Those of who were actually alive in the 70's won't recall the Angels as being a perenially crappy ballclub. Mediocre, certainly, but we're not talking the 2006 Royals here. Gene Autry was one of the early exploiters of the free agent system -- not to any great success, but there was talent flowing thru the system. They won a title in 1979 before Ryan left, and a couple more not long after. It's wrong to attribute Ryan's mediocre record to the teams he played on.
Most would agree that Ryan had about as much talent as anyone who ever played. But few would argue that Ryan was EVER the greatest pitcher of his era. If he would have approached 400 victories with a little better run support -- well, that's more a testimony to his incredible longevity than anything else. An incredible talent, to be sure, but he never fully harnessed that talent.
His era+ was 112 for his career putting him squarely in the middle of the above average category. His career whip was 1.247 which certainly isn't the whip of the greatest of all time.
Let's just say he's one of the greatest strikeout pitchers ever and leave it at that.
Tavish is on the right track. His career ERA+ was only 112, which is good but far far far from great. You have to remember that Ryan's career coincided almost precisely with the era of inflated pitching statistics. This 112 is not even close to top 100 of all time and worse than such pitching luminaries as Dave Stieb, John Tudor, Jimmy Key and Jose Rijo.
he was the hardest pitcher to get a hit off of in the history of the game. but i have to assume that his BAA numbers can be explained so they are less impressive (?)
also, steve carlton's ERA+ (115) was also about the same as al leiter's (112). should this lead me to believe that either carlton was also overrated or al leiter was very underrated? tavish?
stumpak wrote:Tavish is on the right track. His career ERA+ was only 112, which is good but far far far from great. You have to remember that Ryan's career coincided almost precisely with the era of inflated pitching statistics. This 112 is not even close to top 100 of all time and worse than such pitching luminaries as Dave Stieb, John Tudor, Jimmy Key and Jose Rijo.
mbuser wrote:he was the hardest pitcher to get a hit off of in the history of the game. but i have to assume that his BAA numbers can be explained so they are less impressive (?)
Indeed they can. It's pretty damned hard to get hits off of a guy that doesn't throw many strikes.
mbuser wrote:he was the hardest pitcher to get a hit off of in the history of the game. but i have to assume that his BAA numbers can be explained so they are less impressive (?)
Indeed they can. It's pretty damned hard to get hits off of a guy that doesn't throw many strikes.
so the 19,780 batters that he faced and didn't walk -- what was their excuse?
mbuser wrote:he was the hardest pitcher to get a hit off of in the history of the game. but i have to assume that his BAA numbers can be explained so they are less impressive (?)
Probably, but no matter the explanation his BAA numbers will still be impressive to me.
also, steve carlton's ERA+ (115) was also about the same as al leiter's (112). should this lead me to believe that either carlton was also overrated or al leiter was very underrated? tavish?
I guess that depends on where you think Carlton fits in the overall history of the game. If you want to call him one of the 5 or 10 greatest pitchers ever or (like what many of the Ryan fans will do) call him the Greatest, then yes you have been greatly misled. He makes it in as one of the 10 greatest living pitchers though so I guess thats something.
mbuser wrote:he was the hardest pitcher to get a hit off of in the history of the game. but i have to assume that his BAA numbers can be explained so they are less impressive (?)
Indeed they can. It's pretty damned hard to get hits off of a guy that doesn't throw many strikes.
so the 19,780 batters that he faced and didn't walk -- what was their excuse?
They struck out. Or at least a good number of them did. That's why I'm more than willing to label Ryan as one of the greatest strikeout pitchers of all time. His walks though keep him from being in the very top of the list of the greatest all-around pitchers.
My projected hits for Ryan based on his career actually have him getting slightly unlucky in the number of hits that he gave up too. So I guess you could say that in addition to being one of the great strikeout pitchers of all time he's one of the great baa pitchers of all time - but then those two things really go hand-in-hand.
But the goal of a pitcher is to prevent the other team from scoring runs. In that regard Ryan was above average - not dominant. He walked too many hitters to be dominant in preventing runs.
stumpak wrote:Tavish is on the right track. His career ERA+ was only 112, which is good but far far far from great. You have to remember that Ryan's career coincided almost precisely with the era of inflated pitching statistics. This 112 is not even close to top 100 of all time and worse than such pitching luminaries as Dave Stieb, John Tudor, Jimmy Key and Jose Rijo.
Don't be disrespectin' Jose Rijo.
Dave Stieb was the heart and soul of the 80's Jays and had one of the nastiest sliders I've ever seen. That dig hurts, man.
Anyway I agree with whoever said that Ryan has to be considered one of the best strikeout pitchers of all time.
"My cat's breath smells like cat food." - R. Wiggum
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by rainman23 » Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:13 pm 
