ADVERTISEMENT

MLB All-Time Draft Round 2 BigBlueFanGA vs. drcats2013

Who wins H2H in a Best of 7 World Series Format?


  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .

DraftCat

Senior
Nov 5, 2011
5,771
7,897
113
This is Round 2 of an All-Time MLB Draft. 8 Position players... 4 Starting Pitchers.. 1 Closer (No Bench)

Objective: Head 2 Head which team wins in a best of 7 (World Series)

Rules
1. Babe Ruth and Shohei Ohtani can only be used as either a pitcher or position player.
2. Arguments are based on career averages (No 1 year wonders)
3. Two Days of voting you will be allowed to change your pick and your pick is public.

Link to Playoffs click here



@BigBlueFanGA - Willie Mays, Greg Maddux, Mike Trout, George Brett, Ozzie Smith, Satchel Paige, Tim Raines, David Ortiz, Craig Biggio, Thurmond Munson, Don Sutton, Fergie Jenkins, John Franco



vs.


@drcats2013 - Babe Ruth, Walter Johnson, Tom Seaver, Derek Jeter, Frank Thomas, Ivan Rodriguez, Ryne Sandberg, Vlad Guerrero, Kirby Puckett, Billy Wagner, Juan Marichal, Hal Newhouser, Ron Santo
 
  1. Derrick Jeter
  2. Vlad Guerrero
  3. Babe Ruth
  4. Frank Thomas
  5. Ivan Rodriguez
  6. Kirby Puckett
  7. Ryne Sandberg
  8. Ron Santo
Pitching
SP -Walter Johnson
SP - Tom Seaver
SP- Juan Marichal
SP- Hal Newhouser
CP - Billy Wagner

Here’s my lineup. I’ll post my arguement tomorrow at some point, most likely. Two stud teams that should be playing for a final IMO
 
Lineup:

1. Tim Raines
2. George Brett
3. Mike Trout
4. Willie Mays
5. David Ortiz
6. Ozzie Smith
7. Craig Biggio
8. Thurmond Munson

Pitching order:

Greg Maddux
Satchel Paige
Fergie Jenkins
Don Sutton

Relief:

John Franco


Like my opponent, I'll post arguments early tomorrow.
 
So here is my breakdown.

1b - Frank Thomas > David Ortiz - Two mvps, and 7 straight years in the top 8 of voting. His prime was as good as it gets. His career avg stats are also better than Papi’s. 16 point better avg, 40 point better OBP, and equal hr/rbi stats. He also was better defensively (although not saying much there lol).

2b- Ryne Sandberg > Craig Biggio - much better defensively and a much better prime, while also winning an MVP. Offense was close to even, though Ryne had the higher ceiling.

SS - Derek Jeter > Ozzie Smith - The captain had a 48 point higher average, and while he was not as good defensively, he could certainly hold his own on that end. His postseason success puts him a notch above.

3b - Ron Santo < George Brett- easy win for my opponent here

C- Pudge Rodriquez > Thurmond Munson - Pudge was better on defense and offense.

OF - Vlad Guerrero > Tim Raines - Tim was a speedster and one of my favorites growing up, but former MVP Vlad was just on another level.

OF - Kirby Puckett < Willie Mays - Speaks for itself. Lol.

OF - Babe Ruth > Mike Trout - Trout is fantastic, but not Babe Ruth level.
6-2 win for me on offense. Now to pitching.

Walter Johnson > Greg Maddox - this is close, but Walter to me is the goat and he has the state to back it up, as well as the consensus of the experts.

Tom Seaver > Satchel Paige - while satchel is a legend, we can’t put him over an all time great in Seaver, who won 3 MVPs and put up a legendary career. It’s unfortunate Satchel couldn’t play his full career in the MLB, but we can’t go of what ifs.

Juan Marichal > Fergie Jenkins - much better career ERA (45 points higher) and stats across the board. Fergie has the MVP, but overall this isn’t even close.

