base your analysis on traditional statistics, then I think you’d have to place a significant amount of weight on the fact that Kaat and John each had more 20-win seasons than Blyleven. My caveat there would be that “20 wins” is a completely arbitrary number, and that Blyleven’s teams probably did not score as many runs as Kaat’s or John’s. Career numbers appear to be a wash between the three.
With more advanced metrics, like ERA+ (which, to be fair, aren’t that difficult to understand at all) I think Blyleven blows the other two out of the water. But I wanted to lay out how, even with traditional statistics, Blyleven has a significant advantage over Kaat and John.
Treviathan
You have proved Bert is probably the best of the 3. Of course none are HOFers and I still think non should be. I’ll give you this, you have successfully confirmed for me that TJ is not HOF quality.
Jim
Thanks, jrfranchi. That may have been my first moment of successfully “fighting ignorance” (not to imply you’re ignorant, of course!) in 800 posts.
I’m planning on doing up a similar study on Blyleven vs. Fergie Jenkins, Gaylord Perry, and Don Sutton. Probably for tomorrow. It’ll be interesting to see how similar (or dissimilar, though I’m not counting on it) Blyleven will be to those three HOF-ers.
You are welcomed and I enjoy any baseball talks like this. So I look forward to your next comparison.
Before you even start, keep in mind that many fans feel Sutton should not be in and was only a compiler and never great. Sutton and Kirby Pucket are two of my favorite examples of HOFer that shouldn’t be in.
The now defunct old-timers committee put many in that are less than deserving also, but I dwell on the ones that the writers should have known better on.
Jim
Let’s be honest, though; those are pretty different standards. You can question the qualifications of Sutton and Puckett, but the Veterans Committee put in guys who weren’t HALF the players Sutton and Puckett were.
No, I agree completely, but I don’t believe those mistakes will ever happen again.
To me Blyleven has a chance and that would be wrong. I hate when people compare a weak candidate to a weak HOFer.
No one I know would compare their choice with Bill Mazeroski. {as an example}
Jim
Tomorrow’s the big day, folks!
2PM Eastern the big winners are announced? Who’s it gonna be?
Here’s Jayson Stark’s vote column.
He says he finally voted for Blyleven. He’s hoping that’s a harbinger of good things.
He voted for:
Gossage
Rice
Dawson
Murphy
Morris
Blyleven
It’s a tough choice this time. Blyleven, as I’ve said before, should be in. But I can see arguments made for the others on both sides of the equation.
Shit, and I left my Dawson jersey at the cleaners!
It’s Sutter! Good. I always thought he deserved it.
Zev Steinhardt
By the way, I want to know who the one guy who voted for Walt Weiss was thinking!
Zev Steinhardt
It was probably the old announcer for the Rockies who used to go into a swoon whenever Weiss (hitting 8th) would get on. “He’s brought the pitcher up again! That means the pitcher won’t be leading off next inning! That’s so important!”
That said, I’d have probably given him a vote. He was an important cog on some good teams, and though not a hall of famer, is worthy of being sent off into the sunset with a vote or two.
I was surprised to see Rice so high.
Ridiculous. Sutter doesn’t deserve to be in it. I swear, unless there’s an obvious candidate, someone just need to take the ballots away from the baseball writers. Or at least get new blood in there. Some people with a clue, preferably.
So was Sutter really a better pitcher than Gossage, I just don’t see it.
Someone convince me.
Jim
Sutter wasn’t a better pitcher than Gossage, Smith or Blyleven. Like I said, ridiculous.
Yeah, dear God, if Sutter made it and no one else I want some of what they’re having.
How does Blyleven end up 5th AGAIN?
