Where do you think Greg Maddux stands on the all-time greatest pitchers list??

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

Rank Greg Maddux's place on the all-time overall greatest pitchers list. If you care to, name the pitchers you rank ahead of Greg Maddux on your list.

[STLCards2]

ML Only top 10

1. Walter Johnson
(Roger Clemens not including PEDS)
2. Cy Young
3. Lefty Grove
4. Greg Maddux
5. Pete Alexander
6. Christie Mathewson
7. Randy Johnson
8. Tom Seaver
9. Warren Spahn
(Roger Clemens including PEDS)
10. Pedro Martinez

[jjpm74]

1. Walter Johnson
2. Lefty Grove
3. Christy Matthewson
4. Satchel Paige
5. Greg Maddux
6. Pete Alexander
7. Randy Johnson
8. Roger Clemens
9. Tom Seaver
10. Smoky Joe Williams

[philkid3]

In the years as I've tinkered with things, I've rarely had him 3rd or higher and never 7th or lower. So 4-6 is the perfect answer.

[philipthegreat]

1. Cy Young
2. Walter Johnson
3. Lefty Grove
4. Greg Maddux
5. Warren Spahn
6. Roger Clemens
7. Satchel Paige
8. Chrissy Mathewson
9. Randy Johnson
10. Carl Hubbel

[Mongoose]

A couple of years ago, everybody here overrated Clemens; many called him the greatest pitcher in history. Maddux was a bit underrated. I always thought Maddux was better than Clemens; maybe between 5 and 10 all time. Now everybody seems to have dropped Clemens and decided to similarly overrate Maddux.

Strange...

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

I picked 1-3 on the poll, but I really think he's 4-6. Its hard to argue Maddux is better than W. Johnson, Grove or Cy Young. But then again, its very hard to determine this since the eras of the game are so different, and the era those aforementioned pitchers played in is so far removed. Also, I would need to determine how pitcher friendly their home ballparks were, because Maddux toiled in extreme hitters parks most of his career (1986-1996, 2004-2006)

What I can say is that Maddux is probably the greatest pitcher post-WWII, taking into account performance, durability, consistency, defense and PEAK value. In fact, I would say Maddux's performance between 1992-1998 is the greatest 7 year peak any pitcher has ever had, in any generation. This is especially true considering the extreme hitters park home park he pitched in, and the steroid era also.

[AstrosFan]

If it weren't for the steroids issue, I'd rank Clemens as the greatest pitcher ever. As it stands, I bump him to third, behind Walter Johnson and Maddux. I think the drop most people give to Clemens is much too harsh.

My top twelve, not including Negro Leaguers:

1. W. Johnson
2. Maddux
3. Clemens
4. Young
5. Alexander
6. Grove
7. Seaver
8. Johnson
9. Spahn
10. Mathewson
11. Martinez
12. Nichols

Mathewson moved up a little from a previous list I posted. The lack of innings really hurts Pedro, he'd be higher if he were more durable.

[Mongoose]

I picked 1-3 on the poll, but I really think he's 4-6. Its hard to argue Maddux is better than W. Johnson, Grove or Cy Young. But then again, its very hard to determine this since the eras of the game are so different, and the era those aforementioned pitchers played in is so far removed. Also, I would need to determine how pitcher friendly their home ballparks were, because Maddux toiled in extreme hitters parks most of his career (1986-1996, 2004-2006)

What I can say is that Maddux is probably the greatest pitcher post-WWII, taking into account performance, durability, consistency, defense and PEAK value. In fact, I would say Maddux's performance between 1992-1998 is the greatest 7 year peak any pitcher has ever had, in any generation. This is especially true considering the extreme hitters park home park he pitched in, and the steroid era also.

The talent level in Maddux's era was also pretty thin... Not that he wasn't great, but I think league quality makes the numbers shine a little less brightly.

His relative stats anyway...