Hal Newhouser > Don Sutton - he had back to back MVPs and a 20 point better career era.

Billy Wagner > John Franco - 57 point HIGHER era, and 3 more all star games. This one isn’t close.

5-0 in pitching.

While my opponent has a great team, I have a huge advantage in pitching, and also have a good advantage hitting. I’ll give him a defensive advantage, but after looking this over and breaking it down, I win easily.
 
So here is my breakdown.

1b - Frank Thomas > David Ortiz - Two mvps, and 7 straight years in the top 8 of voting. His prime was as good as it gets. His career avg stats are also better than Papi’s. 16 point better avg, 40 point better OBP, and equal hr/rbi stats. He also was better defensively (although not saying much there lol).

2b- Ryne Sandberg > Craig Biggio - much better defensively and a much better prime, while also winning an MVP. Offense was close to even, though Ryne had the higher ceiling.

SS - Derek Jeter > Ozzie Smith - The captain had a 48 point higher average, and while he was not as good defensively, he could certainly hold his own on that end. His postseason success puts him a notch above.

3b - Ron Santo < George Brett- easy win for my opponent here

C- Pudge Rodriquez > Thurmond Munson - Pudge was better on defense and offense.

OF - Vlad Guerrero > Tim Raines - Tim was a speedster and one of my favorites growing up, but former MVP Vlad was just on another level.

OF - Kirby Puckett < Willie Mays - Speaks for itself. Lol.

OF - Babe Ruth > Mike Trout - Trout is fantastic, but not Babe Ruth level.
6-2 win for me on offense. Now to pitching.

Walter Johnson > Greg Maddox - this is close, but Walter to me is the goat and he has the state to back it up, as well as the consensus of the experts.

Tom Seaver > Satchel Paige - while satchel is a legend, we can’t put him over an all time great in Seaver, who won 3 MVPs and put up a legendary career. It’s unfortunate Satchel couldn’t play his full career in the MLB, but we can’t go of what ifs.

Juan Marichal > Fergie Jenkins - much better career ERA (45 points higher) and stats across the board. Fergie has the MVP, but overall this isn’t even close.

Hal Newhouser > Don Sutton - he had back to back MVPs and a 20 point better career era.

Billy Wagner > John Franco - 57 point HIGHER era, and 3 more all star games. This one isn’t close.

5-0 in pitching.

While my opponent has a great team, I have a huge advantage in pitching, and also have a good advantage hitting. I’ll give him a defensive advantage, but after looking this over and breaking it down, I win easily.
Did you have your fingers crossed behind your back with that assessment? Everyone, give me a bit of time and then vote. Even a comparison as seemingly easy as Walter vs Maddux or Paige quickly becomes mired in mitigating factors.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Cowtown Cat
Did you have your fingers crossed behind your back with that assessment? Everyone, give me a bit of time and then vote. Even a comparison as seemingly easy as Walter vs Maddux or Paige quickly becomes mired in mitigating factors.
Biggio and Raines evaluation is up for debate, especially Biggio. Biggio was a stud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drcats2013
Biggio and Raines evaluation is up for debate, especially Biggio. Biggio was a stud.
Take a look at Walter's stats. He was dominant for a long time but it was all during the dead ball era. The very next year after the dead ball era ended, his stats tumbled and stayed that way until he retired.
 
Did you have your fingers crossed behind your back with that assessment? Everyone, give me a bit of time and then vote. Even a comparison as seemingly easy as Walter vs Maddux or Paige quickly becomes mired in mitigating factors.
I’m only speaking my personal truth, my friend. I’ll be anxious to see your own assessment. I’m no liar, though. My team is better and the votes have shown that, thus far. That no knock on yours. It’s very good as well. I’m sorry my truth offended you
 
To me the difference was the 3 and 4 SPs, and Ozzie and Munson lose what otherwise looks pretty close teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drcats2013
Sorry I'm just getting to this guys. I can't ever tell when my health issues are going to be a headache and most of today was one of those days. Anyway, I want to clarify a couple of things.

