Tom came up with a good question...
Who would you pick as GM if you had to pick either Tom Seaver IN HIS PRIME or Jake deGrom IN HIS PRIME?
And why...
Mack’s Mets – the premier site for information on the New York Mets talent pipeline and dialogue on Mets prospects, Mets news, and Mets opinions.
4 comments:
You really couldn't go wrong either way, but I'd have to go with (the real) Tom Terrific. His complete game totals blow deGrom out of the water.
They pitched 50 years apart, the game has changed. Looking at complete games is an absurd measurement. Gary Gentry had 25 CG, Jake had 3. What does that tell you?
It's a stat that says more about the times than it does about the player.
I think you can only fairly and accurately compare pitchers to their contemporaries. An even playing field, literally and figuratively.
Jimmy
Jake faces a baseball world where baseballs clear fences a lot more than in the 1970s. In fact, team HRs have doubled from 1975 (113) to 2019 (226).
Jake, like a lot of pitchers, tries to fan as many as possible I believe for that exact reason.
It drives up pitch counts - you can fan 2 guys with 15 pitches or get a DP ground out to record two outs with a lot less pitches.
I think that is part of Jake's problem by comparison.
But Seaver's stamina and effectiveness after inning 6 was far greater than Jake. Seaver was as good from the 7th inning and later as in innings 1 through 6. Do I have answers to why that is? No - but it is enough for me to give Seaver the edge here.
This is a really easy one: DeGrom. We already know DeGrom can dominate against the best competition in the world right now. We only know that Seaver could do it 50 years ago against less international competition and against hitters with a lot less knowledge and conditioning that exists today. If Seaver was pitching today would he be good? Probably, I'm not so sure he dominates at the same level as DeGrom does though.
Tom you call Jakes problem that he strikes out too many. Well, honestly can you blame him? The Mets defense has been some of the worst in baseball for a few years. Strikeouts mitigate defense as well as moving runners over. I don't know what kind of pitch counts Seaver had in his games but I don't know that you could stick him in todays game and assume it would be the same the way the game is played. Its kind of silly to compare complete games when the leader of complete games this year had THREE. Its simply not the same game. The players from 50 years ago were not magical in their ability to throw complete games, it was just expected and how the game was managed. I would take guys that have an extra 50 years of sports medicine, nutrition, fitness and baseball knowledge behind them.
Quite similarly I doubt Babe Ruth come close to competing against Mike Trout if you bring him from 1930 to 2020. Thats a bigger time difference but the same general principles apply. Natural ability will take you to one level, hard work and knowledge (and nutrition etc) will take you to a different place.
Post a Comment