[AstrosFan]

The talent level in Maddux's era was also pretty thin... Not that he wasn't great, but I think league quality makes the numbers shine a little less brightly.

His relative stats anyway...

:laugh :laugh :laugh

Good one. The talent level was quite strong, but ;) ;) we'll keep that between us.

[Mongoose]

Good one. The talent level was quite strong, but we'll keep that between us.

The league was overexpanded, and the talent pool thinner than it had been in decades. But if demographic analysis is "above your pay level", I suggest you just ignore it and put up more smilies ;)

[Edgartohof]

The talent level in Maddux's era was also pretty thin... Not that he wasn't great, but I think league quality makes the numbers shine a little less brightly.

His relative stats anyway...

WOW!

Are you sure you are not talking about the wrong person?




Oh, by the way, I chose 1-3..

I rank him as #2 all-time. I mean his peak is AMAZING - the best ever in my opinion!!!

[Mongoose]

WOW!

Are you sure you are not talking about the wrong person?




Oh, by the way, I chose 1-3..

I rank him as #2 all-time. I mean his peak is AMAZING - the best ever in my opinion!!!

I don't really want to go off subject in this thread... I have Maddux in my top 10... His peak was great... But the reason relative stats (like ERA+) for guys like Maddux, Martinez, Clemens, Johnson and others of the era are so freakishly high is because league talent was relatively thin. I don't think any of those guys were quite as good as a lot of people think.

If you're curious about this, read the last few pages of the Glavine/Koosman thread - demographic detail and how it relates to baseball are discussed...

[willshad]

To me , Maddux would probably have been rated higher had he retired after the 2002 season...he has spent too many seasons as an average pitcher to be considered the 'best lf all time'. True, he had a great run and an amazing peak, but others have thrived at age 35 and beyond..which to me says he lost his skills at a relatively early age...NOT a sign of the 'best ever'. Guys like Randy Johnson, Clemens, Ryan, Spahn, Young, Carlton, Grove, Seaver, Blyleven, Smoltz and many others managed to have at least one dominiant season at an advanced age.

Not that this makes Maddux have any less career value, but to me it just knocks him down a peg.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

To put into perspective how amazing Maddux's 7 year peak was, lets compare his peak ERA+ average with some of the all-time greats:

From 1992-1998, Maddux's ERA+ average was an absolutely ridiculous 201!

Walter Johnson's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 194 (1910-1916)

Lefty Grove's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 166 (1926-1932)

Cy Young's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 155 (1899-1905)

Randy Johnson's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 156 (1995-2001)

Pete Alexander's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 152 (1915-1921)

The only person who comes remotely close to Maddux peak ERA+ 7-year average was Pedro Martinez, who actually bested it with an unbelievable 216! The caveat here though, is that he pitched only 119 innings one of those years due to injury, and toiled under 200 innings in two others.

[willshad]

To put into perspective how amazing Maddux's 7 year peak was, lets compare his peak ERA+ average with some of the all-time greats:

From 1992-1998, Maddux's ERA+ average was an absolutely ridiculous 201!

Walter Johnson's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 194 (1910-1916)

Lefty Grove's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 166 (1926-1932)

Cy Young's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 155 (1899-1905)

Randy Johnson's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 156 (1995-2001)

Pete Alexander's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 152 (1915-1921)

The only person who comes remotely close to Maddux peak ERA+ 7-year average was Pedro Martinez, who actually bested it with an unbelievable 216! The caveat here though, is that he only pitched 119 innings one of those years due to injury, and toiled under 200 innings in two others.


There is also a flip side to this...his career ERA+ is 132..so that means that for the rest of his career besides his peak he was just a little above average.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

There is also a flip side to this...his career ERA+ is 132..so that means that for the rest of his career besides his peak he was just a little above average.