First, I think WAR is greatly over rated and in this match-up I think it's really being depended on. Second, the more we do these and the more I have to go back and look at the old greats the less great most of them end up being to me. WAR is very good at generally pointing to quality players but it isn't great as a comparison between great players. For instance, I'd take Mays over Ruth in nearly every situation. As an all around baseball player he was simply superior. Another all time favorite, and a player I've picked before, is Walter Johnson. I'll explain more about both in individual write-ups. Oh and before I forget, @drcats2013 yes, you're a big fat liar but you come by it naturally from your momma so you really can't be blamed for it.
Im Innocent Teddy Bear GIF


On to the begging, I mean show.

1B Frank Thomas = David Ortiz : https://www.statspros.com/david-ortiz-vs-frank-thomas-stats/

As you can see, in most stats, Ortiz is a bit better but these guys are extremely similar. Ortiz has slightly better offensive stats but Thomas was a little better defensively. Thomas did hit for a higher average. I'd rate this one as a push.


2B Ryne Sandberg < Craig Biggio : https://www.statspros.com/craig-biggio-vs-ryne-sandberg-stats/

Again you see that Biggio is the better offensive player and by quite a bit actually. He made a lot happen with his bat. Sandberg was quite a bit better on defense while Biggio was quite a bit better offensively. In this case I was willing to give up some defense for offense. You have to score to win. I believe Biggio was the slightly better player over all. By the way, what ceiling are you talking about with Sandberg? Both these guys had long careers, they reached their ceilings. I think you were adding some fluff to that description.


SS Derek Jeter > Ozzie Smith : https://www.statspros.com/derek-jeter-vs-ozzie-smith-stats/

Jeter was the better hitter. Period. But offense was not my goal here at all. I had my offense up the middle with Biggio. I wanted brilliant defensive play from my SS. That is probably the one position on the field to worry about defense a lot more than offense. If you can get both, great, but defense first. Ozzie was good on the bases but there is no getting around how average a hitter he was. In the same respect and maybe even to a greater extent, Jeter was an average to bad defensive SS. Jeter wins this match but not by some landslide. He was that bad on defense. Ozzie was elite on defense and I believe I have enough firepower elsewhere to stack that position with pure defense.


3B Ron Santo << George Brett : Statspros didn't have this one listed. Santo was a good 3rd baseman but Brett was great offensively and defensively. This is a landslide win.


C Ivan Rodriguez > Thurman Munson : Statspros didn't have this one listed either. Munson died young and may not have had enough background, I don't know their criteria. At any rate, Munson was an elite defensive catcher, as was Pudge. Pudge was better offensively but there is an interesting stat for Munson. In the post season, which is what we're doing here, Munson upped his hitting stats tremendously. His BA went up by 70+ points, homeruns went up, everything went up. I suspect his offensive ceiling had not been reached yet when he died, as shown by his post season numbers. My opponent wins this one.

RF Vlad Guerrero = Tim Raines : We were going for different players here. I was after a high level lead off man with a great glove and that is exactly what I got. This comparison is once again more about what you are after. He was a switch hitter, an excellent defender and was electric on the bases. Vlad crush ball. Vlad had a great arm that started failing him well before he retired but he was a quality defender. I'm giving this a push because I think we both got what we wanted in a RF.


CF Kirby Puckett <<< Willie Mays : This one does speak for itself but I want to take this a step further. In overall play, I think Mays was the best position player to ever play the game. His defense, speed and arm were breathtaking but he also hit with extreme power and for average against modern pitching. As I stated earlier, I'm having more and more trouble with these "original" legends. Babe was special but watch his film clips. Would he have kept up with Willie against the pitching Willie faced? Babes hitting was a bit better (not in every category) but the pitching was just suspect. By the way, Kirby was great, one of my favorites.

