Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

Kershaw pitches today with a lifetime record of 165-71, a .699 winning percentage. If he wins today, his new winning percentage will be .7004. This is incredibly good for this many decisions. There are only a couple other pitchers that have reached 70% percentage, for a career. His lifetime ERA is a minuscule  2.41. He is only 31 and has some years left and most probably will not be able to keep up this percentage till the end of his career but it is still quite notable that he is where he is today. MLB probably won't mention it because there is not as home run involved.

///

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, laffite said:

Kershaw pitches today with a lifetime record of 165-71, a .699 winning percentage. If he wins today, his new winning percentage will be .7004. This is incredibly good for this many decisions. There are only a couple other pitchers that have reached 70% percentage, for a career. His lifetime ERA is a minuscule  2.41. He is only 31 and has some years left and most probably will not be able to keep up this percentage till the end of his career but it is still quite notable that he is where he is today. MLB probably won't mention it because there is not as home run involved.

///

Kershaw is having a good year.    Looks like him not having to be the 'ace' has helped him become a very good and reliable starter.   BUT,   the concern is still the playoffs \ World Series.

What is his winning percentage there?    Yea,   not close to .699.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more. A video game, right on. I didn't renew my MLB subscription this year, not worth it. Throughout the season they try and get you back offering a deal, okay this much for the rest of the season. No. I'm not sufficiently interested anymore. I'm glad to see these guys come out like this and say how it is. It's not a question of not changing with the times, all that garbage. The game of baseball is the garbage. Fie on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Kershaw is having a good year.    Looks like him not having to be the 'ace' has helped him become a very good and reliable starter.   BUT,   the concern is still the playoffs \ World Series.

What is his winning percentage there?    Yea,   not close to .699.

The inevitable. Post season stats are secondary and somewhat incidental. Anything can happen with that regardless the merit of the player. Players are judged by regular season stats. I'm sure there are quite a few great players whose post season stats don't measure up but after a time no one even mentions them. Regular season stats over a career is the gold standard for merit.  To emphasize post season stats at the expense of regular season stats in Kershaw's case is too entirely miss the point.

Not being the ace has nothing to do with "helped him become a very good and reliable starter." Kershaw is a great starter, not only this year, but throughout his career. Ryu is having an exceptionable year but he is nowhere near a Kershaw overall. Few are. If Ryu was not around there is no compelling reason to opine that Kershaw would not pitch just as well. Please, no tripe about lack of pressure because he is not the ace. Hardly a greater competitor has ever existed than Kershaw.

///

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Not with this Dodger Team;   We don't wish to be known as the Buffalo Bills.

Very funny.

BTW, it took just five minutes to come up with three examples of great pitchers with less than stellar post season stats. White Ford is 10-8, Greg Maddux 11-14, Tom Seaver 3-3. Nobody remembers these great pitchers for post season stats. Kershaw is 8-8. Not that bad, really. Post season stats are not the standard that exemplify merit.

After this season, The Los Angeles Dodgers will become the Los Angeles Bills :lol: . Of course, even to attain that they will have to get into the WS of which there is no guarntee, what with this idiotic playoff system (caused by the idiotic division set ups).

Why don't they come to me and I will make baseball GREAT AGAIN. All my genius going to waste.

////

///

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, laffite said:

Very funny.

BTW, it took just five minutes to come up with three examples of great pitchers with less than stellar post season stats. White Ford is 10-8, Greg Maddux 11-14, Tom Seaver 3-3. Nobody remembers these great pitchers for post season stats. Kershaw is 8-8. Not that bad, really. Post season stats are not the standard that exemplify merit.

After this season, The Los Angeles Dodgers will become the Los Angeles Bills :lol: . Of course, even to attain that they will have to get into the WS of which there is no guarntee, what with this idiotic playoff system (caused by the idiotic division set ups).

Why don't they come to me and I will make baseball GREAT AGAIN. All my genius going to waste.

////

///

 

I follow basketball more than baseball and in basketball one's legacy is mostly defined by how a player does in the finals.      I'm not saying this is 'right' or 'fair' to players.    Of course basketball is mostly an 8 - 9 man game were having more than 2 top-10 players on the team typically means success.   

Baseball is much different,  especially the pitcher position.     E.g. Trout is the best player of his era,  but will likely never be in the World Series (and maybe even nothing more than a wild-card game!).

Pitchers;  based on innings pitched,  a pitcher is only a factor in a very small percentage of all the 162 games played.   (less than 5%).

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, laffite said:

BTW, it took just five minutes to come up with three examples of great pitchers with less than stellar post season stats. White Ford is 10-8, Greg Maddux 11-14, Tom Seaver 3-3. Nobody remembers these great pitchers for post season stats. Kershaw is 8-8. Not that bad, really. Post season stats are not the standard that exemplify meri

Bill Plaschke of the L.A. Times today has a column you may be interested in:  Kershaw passes Koufar for wins, but he's got work left in October.

Google it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Bill Plaschke of the L.A. Times today has a column you may be interested in:  Kershaw passes Koufar for wins, but he's got work left in October.

Google it.  

Plaschke doesn't have much to do. Maybe he has run out of column ideas. He is careless and his comparison are a bit unwieldy.

Won-Lost records are more valid in measuring effectiveness. Koufax may have had a low ERA but he was 4-3, not significantly better than Kershaw's 9-10 (I posted 8-8 earlier, that was in error).

Kershaw has three times more innings pitched than Koufax and that makes low ERAs harder to come by.  And add to that how fewer runs were scored in Koufax's era as compared with home run derby run production that Kershaw has to deal with. Plashke has the temerity to bring up complete games although he qualifies it a bit. But to even mention borders on the obtuse.