Well, that's not really true. In the 4 years following his PEAK (1999-2002), Maddux posted ERA+ of 125, 153, 146 & 159; high enough to be considered amongst the best pitchers in the National League &Top 10 in ERA+ all four years. He finished Top 5 in regular ERA three of those years, and eighth in the other. In three of those years, he was 2nd in WHIP, and 8th once; so he continued to completely dominate hitters.

Bottom line is, even though the four years immediately following his gaudy peak weren't quite as amazing, he was still amongst the best 3-4 pitchers in the NL.

Maddux only became a slighty better-than-average pitcher post 2002 (2003-2006), then slightly below average from 2007-2008.

[STLCards2]

There is also a flip side to this...his career ERA+ is 132..so that means that for the rest of his career besides his peak he was just a little above average.

Maddux' ERA+ from 1988-1991 and 1999-2008 is about 118 with around 3,000 IP to boot... hardly "a little above average." So basically, the non-peak phases of Maddux' career produce a similar career line to HOFer Bob Lemon's whole career and only a slight step down form Drysdale and McGinnity's careers.

The worst 2/3 of Maddux career (excluding the 1986-87 outliers) is argualbly enough to make him a HOF alone.

[STLCards2]

I ran a little more accurate study and see Maddux at about a 115 ERA+ with 3,400 IP from 1986-1991 and 1999-2008.

Probably not HOF cailiber by itself, but in line with the Hershisers of the world. Certainly a far cry from "a little above average."

[willshad]

I ran a little more accurate study and see Maddux at about a 115 ERA+ with 3,400 IP from 1986-1991 and 1999-2008.

Probably not HOF cailiber by itself, but in line with the Hershisers of the world. Certainly a far cry from "a little above average."

I just wouldnt feel comfortable putting as the number 1 pitcher of all time (or even top 5) a guy who for 2/3 of his career outside of his peak put up numbers that are not close to a hall of famer (like you said, Hershiser). Regardless of the stats, I would have rather had Randy Johnson in his prime any day. I think Maddux got the benefit of the doubt on close calls so much that it lowers his value a bit. Kind of like Barry Bonds...his walk totals are as ridiculously low as Bonds' are ridiculously high.

[STLCards2]

I just wouldnt feel comfortable putting as the number 1 pitcher of all time (or even top 5) a guy who for 2/3 of his career outside of his peak put up numbers that are not close to a hall of famer (like you said, Hershiser). Regardless of the stats, I would have rather had Randy Johnson in his prime any day. I think Maddux got the benefit of the doubt on close calls so much that it lowers his value a bit. Kind of like Barry Bonds...his walk totals are as ridiculously low as Bonds' are ridiculously high.

Just for comparison, if you took out Johnson's top 7 ERA+ years, Johnson is at about a 116 ERA+, but with 2,300 IP - about 1,100 fewer IP than Maddux.

And who said "not close"? 3,400 IP with a 115 ERA+ is pretty close to the HOF by itself.

Randy Johnson at 116 and 2,300 is nowhere near the HOF outside of his best 7 years.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

I just wouldnt feel comfortable putting as the number 1 pitcher of all time (or even top 5) a guy who for 2/3 of his career outside of his peak put up numbers that are not close to a hall of famer (like you said, Hershiser). Regardless of the stats, I would have rather had Randy Johnson in his prime any day. I think Maddux got the benefit of the doubt on close calls so much that it lowers his value a bit. Kind of like Barry Bonds...his walk totals are as ridiculously low as Bonds' are ridiculously high.

Thats just a ridiculous argument right there. Rank Maddux where you will, but please give us more than that tripe.

Take any HOF pitcher's best 7 year ERA+ peak out and the vast majority would have less that 115. Thats actually a very good number.

[baseball junkie]

He was one mediocre 10 win season away from being alone in fifth place on the all-time win list.

Given Maddux's pitching style, his ERA compared to his era, I put him about 4 or 5 all time.

He had the durability of Don Sutton and the talent of Doc Gooden -- different styles of course.