LF Babe Ruth >> Mike Trout : Trout will finish better than Ruth in some categories but is very unlikely to catch him in homeruns. Trout is much better on the bases and generally is a better defender. Babe is Babe, still known as the best but that facade is cracking a bit with more stats and research. I still say Mays was the better player. Having Babe on your team in these drafts gets votes simply on name recognition but that's the way it is.


Now for the real battle, pitching. Brilliant pitchers don't allow these great offensive players to do their thing which is why defense is so necessary.

His ace, Walter Johnson, vs my ace, Satchel Paige. Yes, I know, most of you just said whaaaaat? I'll support my position that Satchel Paige was the greatest pitcher to ever play with a lot of evidence. I just need you guys to read as much of it as you can with an open mind.

First, Walter. The man had great stats that can't be denied but was there a reason for these great stats? Most analysis these days think Walter threw at around 90mph which was a lot back then and supports my position that hitters back then didn't face the nightmare pitchers of modern baseball. My single biggest problem with Walter is when he compiled those brilliant stats. Here is his reference page.

Do you notice that his ERA and other numbers suddenly got much worse and stayed that way until he retired? That is because his entire career, up until 1920, had been played in the deadball era. Every thing then was easier for pitchers and defense while batting was more difficult. The deadball period happened to run through the 1919 season and what do you know, those brilliant numbers of Walters also ran through the 1919 season. This isn't a matter of the timing being close, it was exact. I used to consider Walter the greatest pitcher to have played then in the last draft I read up a lot on Satchel. I read what his contemporaries said, reviewed his stats, longevity and so on. More on that in a bit. Here is an extremely in depth article about the deadball era.

Now, on to Satchel who spent his best years in the Negro League which deprived us all of being able to make easier comparisons with good stats but I'll give it a shot. https://kchistory.org/week-kansas-c... was best summed,be the greatest pitcher ever. Notice in this brief article that DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Dizzy Dean and Bob Feller all named Satchel the greatest pitcher who ever played. As a publicity stunt when Satchel was signed by Kansas City and at 59 played his final game facing 3 batters and getting each one out. No one does that. It was 1965 against fully modern hitters.

Walter Johnson < Satchel Paige

Ok, now on to our 2-4 pitchers.


In nearly every comparison and in particular, in post season play, Maddux is better than Seaver. I grew up watching Seaver and disliking Maddux when I was older but the fact of the matter is Maddux was better.

Tom Seaver < Greg Maddux


Fergie is the better pitcher here but his entire career was played on bottom feeding teams. I mean the poor guy played on historically bad teams and that greatly affected his wins and to a lesser degree his ERA (bad fielding doesn't always mean an error, sometimes guys just suck). Overall, there isn't a huge difference in them but I'd give Fergie the slight edge. However, it's really close so I'll call it a push.

Juan Marichal = Fergie Jenkins


We're getting pretty deep into out lineups now and the differences are pretty subtle. Newhauser and Sutton are pretty much a push. Newhauser has more strikeouts and walks, Sutton has a MUCH better WHIP. As I don't think it matters at this point, I'll just call this another draw.

Hal Newhauser = Don Sutton

Saves, I'm tired, Franco had a ton of saves but played too long and lowered his stats. Wagner had a great WHIP and equaled Franco's saves in far fewer games. Both were great closers but I'll give this one to Wagner.

Billy Wagner > John Franco

Overall, my pitching staff is superior and that will negate some of DrCats offense but the decisions on this is up to you guys. I'll tag the voters so they can at least see the arguments.

@UKcats1988 @dvillecatfan @JonathanW @drcats2013 @WilmoreCat @AFSTALLION13 @Born and raised Big Blue @nickhorvathsuxazz @Cowtown Cat (get off her and change your damn vote) @wildcat_nation28 @JLoad22
 
My post was too long so I had to move some links to here. They are worth reading.








https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2012/6/13/3079411/satchelpaige










.
 