If I were Sports Editor of the LA Times I would call Plashke in the office and tell him to get on the stick. Maybe he should cover high school graduations.

But he does raise the question (not by design but unintentionally) : Who was better overall, Koufax or Kershaw. Koufax had those flashy last four years. Kershaw has been consistent throughout his career. Kershaw has a lower ERA and a better winning percentage. Statistically it's Kershaw, but the comparison is still a difficult one. Koufax was wild early and then came round and he was plagued with an arthritic elbow, which makes his accomplishments all the more amazing. His last four years are among the very best in a four-consecutive-year statistical comparison.

////

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, laffite said:

Plaschke doesn't have much to do. Maybe he has run out of column ideas. He is careless and his comparison are a bit unwieldy.

Won-Lost records are more valid in measuring effectiveness. Koufax may have had a low ERA but he was 4-3, not significantly better than Kershaw's 9-10 (I posted 8-8 earlier, that was in error).

Kershaw has three times more innings pitched than Koufax and that makes low ERAs harder to come by.  And add to that how fewer runs were scored in Koufax's era as compared with home run derby run production that Kershaw has to deal with. Plashke has the temerity to bring up complete games although he qualifies it a bit. But to even mention borders on the obtuse.

If I were Sports Editor of the LA Times I would call Plashke in the office and tell him to get on the stick. Maybe he should cover high school graduations.

But he does raise the question (not by design but unintentionally) : Who was better overall, Koufax or Kershaw. Koufax had those flashy last four years. Kershaw has been consistent throughout his career. Kershaw has a lower ERA and a better winning percentage. Statistically it's Kershaw, but the comparison is still a difficult one. Koufax was wild early and then came round and he was plagued with an arthritic elbow, which makes his accomplishments all the more amazing. His last four years are among the very best in a four-consecutive-year statistical comparison.

////

Yea,  I'm not a fan of Bill,  just felt you would be interested in this.

Much like the sports talk radio hosts for the radio station that broadcast the Dodgers,  most said that any type of comparison was apples and oranges.   E.g. different era,  major difference in years played \ innings pitched etc...

Just to sum this up since maybe I wasn't clear;   I admit I misjudged Kershaw a few seasons back when you and I started discussion him; e.g. that the Dodgers should have low-balled him and if he didn't accept,,, so what etc..

I was WRONG!     I guess I was just bitter that my Dodgers got to the dance but didn't get the girl!  He is the teams second best pitcher (before the season started I believed it would be Buehler but he is too inconsistent).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Yea,  I'm not a fan of Bill,  just felt you would be interested in this.

Yes, and thank you. I did not feel that your citing the article was an attack on me that needed retaliation. I was just taking the article at face value.

Kershaw's stats this season indicate that he is the second best pitcher this year for the dodgers but not by much. His stats are still phenomenal. I see them as virtual equals. Usually the designation of second best implies a significant gulf. Not so here. Ryu has distinguished himself, though, especially with an ERA which is fantastical for our current run-crazy zeitgeist. He will have to suffer a precipitous meltdown not to win the CYA going away. 

Buehler is young and what he may accomplish in the future is daunting. It's still early but guys with that kind of talent at such a young age can attract comments like, "Another Kershaw?"

...

///

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, laffite said:

Buehler is young and what he may accomplish in the future is daunting. It's still early but guys with that kind of talent at such a young age can attract comments like, "Another Kershaw?"

Ah,  you're one wise dude (and not wise guy!).   That "another Kershaw" stopped me in my tracks.

Glad we're only discussing sports and not politics (ha ha).

Take care.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Ah,  you're one wise dude (and not wise guy!).   That "another Kershaw" stopped me in my tracks.

Glad we're only discussing sports and not politics (ha ha).

Take care.

 

That "take care" is usually a signal of conversation over, I get it ; still, not sure what you mean. Buehler is only 23 and in his second year and shows enormous promise. Yes, such a comment may be a stretch but I'm rather bullish on that guy. Not sure about sports and politics, but no fear there; I have retired from politics and was never a staunch politico anyway. I doubt seriously I could keep up with you on that subject. ///

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, laffite said:

That "take care" is usually a signal of conversation over, I get it ; still, not sure what you mean. Buehler is only 23 and in his second year and shows enormous promise. Yes, such a comment may be a stretch but I'm rather bullish on that guy. Not sure about sports and politics, but no fear there; I have retired from politics and was never a staunch politico anyway. I doubt seriously I could keep up with you on that subject. ///

 

Sorry I was confusing.  I viewed that "another Kershaw" as icing on the cake related to Kershaw and what will be his legacy as a pitcher;  the greatest of his generation and one of the top 2 or 3 greatest in Dodger history (in contention with Drysdale). 

So I wasn't commenting on Buehler but just how "another Kershaw" hit home that I had been selling Kershaw short because of my disappointment of the Dodgers losing 2 World Series in a row.    (AND I know you didn't say "another Kershaw" to wack me over the head about that).

As for 'take care';  even I found that odd after I hit submit.   It was just a sign of affection since we were also on-a-role with Hopkins as well.     I was just feeling good since few discussions around here lead to folks coming to a common and mutual understanding (especially when it comes to politics!).

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

So Angel player Tyler Skaggs died from a combo of opioids and alcohol;    No surprise to me.   What was a surprise is all the special events the Angel's hosted before knowing how he died.    These took place days after he was found dead and I told my wife at the time that this might be a major mistake if he died from an overdose, which was the most likely cause.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...