Sutter
Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA + WHIP
1976 23 CHC NL 6 3 52 0 0 0 28 10 83.3 63 27 25 4 26 73 0 2 332 8 0 2.70 3.86 143 1.068
1977 24 CHC NL 7 3 62 0 0 0 48 31 107.3 69 21 16 5 23 129 1 7 411 7 0 1.34 4.38 327 0.857
1978 25 CHC NL 8 10 64 0 0 0 47 27 99 82 44 35 10 34 106 1 8 414 7 1 3.18 4.05 127 1.172
1979 26 CHC NL 6 6 62 0 0 0 56 37 101.3 67 29 25 3 32 110 0 9 403 5 0 2.22 4.11 185 0.977
1980 27 CHC NL 5 8 60 0 0 0 43 28 102.3 90 35 30 5 34 76 1 2 423 8 4 2.64 3.93 149 1.212
1981 28 STL NL 3 5 48 0 0 0 36 25 82.3 64 24 24 5 24 57 1 0 328 8 1 2.62 3.56 136 1.069
1982 29 STL NL 9 8 70 0 0 0 58 36 102.3 88 38 33 8 34 61 3 5 424 13 0 2.90 3.64 126 1.192
1983 30 STL NL 9 10 60 0 0 0 46 21 89.3 90 45 42 8 30 64 1 2 384 14 2 4.23 3.64 86 1.343
1984 31 STL NL 5 7 71 0 0 0 63 45 122.7 109 26 21 9 23 77 1 2 477 4 0 1.54 3.49 226 1.076
1985 32 ATL NL 7 7 58 0 0 0 50 23 88.3 91 46 44 13 29 52 3 0 382 4 0 4.48 3.85 86 1.358
1986 33 ATL NL 2 0 16 0 0 0 11 3 18.7 17 9 9 3 9 16 0 0 80 2 0 4.34 3.99 92 1.393
1988 35 ATL NL 1 4 38 0 0 0 26 14 45.3 49 26 24 4 11 40 1 0 193 3 0 4.76 3.70 78 1.324
12 Years WL%=.489 68 71 661 0 0 0 512 300 1042.1 879 370 328 77 309 861 13 37 4251 83 8 2.83 3.85 136 1.140
162 Game Avg 6 7 68 0 0 0 52 30 107 90 38 33 7 31 88 1 3 437 8 0 2.83 3.85 136 1.140
Career High 9 10 71 0 0 0 63 45 122.7 109 46 44 13 34 129 3 9 477 14 4 1.34 4.38 327 0.857
Sutter Postseason Pitching
Year Round Tm Opp WLser G GS ERA W-L SV CG SHO IP H ER BB SO
1982 NLCS STL ATL W 2 0 0.00 1-0 1 0 0 4.3 0 0 0 1
WS STL MIL W 4 0 4.70 1-0 2 0 0 7.7 6 4 3 6
2 Postseason Ser 2-0 6 0 3.00 2-0 3 0 0 12 6 4 3 7
Gossage
Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA + WHIP
1972 20 CHW AL 7 1 36 1 0 0 7 2 80 72 44 38 2 44 57 4 7 352 3 0 4.28 3.13 73 1.450
1973 21 CHW AL 0 4 20 4 1 0 4 0 49.7 57 44 41 9 37 33 3 6 232 2 0 7.43 3.98 54 1.893
1974 22 CHW AL 4 6 39 3 0 0 19 1 89.3 92 45 41 4 47 64 2 2 397 7 1 4.13 3.73 90 1.556
1975 23 CHW AL 9 8 62 0 0 0 49 26 141.7 99 32 29 3 70 130 5 3 582 15 0 1.84 3.90 212 1.193
1976 24 CHW AL 9 17 31 29 15 0 1 1 224 214 104 98 16 90 135 9 6 956 3 0 3.94 3.56 90 1.357
1977 25 PIT NL 11 9 72 0 0 0 55 26 133 78 27 24 9 49 151 2 2 523 6 0 1.62 3.99 246 0.955
1978 26 NYY AL 10 11 63 0 0 0 55 27 134.3 87 41 30 9 59 122 2 5 543 8 0 2.01 3.63 180 1.087
1979 27 NYY AL 5 3 36 0 0 0 33 18 58.3 48 18 17 5 19 41 0 3 234 4 0 2.62 4.10 156 1.149
1980 28 NYY AL 6 2 64 0 0 0 58 33 99 74 29 25 5 37 103 1 4 401 3 0 2.27 3.92 173 1.121
1981 29 NYY AL 3 2 32 0 0 0 30 20 46.7 22 6 4 2 14 48 1 1 173 1 0 0.77 3.59 465 0.771
1982 30 NYY AL 4 5 56 0 0 0 43 30 93 63 23 23 5 28 102 0 1 356 5 0 2.23 4.00 180 0.978