Great showing Maddux. I hope Smotlz, Glavine and Hoffman follow, just so we can have one of the all-time great HOF classes in five years.

Maddux 350+ wins
Glavine 300+ wins
Mussina 280 wins
Smoltz great starter/closer combo
Hoffman all time leader in saves

[STLCards2]

Thats just a ridiculous argument right there. Rank Maddux where you will, but please give us more than that tripe.

Take any HOF pitcher's best 7 year ERA+ peak out and the vast majority would have less that 115. Thats actually a very good number.

Yeah, take out Koufax's top 7 ERA+ season, and he is at about 500 IP and a 98 ERA+. :D

[SABR Matt]

1) Walter Johnson
2) Roger Clemens
3) Lefty Grove
4) Cy Young
5) Pete Alexander
6) Greg Maddux
7) Christy Mathewson
8) Randy Johnson
9) Pedro Martinez
10) Tom Seaver

[willshad]

Thats just a ridiculous argument right there. Rank Maddux where you will, but please give us more than that tripe.

Take any HOF pitcher's best 7 year ERA+ peak out and the vast majority would have less that 115. Thats actually a very good number.

tripe? Is it not commonly agreed that a sign of greatness is the ability to retain one's performance during what should be 'decline' years? To me, Maddux lost it too swiiftly and suddenly to be the 'best ever'. He was merely average in his mid 30s and beyond...while many pitchers had dominating seasons at comparable ages. This doesnt make them 'better' than him, but it does lessen the gap a bit.

[willshad]

Just for comparison, if you took out Johnson's top 7 ERA+ years, Johnson is at about a 116 ERA+, but with 2,300 IP - about 1,100 fewer IP than Maddux.

And who said "not close"? 3,400 IP with a 115 ERA+ is pretty close to the HOF by itself.

Randy Johnson at 116 and 2,300 is nowhere near the HOF outside of his best 7 years.

Nobody is saying Randy Johnson is the best pitcher of all time, either. He did basically nothing before age 29. He's probably the best pitcher of all time just counting what the pitcher did from age 30-40.
A lot of it is perception. If you rearrange Maddux's career so that his peak years were his first 7, then he would be viewed as a big disappoinment. The same can probably be said about Johnson and Koufax as well.

[philkid3]

1) Walter Johnson
2) Roger Clemens
3) Lefty Grove
4) Cy Young
5) Pete Alexander
6) Greg Maddux
7) Christy Mathewson
8) Randy Johnson
9) Pedro Martinez
10) Tom Seaver

Have I ever told you it's soothing when you put up a list that looks a lot like mine?

[willshad]

1) Walter Johnson
2) Roger Clemens
3) Lefty Grove
4) Cy Young
5) Pete Alexander
6) Greg Maddux
7) Christy Mathewson
8) Randy Johnson
9) Pedro Martinez
10) Tom Seaver


Good list, but I may switch Mathewson and Alexander.

[willshad]

1. Cy Young
2. Walter Johnson
3. Lefty Grove
4. Greg Maddux
5. Warren Spahn
6. Roger Clemens
7. Satchel Paige
8. Chrissy Mathewson
9. Randy Johnson
10. Carl Hubbel

why is Spahn so high?

[SABR Matt]

Have I ever told you it's soothing when you put up a list that looks a lot like mine?

LOL...I'll take that as a compliment. :)

[Domenic]

I have Greg Maddux ranked fifth:

01. Walter Johnson
02. Lefty Grove
03. Roger Clemens
04. Cy Young
05. Greg Maddux
06. Pete Alexander
07. Christy Mathewson
08. Pedro Martinez
09. Randy Johnson
10. Sandy Koufax

I did not consider Clemens alleged PED use in this... if I had, he would likely drop a few pegs, perhaps to ninth, bumping everyone else up a bit.

