he has won 15 games for 16 straight seasons. No pitcher has ever done that! do you understand me? I said nobody!

cbfranchise3 Wrote:35 wins in two years is not dominant, that is really good.

is it only really good, when it is second in MLB in 1994 and first in MLB in 1995. What cb, the genius, might've forgetten is that maddux won 16 games in 1994. he did this in 114 games, because of the strike. and in 1995 they only played 144 games, and maddux managed to win 19 games. He led MLB by a wide margin in ERA for both of those seasons.

he never won a lot more than 20 games because he pitched in a hitter's era. if i step back and not look at the stats, i can surmise that much. The fact is, greg maddux was virtually top 3 in wins every season, and first or second in ERA.

You said he wasn't a feared pitcher, but obviously you didn't watch him in his prime. Because every time he got on the mound, you knew he would win. I never wanted my giants to face him. he was a simply dominating pitcher. and he was amazing. he did things with a baseball that i have never seen done.

The problem with palmeiro is that: a) he's done something a lot of players seem to be doing and b) he was never the best player on his team. But maddux, did something no pitcher has ever done, and he was the ace on one of the second best team of the 90's.

cbfranchise3 Wrote:The argument against Maddux is that he was never great. I applaud his consistency, but this is similar to the Palmeiro argument. While at the end of his career Palmeiro will have outstanding numbers, anybody who followed him over his career would say he was never a dominant player. The same goes for Maddux.

Clemens was a feared pitcher. Maddux never was. This is when you have to go above statistics.

Many have addressed this already, but let me pile on...

Are you insane? 4-Cy Youngs...and "he was never a dominant player".

See, here's the problem with baseball today. MLB started promoting the homerun and the strikeout pitchers more than the game itself, so we're stuck with a bunch of 'roided up freaks and pitchers who can't pitch, because that's what the masses want to see.

It's funny...people remember Nolan Ryan like he was a god (0 Cy Youngs, two 20 win seasons over a 27 year career, losing post-season record), yet Maddux got as little press as I've seen for a 300 game winner since Don Sutton. Why? Because he didn't strike out alot of people. Ignorant.

Besides the 300 wins and 4 Cy-Youngs, his back-to-back seasons in '94 and '95 are as dominant as any in history.

Year Tm Lg W L G GS GF CG SH IP H R ER HR BB SO HB WP ERA
1994 ATL NL 16 6 25 25 0 10 3 202.0 150 44 35 4 31 156 6 3 1.56
1995 ATL NL 19 2 28 28 0 10 3 209.7 147 39 38 8 23 181 4 1 1.63

And 'being feared' is what...throwing shattered bat pieces at a whimpy catcher? Clemens is/was a great pitcher...but 'being feared' is such a subjective, media-driven perception that it's not even worth making it part of this discussion.

Rob Dibble was "feared" because he threw hard, had bad head-wiring, and occasionaly was wild.

Mitch Williams was "feared" because there were seasons he didn't have a clue where the ball was going.

Being feared is a writer/broadcaster romanticizing that doesn't hold any water when you put it to test.

that was an excellent post. i would also like to add that nolan ryan was one of the most overrated pitchers ever.

I agree...Nolan was a very good pitcher for a long time. And he's a hall of famer. But he's remembered like he was Cy Young.

Nolan was a statistical and physical oddity. The fact that he didn't have a serious drop off as he hit his mid-to-late 30's and early 40's is what made him a HOF'er. Nolan was a very good pitcher who was a freak of nature...but not even in the discussion of the best pitchers in baseball history.

cbfranchise3 Wrote:The argument against Maddux is that he was never great.

I am almost at a loss for words over this post. Never great? From about '92 through '98, he was the best pitcher in baseball. Not one of the best. THE best. Better than Clemens. Better than Randy. Better than Glavine. And, yes, he was feared by hitters.

flyingswoosh Wrote:that was an excellent post. i would also like to add that nolan ryan was one of the most overrated pitchers ever.

For sure.

Sorry about the delay, I'll try to address all this in one post.

Let me start out by saying I think Maddux is a top 10 pitcher of all time. He was a really good pitcher. The top three pitchers of all time are my definition of great. Maddux isn't on that list, neither is Clemens. They were both really good pitchers.

I still think that you all are looking too far into stats, in which Maddux has an advatage in the most important stat, ERA. But I will play your game and throw some other ones out there:

Four Cy Youngs are a fabulous accomplishment for Maddux, and a highly respect that. Clemens had six.

Clemens has 4251 K's compared to Maddux's 2863. That is almost 1500 more.

300-170 is a remarkable record for a career that I applaud with awesome respect. It is, apparently, one of the best two things Maddux has accomplished in his career. Clemens is 322-164.

We all know that the World Series is what baseball is all about, and where people make their names big. Maddux was a remarkable 2-3 with a 2.09 ERA. Clemens was 3-0 with a 1.90 ERA.

Maddux won 20 games twice in his career, a solid accomplishment. Clemens did it six times.

The point is, I would take Clemens over Maddux, not by a wide margin, it is a close call. I think you all were confused when I said Maddux wasn't great, but that just means, to me, not top 3 of all time. I greatly respect and applaud Maddux's career, it was very nice.

But neither of these guys is the best pitcher of the era IMO, that is Pedro Martinez. Unfortunately, he is slowing down and will probably not approach Maddux or Clemens numbers.

Another note:

I know you all were trying to personally attack me with the Nolan Ryan stuff, and the funny thing is I don't even like the guy. I asked for an autograph from him in second grade and he ignored me. I have never liked him. Good try though.

And I don't think he is overrated, I think anybody that knows anything about baseball would not begin to rank him in the top 20 pitchers.

Final Note:

If anybody responds, I will be happy to continue the argument. But I am going through a hectic time and it may be a couple of days. Thanks, and peace. :drink:

I don't really feel like continuing this because it would take me hours to respond to everything you said. But, anyways, I do think you make some good points. But I would still take Maddux over Clemens for the reasons I gave earlier.

:stupid:

I'm always for the underdog. And in this case, Maddux is the underdog. He's plaing in a game where you have to throw 95 with a great curve to succeed, eyt he throws 88 and doesnt really have a great curve at all.