1983 31 NYY AL 13 5 57 0 0 0 47 22 87.3 82 27 22 5 25 90 1 0 367 5 0 2.27 3.91 173 1.225
1984 32 SDP NL 10 6 62 0 0 0 51 25 102.3 75 34 33 6 36 84 1 2 412 4 2 2.90 3.56 123 1.085
1985 33 SDP NL 5 3 50 0 0 0 38 26 79 64 21 16 1 17 52 1 0 308 1 0 1.82 3.53 193 1.025
1986 34 SDP NL 5 7 45 0 0 0 38 21 64.7 69 36 32 8 20 63 2 4 281 0 0 4.45 3.65 82 1.376
1987 35 SDP NL 5 4 40 0 0 0 30 11 52 47 18 18 4 19 44 0 2 217 6 0 3.12 3.96 127 1.269
1988 36 CHC NL 4 4 46 0 0 0 33 13 43.7 50 23 21 3 15 30 3 3 194 5 2 4.33 3.63 84 1.489
1989 37 TOT 3 1 42 0 0 0 28 5 58 46 22 19 2 30 30 1 3 238 4 0 2.95 3.52 119 1.310
1991 39 TEX AL 4 2 44 0 0 0 16 1 40.3 33 16 16 4 16 28 3 3 167 1 0 3.57 4.02 113 1.215
1992 40 OAK AL 0 2 30 0 0 0 13 0 38 32 13 12 5 19 26 2 0 163 4 0 2.84 3.75 132 1.342
1993 41 OAK AL 4 5 39 0 0 0 12 1 47.7 49 24 24 6 26 40 1 4 213 2 0 4.53 4.16 92 1.573
1994 42 SEA AL 3 0 36 0 0 0 21 1 47.3 44 23 22 6 15 29 3 2 197 1 0 4.18 4.90 117 1.246
22 Years WL%= .537 124 107 1002 37 16 0 681 310 1809.3 1497 670 605 119 732 1502 47 63 7506 90 5 3.01 3.78 126 1.232
162 Game Avg 8 7 65 2 1 0 44 20 118.3 97 43 39 7 47 98 3 4 491 5 0 3.01 3.78 126 1.232
Career High 13 17 72 29 15 0 58 33 224 214 104 98 16 90 151 9 7 956 15 2 0.77 4.90 465 0.771
Note 1989 SFG NL 2 1 31 0 0 0 22 4 43.7 32 16 13 2 27 24 0 2 182 3 0 2.68 3.40 127 1.351
was split NYY AL 1 0 11 0 0 0 6 1 14.3 14 6 6 0 3 6 1 1 56 1 0 3.77 3.89 103 1.186
Gossage Postseason Pitching
Year Rnd Tm Opp WLser G GS ERA W-L SV CG SHO IP H ER BB SO
1978 ALCS NYY KCR W 2 0 4.50 1-0 1 0 0 4 3 2 0 3
WS NYY LAD W 3 0 0.00 1-0 0 0 0 6 1 0 1 4
1980 ALCS NYY KCR L 1 0 54.00 0-1 0 0 0 0.3 3 2 0 0
1981 ALDS NYY MIL W 3 0 0.00 0-0 3 0 0 6.7 3 0 2 8
ALCS NYY OAK W 2 0 0.00 0-0 1 0 0 2.7 1 0 0 2
WS NYY LAD L 3 0 0.00 0-0 2 0 0 5 2 0 2 5
1984 NLCS SDP CHC W 3 0 4.50 0-0 1 0 0 4 5 2 1 5
WS SDP DET L 2 0 13.50 0-0 0 0 0 2.7 3 4 1 2
4 Lg Champ Series 3-1 8 0 4.91 1-1 3 0 0 11 12 6 1 10
3 World Series 1-2 8 0 2.63 1-0 2 0 0 13.7 6 4 4 11
8 Postseason Ser 5-3 19 0 2.87 1-2 8 0 0 31.3 21 10 7 29
I don’t know how the Code will look but these are charts compiled for sutton vs Gossage. I have to change my opinion, they are basically equal. Each had a great 9 year run as closers.
The one thing I am sure of, is with Sutton in there should be no road blocks for Rivera now when he is eligible.
Jim
Man. 20 years ago, who would have thought Doc Gooden would fail to even make five percent and stay on the ballot in his first year of eligibility?
Sure, they’re equal. Except for the fact that Gossage a heck of a lot longer than Sutter and had just as high of a peak as he did.