[Gregory Pratt]

tripe? Is it not commonly agreed that a sign of greatness is the ability to retain one's performance during what should be 'decline' years? To me, Maddux lost it too swiiftly and suddenly to be the 'best ever'. He was merely average in his mid 30s and beyond...while many pitchers had dominating seasons at comparable ages. This doesnt make them 'better' than him, but it does lessen the gap a bit.

In his mid-thirties -- age 34, 35, 36 seasons -- he put up 153, 146, 159 ERA+s. So no, he was not "merely average" then, though afterward he came to the real world. When you're at the level he was at for fifteen years, you're allowed to decline like a real human being.

[thewupk]

In his mid-thirties -- age 34, 35, 36 seasons -- he put up 153, 146, 159 ERA+s. So no, he was not "merely average" then, though afterward he came to the real world. When you're at the level he was at for fifteen years, you're allowed to decline like a real human being.

I think that's the key. Maddux had a normal career path. He got hit early, god better, peaked, left the peak somewhat, and declined as he got to the end of his career. It was just that his peak and few years after were god like.

[henrich]

1. Walter Johnson
2. Roger Clemens
3. cy Young
4. Steve Carlton
5. Pete Alexander
6. Nolan Ryan
7. Christy Matthewson
8. Tom Seaver
9. Randy Johnson
10. Greg Maddux

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

1. Walter Johnson
2. Roger Clemens
3. cy Young
4. Steve Carlton
5. Pete Alexander
6. Nolan Ryan
7. Christy Matthewson
8. Tom Seaver
9. Randy Johnson
10. Greg Maddux

Henrich, I don't know what's more ridiculous; having Nolan Ryan ranked 4 spots ahead of Maddux or having Steve Carleton as the 4th best pitcher of all-time. You really are a piece of work. :D

[Paul Wendt]

To put into perspective how amazing Maddux's 7 year peak was, lets compare his peak ERA+ average with some of the all-time greats:

From 1992-1998, Maddux's ERA+ average was an absolutely ridiculous 201!

Walter Johnson's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 194 (1910-1916)

Lefty Grove's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 166 (1926-1932)
. . .
As calculated by GMBF,
Pedro Martinez, Randy Johnson, Cy Young, and Pete Alexander achieved 7-year peak ERA+ 216, 156, 155, and 152

As calculated by BB-Ref,
Johan Santana's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was 155 (2002-2008)

As calculated by BB-Ref,
Roger Clemens in his twenties worked 2031 innings at ERA+ 151. (Roger Clemens thru age 29 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/scomp2.cgi?I=clemero02:Roger+Clemens&st=int&compage=29&age=29))

As estimated by Paul Wendt, removing 231 inns or about 1/9 of career workload at rate about 110,
Roger Clemens's best 7 year peak ERA+ average was about 156 (1986-1992)

[Fuzzy Bear]

I rated Maddux 11-20, but he's no lower than 12th.

Randy Johnson isn't finished yet, and he's an extreme power pitcher. His chances of ranking ahead of Maddux in the end are 50-50.

He's probably top 10, at least; my ranking is extremely conservative.

[willshad]

In his mid-thirties -- age 34, 35, 36 seasons -- he put up 153, 146, 159 ERA+s. So no, he was not "merely average" then, though afterward he came to the real world. When you're at the level he was at for fifteen years, you're allowed to decline like a real human being.


But thats exactly why i cant rate him as the best ever. Many of the all time great pitchers (even some not so great ones) managed to still be dominant at least one season or two in their late 30s and even early 40s. That is a sign of true greatness. You have to ask youself why is it that guys like Bert Blyleven, Warren Spahn, Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, Cy Youg, Lefty Grove, could do it but not Maddux?

[The Splendid Splinter]

But thats exactly why i cant rate him as the best ever. Many of the all time great pitchers (even some not so great ones) managed to still be dominant at least one season or two in their late 30s and even early 40s. That is a sign of true greatness. You have to ask youself why is it that guys like Bert Blyleven, Warren Spahn, Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, Cy Youg, Lefty Grove, could do it but not Maddux?

