I’m so confused has to how the all-time ERA leader, who is also 2nd in WHIP, is still available. Give me Ed Walsh
@jcrow10 you are up
@jcrow10 you are up
MLB Draft Round 16 Last Round
- Thread starter DraftCat
- Start date
Probably because he’s not pitched a baseball game in over 100 years
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Just messing, but I’m sure that really is why. I guess it’s kind of like drafting George Mikan in a basketball draft. The stats are there, but are people going to vote for these relatively unheard of guys that put up crazy numbers over 100 years ago? I am interested to see how it plays out
fact is fact. mcgwire had the most perfect compact swing of any guy his size. all the beast guys would have a down and inward flex to get down on the ball. mcgwire standed so wide that he was already down and his swing was more like a flick. his ball always went out fastest. yet of all the great power hitters of all-time why hasn’t anyone picked him until now? maybe it’s fear, maybe it’s biased apprehension, or maybe because he was a member of the fantastic 4.
Ivan and Banks was two I was hoping who'd come back to me. Pipe dream however!
@GoBigBlue712 you are up
@GoBigBlue712 you are up
there’s arguably more than 1.
great pick. another good switch hitter. and a great 2nd basemen.
I just googled top 10 pitchers and got about 45 different lists lol
Yep, terribly subjective once you get past the top 5 or so, but even then the lists go all over the place.
That is the great thing about baseball.. for the most part there isn't a consensus on anything.
Give me Tom Glavine since Smoltz and Maddux are gone.
solid pick. if i didn’t have a lefty starter i’d have taken him. huge number of wins including the braves’ biggest ever win. he was a picker of corners and got some calls but he never the less kept people off balance and for a lefty in this draft that’s a requirement. there’s more, but not too many more lefties that check all the boxes like a glavine for this competition.
Sorry, I was right in the middle of something when the draft went from a standstill straight to my pick at warp speed. Lol. This guy started his HOF career with 11 consecutive seasons of hitting at least .300 & 100+ RBI. He retired with a .334 career BA & hit at least .380 4 times, winning 2 batting titles & drove in 150+ runs 3 times. He played very well in the post season & helped win 2 WS. He’s also remembered as a good defensive CF & LF. I’ll take Al Simmons.
@LukaszObrzut OTC
@LukaszObrzut OTC
An eight time 20 game winner- won a World Series game in 3 different decades---- 3 time World Series Champion & 3 Cy Young Awards (2nd twice and top 5 eight times). He was 8-3 with a 2.61 era in 17 postseason appearances. Four Gold Gloves
IN over 3900 innings he never gave up a grand slam in his career (over 200 times bases were loaded.
Give me Jim Palmer-
@csrupp otc
IN over 3900 innings he never gave up a grand slam in his career (over 200 times bases were loaded.
Give me Jim Palmer-
@csrupp otc
Probably because he’s not pitched a baseball game in over 100 years
Just messing, but I’m sure that really is why. I guess it’s kind of like drafting George Mikan in a basketball draft. The stats are there, but are people going to vote for these relatively unheard of guys that put up crazy numbers over 100 years ago? I am interested to see how it plays out
Going by this logic, though, means we should be just be drafting all stars from the past 20 years.
So you don’t think that the all time ERA leader was passed on for over 4 rounds due to the fact his career was finished by 1917? I stand by my statement. I’m interested to see if drafting guys that played over 100 years ago will be beneficial. If he pitched in even the 60’s and had a career ERA like that, I think he would have been a top 5 pick.
That is the difficult thing about drafts like this. You have to try and find that fine balance between true talent, amazing stats, and name recognition that will get you a vote. For every voter that is a hardcore baseball fan that knows who Ed Walsh is and appreciates what he did, you might have 2 that think, "isn't that the guy who played Al Bundy?" I wonder if someone had just drafted last year's all-star time might not just win this thing. At the very least, we have to hope that voters will be open minded enough to listen to our arguments when describing and defending a player they may not know. And as a baseball fan, and teacher, I hope some people will do some research on a few of these guys on their own and gain some knowledge.
Nah. Last years all star team wouldn’t do much. It would be similar to drafting all guys from 1910, in my opinion. A lot of people don’t follow and the names would be relatively unheard of.
Very true. I honestly believe I have drafted 3 of the top 10 pitchers of all time & currently have best staying rotation thus far. But I’m worried if people will see Grover Cleveland Alexander and Mordecai Brown and even think anything of it. Fortunately, I was able to nab Clayton Kershaw. What he has done in his 12 seasons has actually been BETTER numbers-wise than what Sandy Koufax did in his 12 years, aside from Sandy’s 3 more no-hitters, but ultimately that’s as much luck as it is skill.
That’s the reason I personally avoided players from 100 years ago. No knock whatsoever on you for drafting them, but I’m afraid they won’t get credit for the stats they put up at that time
The heater from Van Meeter . . Bob Feller. Thank you. With the two Bob's and Warren Spahn, a vicious trio of complete game modern era hurlers. What else is needed to win this competition? Feller threw 36 complete games after the war, the 2nd one. The only times in history you hear of that is before 1920, or before 1900, when compete games were the result of having nobody else.
Bob Feller
@podgejeff_
Bob Feller
@podgejeff_
Last edited:
yeah aside from a lot of things like koufax having the best 5 year span in history.
That's the pitcher I've been dumbfounded that wasn't taken the last 2 rounds. He missed sometime due to the War but if not he was a 300 game winner easily. Some say he had a chance at 400
Sandy Koufax’s best 5 years were 1962-66 in which he amounted 111 wins, averaged a 2.00 era and amassed 1444 strikeouts (289 per year) Yes, that is absolutely preposterous.
Kershaw’s best 5 were probably 2013-17, though the surrounding years weren’t much different. He had 83 wins, averaged a 1.95 era and had 1146 strikeouts (229 per year)
So his wins & strikeouts are lower, but you have to remember that Koufax was part of a 4 man rotation, so a full season was 40 stars for him instead of 32 or so for Kershaw. Those stretches were actually very similar as far as dominance.
yes, except for the strike outs, wins, complete games, post season success overall and ws mvp’s. btw like how you rounded up. kofax’s era in that span is 1.98. besides pitching more innings with that era is more proven. whose to say if kershaw had to go longer. kershaw never came close to 250 innings let alone 330. that argument goes in sandy’s favor.
Last edited:
World Series success is the true difference in the two. Kershaw has an era of over 5 in the World Series, while Koufax is .95 which is just absurd.
Just as a quick correction, on the main page you got Kopikat taking Mel Ott, that was csrupp's pick. Kopikat took Bob Feller.
Good lord man, I wasn’t trying to get into a pissing match between the 2. It was simply to emphasize how good Kershaw has been up to this point in his career.
And by the way, the math I did had Sandy at 2 even. I simply added the era’s together and divided by 5. I didn’t go into how many innings he had in each of those years so I didn’t “round up”, it’s just what I came up with.
That, I will certainly concede to. His clutch pitching was otherworldly. As I said above, I wasn’t trying to debate the 2 guys. Koufax was a legit 1st round selection, whereas I thought my pick of Kershaw was appropriate at the round 2/3 corner. My point was simply that at this point in his career, Kershaw is right on par with where guys like Koufax, Clemens, and Maddux were at the same point in their careers.
