--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No baseball for a while so I thought I might stir the pot. Just finished Jane Leavy's excellent if reverential bio. It provides some insight into this extrarordinarly private man. She dispells notions that he did not really like baseball, or that he was aloof from teamates. But the main thing about him is his absolute dominance from 1961 through 1966. The statistics are daunting, 4 no hitters, an ERA of less than two, wining crutial games for the Dodgers at the end of the season and then in the world series often on 2 days rest. Other players of that era insist that he was the best. I know Gautam has argued in favor of Pedro Martinez but it seems to me that Pedro is not in the same league. As good as he Pedro has not been able to drag his team along with him. As good as he is he does not seem to have the ability to dominate the way Kofax could.
Except that Koufax pitched in Dodger Stadium, off a
20" mound (the mound in Dodger Stadium was illegally
high) in an era when the _batting title winner_ hit
.301 in the American League, and the HR high was in
the low 30s, IIRC. Pedro puts up ERAs similar to
Koufax's when the batting title winner hits in the
.370s, the HR champion hits 70 HRs, the mound is 10"
high, and he does it in _Fenway Park_ (which favors
hitters), not Dodger Stadium (then and now the best
pitcher's park in MLB). In fact, until Koufax moved
to Dodger Stadium, he wasn't an overwhelming pitcher. He was very good, but if I had to pick one pitcher of
the post-war era to win a game for me, the list would
go something like:
1. Pedro
2. Pedro
3. Tom Seaver
4. Roger Clemens
5. Greg Maddux
6. Koufax
And I'm not even sure I'd put him that high.
What about Bob Gibson?
Doug
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