Ok... so who actually have Maddux as the greatest ever? You don't have to think he's the best ever. I don't either. He's definately in the top 10 for me and probably around the 5th spot so I'll go with 4-6.

So guys like Dazzy Vance, Mussina, and Ted Lyons are better than Maddux cuz it's a sign of true greatness to have a great year later in their career? There are other signs of greatness you know. Peak Value. Consistency. Maintaining a high level. Lets talk about Maddux's peak... it was basically 11 years. 10 of those 11 years he put up a 146 ERA+ or higher. Can you find me someone else who did that? If you do, then look at those pitchers. I bet either he's the only one or the pitchers on the list are considered the best ever. Heck, list the pitchers who have at least 10 seasons of 145 ERA+ or higher in their career.

The pitchers you listed were all power pitchers (except Spahn). Power pitchers generally last longer than control pitchers. Blyleven was basically done after age 36 (when Maddux started to decline). His '89 season was unusual and in between seasons where he put 73, 75, and 84 ERA+. At least Maddux in the last 2 years was in the 90s ERA+.

Lets not go there with Spahn or Clemens. We all know how Clemens did so well later in his career. Spahn last great year was at age 32. What year you think Spahn was dominant late in his career? I mean he was above average, but I don't see that great year. I guess you can say '63, but he was not dominant or it was a sign of true greatness.

Randy Johnson had a late peak and it lasted as long as Maddux. His peak started at age 29 where Maddux at the same age posted what arguably could be the greatest season ever by a pitcher. If Johnson started his peak a couple years earlier, his career path would be VERY similar to Maddux (beside the Ks and walks).

Consider Ryan a freak of nature really. I'm kinda stumped on this one. He doesn't have a peak at all though. We all knew Ryan could be special if he could get it all together. That didn't really happen until late in his career.

I don't know why you mentioned Grove or Young though. Heck, I don't know why you mentioned all these guys (except Blyleven or Ryan) cuz all of them are considered top 10 pitchers of all time. This is not a good argument against Maddux cuz I can come back with that none of them had a peak like Maddux. Why can Maddux do it, but not those guys?

[Honus Wagner Rules]

The league was overexpanded, and the talent pool thinner than it had been in decades. But if demographic analysis is "above your pay level", I suggest you just ignore it and put up more smilies ;)

I have no idea what this means?

[Honus Wagner Rules]

tripe? Is it not commonly agreed that a sign of greatness is the ability to retain one's performance during what should be 'decline' years? To me, Maddux lost it too swiiftly and suddenly to be the 'best ever'. He was merely average in his mid 30s and beyond...while many pitchers had dominating seasons at comparable ages. This doesnt make them 'better' than him, but it does lessen the gap a bit.

Through age 36 (17 seasons) Maddux had a career 2.83 ERA and 145 ERA+. At this point in time he was 273-152. At age 36 he put up a 159 ERA+. Then he did seem to lose it "overnight". From age 37 forward (6 seasons) he was 82-75, 4.13 ERA, 104 ERA+. I find that strange.

[SABR Matt]

I have no idea what this means?

Don't worry about it...his obsessive crusade to convince the world that the 1990s is as weak a game as the deadball era has traveled into the ludicrous...not worth trying to decipher that post.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

In a Nutshell, Maddux's Career boils down in 6 distinct phases:

The Rookie Phase (1986-1987): Maddux comes up for a cup of coffee in '86, and gets shelled. Ditto in his official rookie campaign in '87, except it lasts the whole season. He only just turns 21 at this point; he's taking his lumps and learning how to pitch. Nothing unusual here.

The Early Years (1988-1991): Maddux is learning how to pitch quickly and harnessing his control. Experiences good success in sophomore year going 18-8. His ERA+ during this time ranges from 114-128, so he's amongst the best 8-15 starting pitchers in the NL during this time, or moderately above average. What's jumps out at me is that he only gave up 55 homeruns over 987 IP pitching half the time at Wrigley Field, which is remarkable.