The way those pitchers were spun is quite possibly the funniest thing I’ve seen in these drafts lmao. Also that the Babe is winning me votes. That’s an insult to the good people voting on this. Many of them I know and would never insult their intelligence with something like that. Fact is, my team is just better; much better. Top to bottom.

Put some sugar on those grapes, my friend 😂 @BigBlueFanGA
 
The way those pitchers were spun is quite possibly the funniest thing I’ve seen in these drafts lmao. Also that the Babe is winning me votes. That’s an insult to the good people voting on this. Many of them I know and would never insult their intelligence with something like that. Fact is, my team is just better; much better. Top to bottom.

Put some sugar on those grapes, my friend 😂 @BigBlueFanGA
Well, you tell me what happened to Walter's stats starting 1920. Its right there to see. Maddux has more Cy Youngs and better post season results than Seaver.

No Splenda needed.
 
You drafted Greg 5 ROUNDS before Satchel, yet change their spots in the rotation to try and make this cockamamie argument lol. Walter won an MVP in 24, and in his last 8 years that you’re hating on, he averaged a full 1 point LESS era than Maddox did in his final 8. Also, Satchels career in the MLB included a losing record and a 3.61 ERA. Despite how good he would have been, that’s what we have to go by.
 
Well, you tell me what happened to Walter's stats starting 1920. Its right there to see. Maddux has more Cy Youngs and better post season results than Seaver.

No Splenda needed.
He had 1/2 as many games he pitched in that season, so sounds like he may have been injured. And that was before there were any surguries to repair injuries, all you could do was rest and hope for the best.
Not to mention he was 33, and that was at a time where pitchers weren't good in their mid-late 30's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drcats2013
I will say though, I don't think you can look a just unadjusted stats, especially from different time-periods, to make comparisons. For example if pitcher X had a 2.00 ERA during a certain decade, and pitcher Y had a 2.50 ERA during a different decade, that does not necessarily mean X > Y. Lets say during X's decade, there were 10 other pitchers with ERA's around 2.00, and during Y's decade the 2nd-10th best pitchers were all around 3.00. Then I think you have a legit argument that Y > X.

And even though a guy's best years came during the deadball era, quite a few runs were still being scored, just in a different way. Would Johnson have been as good pitching in say the juiced ball era of the 90's? I don't know, maybe not. But similarly, would deGrom be as good pitching in an era when every hitter wasn't swinging for the fences, leading to lots of swing-&-misses? I don't know, maybe not.

LOL, I think I've just made a point/case for both of you.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BigBlueFanGA
He had 1/2 as many games he pitched in that season, so sounds like he may have been injured. And that was before there were any surguries to repair injuries, all you could do was rest and hope for the best.
Not to mention he was 33, and that was at a time where pitchers weren't good in their mid-late 30's.
So its just coincidence that his amazing numbers went away (he still had great numbers) at the exact same time the deadball era ended? Thats amazing.
 
I will say though, I don't think you can look a just unadjusted stats, especially from different time-periods, to make comparisons. For example if pitcher X had a 2.00 ERA during a certain decade, and pitcher Y had a 2.50 ERA during a different decade, that does not necessarily mean X > Y. Lets say during X's decade, there were 10 other pitchers with ERA's around 2.00, and during Y's decade the 2nd-10th best pitchers were all around 3.00. Then I think you have a legit argument that Y > X.

And even though a guy's best years came during the deadball era, quite a few runs were still being scored, just in a different way. Would Johnson have been as good pitching in say the juiced ball era of the 90's? I don't know, maybe not. But similarly, would deGrom be as good pitching in an era when every hitter wasn't swinging for the fences, leading to lots of swing-&-misses? I don't know, maybe not.

LOL, I think I've just made a point/case for both of you.
You seem to like diving into baseball. Did you read that deadball article I linked. The batting difference was pretty stark.
 
