If you were building a team...

[Sportsforever]

Re: If you were building a team...

I like Pedro just because of his arsenal. I'm not debating who was better between him or Maddux, they are both two of the best ever. I just like Pedro's ability to blow you away. To strikeout 13 batters per 9 innings, with just 1.6 walks like he did in 1999, that's incredible. I just prefer the power pitcher in this case.

Maddux pitched longer, but it's not like Pedro couldn't stay on the field. From 1995 to 2005, he was the best pitcher on the planet and averaged 30 starts a season in that span. He still pitched enough to be worthy of building around.

Meh, I'd say from 1998-2002 he was the best pitcher on the planet. In 1995-1997 I'd say Maddux was still better. Maddux 1995 is insane, almost as much so as Pedro's 2000. Yes, Martinez zenith was better, but it was as short as Koufax while Maddux was much longer. If you were building a franchise, I'd take Maddux career over Martinez...and I love me some Pedro.

[Chrisksaint]

Re: If you were building a team...

I'd take Maddux, I like the consistency of his career

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

Meh, I'd say from 1998-2002 he was the best pitcher on the planet. In 1995-1997 I'd say Maddux was still better. Maddux 1995 is insane, almost as much so as Pedro's 2000. Yes, Martinez zenith was better, but it was as short as Koufax while Maddux was much longer. If you were building a franchise, I'd take Maddux career over Martinez...and I love me some Pedro.

It's a no brainer imo. Maddux also managed to average almost 35 games a year and eat 270ish innings in that span.

Maddux was every bit as good as Pedro and he was better for longer.

[Sportsforever]

Re: If you were building a team...

It's a no brainer imo. Maddux also managed to average almost 35 games a year and eat 270ish innings in that span.

Maddux was every bit as good as Pedro and he was better for longer.

Agreed. Plus, Maddux is probably the best defensive pitcher of all time and could handle the bat (not that the bat mattered for Pedro in the AL). Pedro was amazing...I saw him pitch in person on several occasions in his prime and he is one of my all time favorites. He broke down, however, too quickly while Maddux pitched for nearly 25 years. It's a no brainer if you are starting both careers...do you want 25 years of 350+ wins with a 10 year stretch of brilliance or 15 years of 220 wins with a 5 year stretch of brilliance?

[DieHardYankee26]

I need stats. I just showed Pedro was far more dominant for his career. Maddux was good for longer, but in no way was he as dominant as Pedro. His best year wasn't better, his best years weren't better...How was he more dominant than Pedro?

From what you guys are saying, Maddux was a great pitcher for more years. I agree on that. But you said Maddux was "more dominant". That's just not true.

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

I need stats. I just showed Pedro was far more dominant for his career. Maddux was good for longer, but in no way was he as dominant as Pedro. His best year wasn't better, his best years weren't better...How was he more dominant than Pedro?

From what you guys are saying, Maddux was a great pitcher for more years. I agree on that. But you said Maddux was "more dominant". That's just not true.

Sabrmetrics are a sham.

Agreed. Plus, Maddux is probably the best defensive pitcher of all time and could handle the bat (not that the bat mattered for Pedro in the AL). Pedro was amazing...I saw him pitch in person on several occasions in his prime and he is one of my all time favorites. He broke down, however, too quickly while Maddux pitched for nearly 25 years. It's a no brainer if you are starting both careers...do you want 25 years of 350+ wins with a 10 year stretch of brilliance or 15 years of 220 wins with a 5 year stretch of brilliance?

From 92 to say 98 I would say Maddux was as dominant as any pitcher ever. And the Chicks dig the longball commercial is an all timer.

[Sportsforever]

Re: If you were building a team...

I need stats. I just showed Pedro was far more dominant for his career. Maddux was good for longer, but in no way was he as dominant as Pedro. His best year wasn't better, his best years weren't better...How was he more dominant than Pedro?

From what you guys are saying, Maddux was a great pitcher for more years. I agree on that. But you said Maddux was "more dominant". That's just not true.

Pedro's average season during peak (1997-2005):
17-6, 29 GS, 2.47 ERA, .97 WHIP,

Greg Maddux average season during peak (1988-1998):
18-9, 33 GS, 2.56 ERA, 1.07 WHIP

If I wanted to make Maddux's peak smaller (1994-1998):
17-6, 31 GS, 2.10 ERA, .94 WHIP

There really isn't a huge difference between them, but Maddux definitely did it longer. Now, Pedro was more 'dominant' from the perspective of how he got it done (lots of K's), but Maddux was no slouch either and actually has the better K/BB ratio.

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

Pedro's average season during peak (1997-2005):
17-6, 29 GS, 2.47 ERA, .97 WHIP,

Greg Maddux average season during peak (1988-1998):
18-9, 33 GS, 2.56 ERA, 1.07 WHIP

If I wanted to make Maddux's peak smaller (1994-1998):
17-6, 31 GS, 2.10 ERA, .94 WHIP

There really isn't a huge difference between them, but Maddux definitely did it longer. Now, Pedro was more 'dominant' from the perspective of how he got it done (lots of K's), but Maddux was no slouch either and actually has the better K/BB ratio.

