mbuser wrote:i hate to keep harping on it, but despite the huge amount of walks, his WHIP wasn't that bad (especially considering how bad it could be). would you rather have a pitcher walk a batter or give up a base hit?
I would almost rather have a pitcher give up a basehit than walking alot of batters. A walk is more demoralizing to a team than a hit because a ball in play is at least playable. A walk also will lead to higher pitch counts causing teams to go to bullpen earlier. A guy like Nolan Ryan in my opinion is around 23 to 25th best pitcher of alltime and he really didn't learn to pitch until probably 1987. Before 1987 his strikeouts and walks were both very high and that caused his defense to be sluggish and bored and i'm sure being bored on the field led to low energy at the plate.
I don't even feel Nolan Ryan was the best pitcher on his own team in most years. I think Frank Tannana was better while on Angels, Joe Neikro and Mike Scott were better on the Astros and he was the best pitcher the Rangers had but he really only had a few good years with em. Bobby Witt was probably better in some years in Texas.
I hate to say this but I hear alot about the homerun record being tainted but in my opinion Ryan was using from as early as 1987. I have no proof but usually a pitcher declines after 40 except for Clemens and other roid users. Maybe Ryan was the exception but he did play for some steriod heavy teams in his last years. His horse trainer at his ranch was convicted of selling illegal steroids to University of Texas football players and he does show signs of steroid abuse like his recent heart problems. I can honestly say I would bet money he used.