So its just coincidence that his amazing numbers went away (he still had great numbers) at the exact same time the deadball era ended? Thats amazing.
Injuries can do that. Age can do that. The change in the ball can too. I would be willing to bet ALL 3 were factors. And no way possible to determine how much of a factor each one was.
 
Injuries can do that. Age can do that. The change in the ball can too. I would be willing to bet ALL 3 were factors. And no way possible to determine how much of a factor each one was.
I'm science minded and I don't believe in coincidence much. Age, you're requiring me to believe age set in after the 1919 season but then didn't take much more of a toll on him for years. That isn't likely. He did suffer a season ending injury in 20 but his stats were compiled before that.

The simple fact of the matter remains - pitchers had the upper hand during the deadball era and to a huge degree.
 
You seem to like diving into baseball. Did you read that deadball article I linked. The batting difference was pretty stark.
Too much to read for me.
But I am a lifelong baseball fan (as probably all 12 of you are), AND lifelong stats geek who got my degree in statistics and since then have been a practicing statistician analyzing and interpreting data for 30 years.

I mean there is clearly a reason, that of the 42 .400+ hitters ever:
- 16 the 26 years from 1876-1901
- 3 the 2 years 1911-1912
- 15 during the 1920's, including 8 from negro leagues
- 3 during the 1930's, including 2 from negro leagues
- 4 during the 1940's, including 3 from negro leagues
- 0 during the 74 years since then / 0 in MLB in 82 years

Would Rogers Hornsby have hit .424 in the 60's like he did in the 20's? No. But he may have hit .350+
Would Ted Williams have hit .406 in 2022 like he did in 1941? Probably not. But he may have hit .370+

I think to think of it as "how much better were you than the next best player that year or that era?".
But even then, naturally some decades may have had more great players than other decades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigBlueFanGA
I'm science minded and I don't believe in coincidence much. Age, you're requiring me to believe age set in after the 1919 season but then didn't take much more of a toll on him for years. That isn't likely. He did suffer a season ending injury in 20 but his stats were compiled before that.

The simple fact of the matter remains - pitchers had the upper hand during the deadball era and to a huge degree.
You are assuming that the injury was sudden, and he was completely healthy before that. As a former pitcher I can tell you that you can often feel something going wrong with your elbow or shoulder before it just gives out. You often lose some velocity, or some cut on your ball first. I would think he tried to pitch through the injury, and finally realized mid-season he couldn't effectively do that, deciding then to shut it down. And he did improve the following years which does support that theory. But he was also at the point in age when guys typically were in a decline.
But I did concede that the change in the ball probably was a factor. Maybe he didn't adjust quickly to the ball change in 1920. Maybe he wasn't worried about fly balls until then. IDK.
But even after the injury (which back then often ended pitching careers), AND after the deadball era death, he was still a good pitcher in his late 30's.
 
You are assuming that the injury was sudden, and he was completely healthy before that. As a former pitcher I can tell you that you can often feel something going wrong with your elbow or shoulder before it just gives out. You often lose some velocity, or some cut on your ball first. I would think he tried to pitch through the injury, and finally realized mid-season he couldn't effectively do that, deciding then to shut it down. And he did improve the following years which does support that theory. But he was also at the point in age when guys typically were in a decline.
But I did concede that the change in the ball probably was a factor. Maybe he didn't adjust quickly to the ball change in 1920. Maybe he wasn't worried about fly balls until then. IDK.
But even after the injury (which back then often ended pitching careers), AND after the deadball era death, he was still a good pitcher in his late 30's.
I pitched as well and that's also how my family knows Fergie Jenkins. My brother used to work out with him during his Ranger days. He got my brother a minor league offer which he turned down.

I suspect Walter fell victim to what most power pitchers fall victim to when things aren't going great...throw harder. At his age, that would have been an easy way to injure himself. Unless you're Nolan, placement is more important than power.
 