His ability to run that 2 seamer to either side of the plate was the ultimate equalizer. When he developed the change he was darn near unhittable. He wouldn't rack up a ton of K's, but no one hit the ball on the screws. Every pitch was a different speed and every pitch had movement on it.

[DieHardYankee26]

Pedro's average season during peak (1997-2005):
17-6, 29 GS, 2.47 ERA, .97 WHIP,

Greg Maddux average season during peak (1988-1998):
18-9, 33 GS, 2.56 ERA, 1.07 WHIP

If I wanted to make Maddux's peak smaller (1994-1998):
17-6, 31 GS, 2.10 ERA, .94 WHIP

There really isn't a huge difference between them, but Maddux definitely did it longer. Now, Pedro was more 'dominant' from the perspective of how he got it done (lots of K's), but Maddux was no slouch either and actually has the better K/BB ratio.

For reference, what's Pedro's average season during a peak as short as Maddux's shortened peak? Say from 1998-2002? Probably ridiculous. I agree that Maddux did it longer. I said that from the beginning. But he said Maddux was "more dominant". And it seems most would agree that that is not the case.

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

For reference, what's Pedro's average season during a peak as short as Maddux's shortened peak? Say from 1998-2002? Probably ridiculous. I agree that Maddux did it longer. I said that from the beginning. But he said Maddux was "more dominant". And it seems most would agree that that is not the case.

I said as dominant or more dominant. I'd say it again. Feel free to post whatever sabrshenanigans you wish.

[Sportsforever]

Re: If you were building a team...

For reference, what's Pedro's average season during a peak as short as Maddux's shortened peak? Say from 1998-2002? Probably ridiculous. I agree that Maddux did it longer. I said that from the beginning. But he said Maddux was "more dominant". And it seems most would agree that that is not the case.

Pedro from 1998-2002:
17-6, 28 GS, 2.27 ERA, 0.92 WHIP

Almost identical to Maddux's 5 season peak I posted. Maddux may have not had a 1999 or 2000 season like Pedro did, but his 1994 and 1995 seasons measure up very nicely, their peaks almost identical, and Maddux did it for twice as long.

[Sportsforever]

Re: If you were building a team...

His ability to run that 2 seamer to either side of the plate was the ultimate equalizer. When he developed the change he was darn near unhittable. He wouldn't rack up a ton of K's, but no one hit the ball on the screws. Every pitch was a different speed and every pitch had movement on it.

Yup. I have never seen ANYONE pitch with such pinpoint control as Maddux with movement. In his prime, he was unbelievable. In 1995 Charlie O'Brien (his personal catcher) and Leo Mazzone both have said he didn't make a poor pitch ALL year. Throw in the fact that he is one of the most cerebral baseball players of all time, I'd take him in a heart beat.

[DieHardYankee26]

I agree Maddux was a great pitcher. But for Pedro to do what he did in the AL, having probably the greatest season a pitcher has ever had (twice as many strikeouts as hits doesn't even make sense), I'd definitely say he was more dominant. Maddux had his ways of getting hitters out, and at the end of the day that's all that matters, but speaking of dominance, Pedro was blowing guys away. Making great hitters look stupid, over powering them. And he was the smallest guy on the field. Clearly, no one is going to be shaken either way (wont bother with "sabrshenanigans") but Pedro was must see TV in the same way Mark McGwire and Sosa were in the summer of 98.

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

Yup. I have never seen ANYONE pitch with such pinpoint control as Maddux with movement. In his prime, he was unbelievable. In 1995 Charlie O'Brien (his personal catcher) and Leo Mazzone both have said he didn't make a poor pitch ALL year. Throw in the fact that he is one of the most cerebral baseball players of all time, I'd take him in a heart beat.

I am no Braves or Cubs fan, but if I had to pick a pitcher, going on all of the pitchers I have seen, to me it starts with Maddux. I don't even think it's that close.

Funny thing is at one point I thought Steve Avery was going to be the best pitcher for the Braves for years to come.

[Sportsforever]

Re: If you were building a team...

I agree Maddux was a great pitcher. But for Pedro to do what he did in the AL, having probably the greatest season a pitcher has ever had (twice as many strikeouts as hits doesn't even make sense), I'd definitely say he was more dominant. Maddux had his ways of getting hitters out, and at the end of the day that's all that matters, but speaking of dominance, Pedro was blowing guys away. Making great hitters look stupid, over powering them. And he was the smallest guy on the field. Clearly, no one is going to be shaken either way (wont bother with "sabrshenanigans") but Pedro was must see TV in the same way Mark McGwire and Sosa were in the summer of 98.

I don't think this discussion is an attempt to diminish Pedro. If I had one game to start and both pitchers are in their primes, I'd probably take Pedro. The point is that Maddux had a greater career and that is what I would look at when it comes to selecting who I want on my team for the duration of their career. Pedro was an all-time great, but Maddux was an all-time great for twice as long.