The Dominant Years (1992-1998): Best pitcher in MLB hands down. Most probably, the best 7-year peak any pitcher has ever had, in any generation. Completely dominated hitters without being a huge strikeout guy. In 1674IP, Maddux gave up 62 Homeruns, or 1 HR every 27 innings! This is even more amazing considering he pitched 1 year at Wrigley and 4 years at Fulton County Stadium, aptly known as "The Launching Pad'... Of course, he became the only man to ever win 4 consecutive Cy Young's. ERA+ was 201 and had WHIP of under 1 four of those years, and never higher that 1.04. This level of domianance has never been seen by a non-power pitcher. Instramental player in the Braves playoff dynasty of the '90's...

The Great, But Not Dominant Phase (1999-2002): ERA+ between 125-159 during this period still ranks him amongst the best 3-4 SP's in the NL. Second in WHIP twice. Third in Cy Young voting in 2000. Obviously, still a premier pitcher and staff ace, but starting to lose some velocity off the fastball and giving up a few more hits and homeruns. As Honus points out, at the end of 2002, Maddux in 273-152 with a 2.83 era.

The Decline Phase (2003-2006): Maddux goes back to the Cubs where it all began. At this point, the movement on the fastball is what its always been, but the velocity is not. The lack of velocity is making it harder to pitch to contact, and keep the ball in the ballpark. Maddux is noticably giving up the gopher ball, and its affecting his ERA. In these four years, he gives up 108 HR in 865IP, or 1HR every 8 innings. His ERA+ is between 104-109 during this period, which still makes him a solid Number 3 rotation guy.

The End of the Road Phase (2007-2008): Pitching in an extreme pitcher friendly ball park is necessary at this point. The gradual decline in velocity is super evident at this point. I watched almost all his starts on the baseball network, and Maddux is routinely only hitting 83-84 on the gun. Really, since the 2004 season, he's only been a two-pitch pitcher (2 seam fastball/cut fastball-change). Literally only throws 1-2 beaking pitches a game, for a change of look. ERA+ is 93-98, which puts him at capable 4th or 5th starter, or slightly above replacement level. Rarely works more than 6 innings, even on good starts. The end is all too near, we just don't want to acknowledge it.

And yes, I agree with the Splendid Splinter that consistency counts for a whole lot in terms of Maddux greatness. Year in and year out, he takes the ball and NEVER is on the DL, thus hurting his team by requiring a scrub to take his place. To me, he was the most consistent and durable pitcher ever, and this means a lot in terms of his greatness, and to the teams he played for.

[STLCards2]

Through age 36 (17 seasons) Maddux had a career 2.83 ERA and 145 ERA+. At this point in time he was 273-152. At age 36 he put up a 159 ERA+. Then he did seem to lose it "overnight". From age 37 forward (6 seasons) he was 82-75, 4.13 ERA, 104 ERA+. I find that strange.

1. Old age "suddenly" catches up with older atheletes all the time. Shouldn't be too strange.

2. Large swings in ERA+ from year to year are very common with pitchers, since a lot of ERA+ is due to luck. It is very posible that age started to cacthe up with Maddux at the same time he had a few unlucky seasons. When the luck ended - he was old. I do know his HR rate went up drasticaly, and that casued a lot of the ERA+ dip. I am specualting here.

3. It isn't like he went from a 180 ERA+ to 90. He was still hitting 220 IP and a near 110 ERA+ from ages 37 -40. Very high production for a 37-43 year old.

Are you implying something about Maddux? If so, why don't you just come out and say it? ;)

[SABR Matt]

Part of Maddux's problem right toward the end was that the strikezone changed from very wide but short to more squarelike...still not as tall as the 1960s, but pitchers didn't get the calls wide of the black as much...and that's where Maddux lived. QUESTEC had a negative impact on a bunch of guys...Moyer, Maddux, Glavine, etc...anyone who made his living nibbling and getting batters to chase perfect pitches.

[STLCards2]

Part of Maddux's problem right toward the end was that the strikezone changed from very wide but short to more squarelike...still not as tall as the 1960s, but pitchers didn't get the calls wide of the black as much...and that's where Maddux lived. QUESTEC had a negative impact on a bunch of guys...Moyer, Maddux, Glavine, etc...anyone who made his living nibbling and getting batters to chase perfect pitches.

True, but the fact that they were all good pitchers (old too boot) post Questec shows that the wide-zone was not the biggest reason for their success as many Maddux haters have suggested.

[Mongoose]

I have no idea what this means?

A lot of indicators suggest league quality was weak in the 1990s: it wasn't just Maddux posting outlandish ERA+ numbers at the time, it was Martinez, Clemens, Johson, Kevin Brown, etc. Crazy high relative stats is a big indicator of low league quality.

There was a good piece in Hardball Times that touched on this:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/ar...eague-quality/

Here’s a quote:

“In The Hardball Times Annual 2007, I tried to answer just that question by comparing the number of players in the major leagues over time to the population supplying baseball players to professional baseball. Basically, my thought was that the larger the pool of potential baseball players compared to the actual number that make it, the higher the quality of competition will be. Why is that?

Let’s say that we need 750 players to build a full major league. Let’s say that we decide to place one thousand randomly selected people on an island, and start a 30-team league on that island? How great will the quality of competition be? Obviously, not very high. Now let’s say another thousand people move to that island. The games will get better, because the best players among those thousand will now be signed to the major leagues, while the worst of the original major league players will drop out....

...In Baseball’s All-Time Best Sluggers, Michael Schell takes an idea from Stephen Jay Gould to adjust for era. In an essay titled, “Why No One Hits .400 Anymore,” Gould argued that the .400 hitter has disappeared because of rising quality of competition. His thought was that as league quality increases, the standard deviation, or variability, in statistics decreases.”

Between 1988 and 1998 there was a sharp drop in the U.S. talent pool in Major League baseball:

http://www.bos.frb.org/peanuts/sptspage/inning8.htm

This is another indicator of diminished league quality.

I'd rather not argue this point on this thread, though. The center of discussion on this issue, as of now, is the Glavine/Koosman thread:

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=84664&page=3

[Gregory Pratt]

The Decline Phase (2003-2006): Maddux goes back to the Cubs where it all began. At this point, the movement on the fastball is what its always been, but the velocity is not. The lack of velocity is making it harder to pitch to contact, and keep the ball in the ballpark. Maddux is noticably giving up the gopher ball, and its affecting his ERA. In these four years, he gives up 108 HR in 865IP, or 1HR every 8 innings. His ERA+ is between 104-109 during this period, which still makes him a solid Number 3 rotation guy.
[B]


How can someone refer to themselves as Greg Maddux's biggest fan and confuse the year he went back to the Cubs -- 2004, not 2003.

[Extra Innings]

Personally, I rank Maddux in my top 3 of greatest pitchers of all time. Being a Braves fan, I felt extremely grateful to watch him pitch in Atlanta. He is certainly one of a kind and will be missed by all baseball fans.

[jaxxr]

Best ever, Tie,
Lefty Grove, and Walter Johnson

3rd place, Tie,
Young, Alexander, and Clemens
6th place, Tie,
Pedro, Mathewson, Walsh, and Hubbell,
10th place, tie,
Seaver, Spahn and Maddux.

[Eastvanmungo]

Not including Negro Leaguers and considering Roger Clemens to be innocent until proven guilty.

1) Walter Johnson
2) Lefty Grove
3) Roger Clemens
4) Greg Maddux
5) Pete Alexander
6) Tom Seaver
7) Cy Young
8) Christie Mathewson
9) Randy Johnson
10) Pedro Martinez