You are assuming that the injury was sudden, and he was completely healthy before that. As a former pitcher I can tell you that you can often feel something going wrong with your elbow or shoulder before it just gives out. You often lose some velocity, or some cut on your ball first. I would think he tried to pitch through the injury, and finally realized mid-season he couldn't effectively do that, deciding then to shut it down. And he did improve the following years which does support that theory. But he was also at the point in age when guys typically were in a decline.
But I did concede that the change in the ball probably was a factor. Maybe he didn't adjust quickly to the ball change in 1920. Maybe he wasn't worried about fly balls until then. IDK.
But even after the injury (which back then often ended pitching careers), AND after the deadball era death, he was still a good pitcher in his late 30's.
Yes, he was an elite pitcher.
 
Too much to read for me.
But I am a lifelong baseball fan (as probably all 12 of you are), AND lifelong stats geek who got my degree in statistics and since then have been a practicing statistician analyzing and interpreting data for 30 years.

I mean there is clearly a reason, that of the 42 .400+ hitters ever:
- 16 the 26 years from 1876-1901
- 3 the 2 years 1911-1912
- 15 during the 1920's, including 8 from negro leagues
- 3 during the 1930's, including 2 from negro leagues
- 4 during the 1940's, including 3 from negro leagues
- 0 during the 74 years since then / 0 in MLB in 82 years

Would Rogers Hornsby have hit .424 in the 60's like he did in the 20's? No. But he may have hit .350+
Would Ted Williams have hit .406 in 2022 like he did in 1941? Probably not. But he may have hit .370+

I think to think of it as "how much better were you than the next best player that year or that era?".
But even then, naturally some decades may have had more great players than other decades.
My nephew is working on a sports stats degree of some sort.
 
My nephew is working on a sports stats degree of some sort.
I have messaged UK staff urging them to get a grad-student from the UK Statistics department to do specialized analytics for the basketball team. Almost free-labor, paying for TA's scholarship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigBlueFanGA
I pitched as well and that's also how my family knows Fergie Jenkins. My brother used to work out with him during his Ranger days. He got my brother a minor league offer which he turned down.

I suspect Walter fell victim to what most power pitchers fall victim to when things aren't going great...throw harder. At his age, that would have been an easy way to injure himself. Unless you're Nolan, placement is more important than power.
Ryan's longevity is more impressive to me than Cy Young, or Gehrig, or Rose, or Ripken.

"Placement > power". Yeah, and I was a power pitcher, who after I stopped playing wished I knew years before what I knew then (placement, but not just placement, also changing speeds). Kind of like how SGA could penetrate when he was at UK, he wasn't the fastest, but he changed speeds so well.
 
Ryan's longevity is more impressive to me than Cy Young, or Gehrig, or Rose, or Ripken.

"Placement > power". Yeah, and I was a power pitcher, who after I stopped playing wished I knew years before what I knew then (placement, but not just placement, also changing speeds). Kind of like how SGA could penetrate when he was at UK, he wasn't the fastest, but he changed speeds so well.
Yes. Neither my brother nor I had power. He was a junk master, I was all about placement. You should have seen my brothers "fastball" knuckleball. You couldn't catch the darn thing let alone hit it. It was probably around 86-88 and would bob several inches up and down. My go to was a naturally tailing fastball that waited til just before the plate to break. Dang i miss pitching.

BTW, I've appreciated your intelligent input in this draft. If you weren't here we'd only have @drcats2013 input and we all deserve better than that.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: drcats2013
Yes. Neither my brother nor I had power. He was a junk master, I was all about placement. You should have seen my brothers "fastball" knuckleball. You couldn't catch the darn thing let alone hit it. It was probably around 86-88 and would bob several inches up and down. My go to was a naturally tailing fastball that waited til just before the plate to break. Dang i miss pitching.

BTW, I've appreciated your intelligent input in this draft. If you weren't here we'd only have @drcats2013 input and we all deserve better than that.
Loser.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT