What metric are you using for him being 2nd best of all time?

Because I felt like doing extra research.

Verlander 13.2 wins per year
Kershaw 12.3 wins per year
Scherzer 12.3 wins per year
Greinke 11.3 wins per year
Sale 9.5 wins per year
Skubal 8.7 wins per year
Cole 12.8 wins per year


So even predicting 14 a year for Skenes would put him on a pace higher than anyone recently

For comparison

Maddux 15.4
Big unit 13.8
Clemens 14.8
Glavine 13.9
Pedro 12.2
Sabathia 13.2

AgRyan04 said:

---

What metric are you using for him being 2nd best of all time?

---

Total Zone Runs. Only behind Brooks Robinson. In dWAR, only behind Robinson and Beltre.

AggieEP said:

---

Because I felt like doing extra research.

Verlander 13.2 wins per year
Kershaw 12.3 wins per year
Scherzer 12.3 wins per year
Greinke 11.3 wins per year
Sale 9.5 wins per year
Skubal 8.7 wins per year
Cole 12.8 wins per year


So even predicting 14 a year for Skenes would put him on a pace higher than anyone recently

For comparison

Maddux 15.4
Big unit 13.8
Clemens 14.8
Glavine 13.9
Pedro 12.2
Sabathia 13.2

---

Cole's a pretty good road map for Skenes. 5 years with the Pirates (59 wins), and traded rather than let him walk after his 6th.

In Cole's 5 injury free seasons (30+ starts) post Pirates with the Astros and Yankees he's averaged 15.8 wins a season. It's just a matter of staying injury free while playing for a team that puts up runs. The latter will be a given.

It's still bonkers to me that a players individual greatness is so strapped to the team that he is with (and in many cases is drafted by, outside of his control)

I think the majority of fans have moved on from that mindset. Don't most believe Skenes is one of if not the best pitcher in baseball?

Farmer1906 said:

---

I think the majority of fans have moved on from that mindset. Don't most believe Skenes is one of if not the best pitcher in baseball?

---

I agree with AgRyan here, but I think this is more unique to pitchers.

Skenes could have the best 15 year run of dominance in the history of baseball, but if he finishes his career with 178 wins, no one is comparing him to Maddux, Seaver, etc. when they have the argument about "best pitcher of all time." He could still get into the hall of fame, but he wouldn't be a mount rushmore of pitchers inductee simply because of a low win total.

On the other hand, if Trout had stayed healthy, and put up 600 homers and 3000 hits no one would have cared that his Angels teams stunk his whole career.

Basically the hitting magic numbers are individual statistics while the pitching magic number is a team stat.