In a message dated 7/11/2003 9:28:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Furthermore, injuries aren't a random or infrequent > factor for pitchers. They are a non-random, frequent > factor. Power pitchers are less likely to get injured > that soft-tossers (Koufax, of course, was the > quintessential power pitcher). Furthermore, pitchers > get injured all the time (unless they play for the > Oakland A's right now). The odds of a pitcher having > a major injury in a season are (IIRC) over 10%. Being > able to avoid getting injured is a talent just as > surely as striking someone out - because if you're on > the bench, you can't contribute to your team. Surely > one part of Greg Maddux's remarkable ability is the > fact that he is never, ever injured. That's not > random - it's because he has flawless mechanics and is > the most efficient pitcher in the history of the > modern game But here you are being grossly unfair to compare Koufax to Maddux. The way pitchers are used and or allow themselves to be used today is completely different than it was then. Koufax's used an ice bucket and a rub they use on horses to protect his arm. He went out on 3 days rest regardless of how he felt. He played through major injuries that would have put pitchers on the DL for months. One year he damaged an artery in his pitching hand. Without modern tests who knew. What people did know was that his finger turned blue when he pitched, that it was cold as ice and numb. But he pitched through most of the year and almost lost the finger to gangrene. Now he was no fool. But it was a different era and pitchers did not sit out. Can you imagine management or the player allowing something like that to happen now? Guys go on the DL if their finger is blue from nail polish rather than ischemia. Koufax's career was short but during his five year reign he virtually never missed a turn to pitch. He was durable but did not have longevity. Things would have been different now. As to the value of a long career this is a tough one. Longevity is not enough. Don Sutton won over 300 games and pitched for ever; so did Phil Neikro. Are they in the same league with these guys? Clemens has done both and that makes him one of the greatest pitchers ever. Same with Maddux. But how long is long enough? Koufax did his stuff in 5 years. Not a flash in the pan. He went out on top (although not without pain). He could have pitched longer but he felt he would not be able to maintain his skill and would certainly damage his arm. He walked away. Now this choice certainly means that if one wants to measure longevity (certainly a reasonable thing to do) that he will lose points. But we value things other than longevity (or in addition to them). Cal Ripkin's consecutive game record is an example of a feet of longevity. In and of itself does this mean he was a great player? Including the record does than make him the greatest short stop of all time? By the way, sometimes when statistical tools fail to produce an answer that is obviously correct it becomes necessary to devise new tools. So have James go back to the drawing board.
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
