This is the main reason I'm so high on Blair - I spent so many nights watching the Big Three 20+ years ago and honestly still can't tell you which one was truly the best Pitcher..
Highest ceilings Prospects
- Thread starter Preacher
- Start date
This is the main reason I'm so high on Blair - I spent so many nights watching the Big Three 20+ years ago and honestly still can't tell you which one was truly the best Pitcher..
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
To me, Maddux was the best. his control and that cutter to lefties was killer. So many broken bats or moving the hips out of the way to just watch it move across the inside corner.. It was really fun watching him carve up batters. I know Kershaw is great.. but I still can't compare him to Maddux.. He needs to sustain his success into his 30's to surpass Maddux as the best I have ever had the privilege to watch.
chop2chip
Well-known member
Wait... Really? Maddux was twice the pitcher Glavine and Smoltz were.
Twice? Really? Based on stuff? Records? Mound presence? What criteria?
Smoltz was the best postseason Pitcher of all time. Glavine spun the most dominant playoff start in team history when he stuffed the vaunted Indians' offense in Game 6 in 1995. Maddux had a pretty pedestrian (at best) postseason resume.
All three are in the Hall Of Fame.
I honestly don't think I could've complained about whichever one Bobby wanted to start any particular game when they were healthy.
But 'control' or 'command' isn't really a talent you can see in a pitcher until it's there. Blair has had decent control in the minors, but it hasn't been great. There's nothing keeping a guy like Toussaint from developing the same command as a guy like Blair. He may have a lower % chance of getting there, but he can. At this point, there's nothing Blair can do to get to Toussaint's overall stuff. That's why I put Toussaint ahead on pure stuff. Blair can become a very good major league pitcher. But can he develop into a shut-down ace? I don't think so.
And Maddux had pretty filthy stuff. He didn't have top-end velocity, but he had more movement than any pitcher I've ever seen. He had incredible command, too, sure. But the chances of a guy developing that level of command are pretty slim, for any pitcher. The chances of a guy having Touki stuff are also pretty slim, which is why it's promising that Touki already has it.
From the NLCS in 1995 through 1999, which covered 19 starts, Maddux didn't have an ERA above 3 in any postseason series. His record over that stretch was 8-8. Not his fault.
His career postseason ERA is 3.27.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Smoltz and Glavine are Braves legends and Hall of Famers. Maddux is in a much smaller and more exclusive circle.
Just depends on what criteria you choose - Maddux had strong stretches in the postseason, sure.
Smoltz struck out more hitters than any Pitcher in postseason history (Maddux even had more starts). Glavine struck out 16 more than Maddux (in 20,1 more IP). Smoltz even struck out 26 more hitters than Clemens in only 10 more IP.
Just comes down to whatever criteria floats your particular boat IMO. There are numbers that could likely back up whichever one you personally prefer.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I think what most are saying is that 90% of the population would say Maddux is better than both hands down. Maddux stretch between 92 to 2002 was all world. Now a days, you are happy if you can get 200 innings.. Maddux was pitching 250 just about. Maddux is considered a top 10 at least of ALL time.. Smoltz and Glavine are not...Smoltz was money in the playoffs.. but that is not a career.
Still bummed that we only took one title with a team of Jones/Jones/ and the big 3...
JohnAdcox
Brian Jordan's New BFF
Which leg of the tripod is most important?
Well, Smoltz struck out more over his career than Maddux, too. And Maddux was the better pitcher. So my criterion won't be strikeouts.
Smoltz was incredible in the postseason, no one's doubting that. But you're comparing what amounts to about one season of their careers. Maddux was the better pitcher.
Perfect timing for this discussion - with the weather delay and the "Driven" episodes back-to-back, it's pretty funny to watch Bobby, Leo, and the other players talk about all three. Everyone says "he was better than everybody" or "did this better than everybody" several times about all three. Would love to see someone pin Chipper down and ask him "If Maddux was the best Pitcher of your era, why would you say that if you had ONE game to win that you'd give the ball to Glavine or Smoltz?" Have heard him say that multiple times.
They're three of the greatest Pitchers of all time - does it really make any difference who says which was "the best"???
They're three of the greatest Pitchers of all time - does it really make any difference who says which was "the best"???
No. But it's still Maddux.
chop2chip
Well-known member
That just simply isn't true.
UNCBlue012
Well-known member
I love of all of them, but going by almost every stat possible, Mad-Dog was the man.
JohnAdcox
Brian Jordan's New BFF
It's a lot like arguing about which is the greatest Beatle. There are arguments for all four, likely (I've actually never heard one for Ringo, I'd love to), but in the end, it comes down to this: individually, they're brilliant. Collectively, they're a miracle.