Melancon's ERA the Best

[Rog]

As mentioned previously, Mark Melancon's 1.80 ERA has been the best in the majors over the past four years for pitchers throwing 200 or more innings.  At 1.93, Andrew Miller and Aroldis Chapman have been excellent too.  As has been Zack Britton's 1.95.  But between Melancon and the latter trio has been Clayton Kershaw at 1.88.  And Kershaw has AVERAGED over 200 innings per season, not simply exceeded it in total over the past four seasons.

Here is how Kershaw's four-year ERA compares to other starters over four years in the past 50:

Sandy Koufax      1.86

Kershaw              1.88

Greg Maddux       1.98

Pedro Martinez     2.07*

Bob Gibson          2.08**

*  During the steroid era    **  Included the "Year of the Pitcher"


As nearly as I can tell, this quintet stands far above any other starting pitcher in the live ball era.  We see how Koufax and Kershaw stand clearly ahead of Maddux, who himself stands easily ahead of Martinez and Gibson.  We see that Martinez was hurt by the "unfair" era in which he pitched and his hitting oriented park and that Gibson was aided by pitching in an era that led to the lowering of the mound and the enlarging of the strike zone.  We know that both Dodger southpaws have benefited from their home park (particularly Koufax).

I think it's safe to say that the first four stand above Gibson, who himself is well above anyone else.

If we  unweighted average the ERA+ of each of the players over the four-year period, here is how it comes out:

Martinez         231

Maddux          217

Kershaw         198

Koufax            171


This will favor the old time pitchers who pitched in an era of more innings per season, but let's compare their WAR over the four years:

Martinez          38

Koufax             36

Maddux           33 

Kershaw          28


Depending on how one combines these metrics, it appears Pedro Martinez may have had the best four-year peak in the live ball era, followed perhaps by Maddux, Koufax and Kershaw.  The entire quartet have been outstanding in their four-year peaks, and I suppose one could argue for any one of them.  Given that Martinez faced hitters on steroids and did so in a very hitter-friendly park, he probably stands above the other three.  Perhaps Maddux is a good choice for #2, while Koufax and Kershaw appear to be reasonably close, with the slight advantage likely going to Koufax.  If we take the different numbers of innings that are normal for each era, Kershaw likely moves ahead of Koufax.  

On the other hand, if we consider the physical ailments of Koufax, which caused him to retire immediately after this period, it's tough to say he wasn't the most remarkable.    





               

[klaiggeb]

My only concern about Meloncon is the SAME concern I have about ALL big time closers who do it over a number of years;

Arm fatigue.

They get older and finding that same arm slot becomes problematic.

He's only 31... but when closers pitch so often that 31 year old arm suddenly looks 35 or 40.

As I say, ALL closers, not just Meloncon.

boly

[sfgdood]

it just amazes me how you can't let the Giants have ONE good day without making a post sucking Kershaw's lollipop.

[Rog]

I'm not certain about this, but I think it is possible that only Mariano Rivera (twice) and Craig Kimbrel (twice in a five-year period) have posted a lower ERA over four years than Melancon's 1.80. Anyone know of any others with four-year ERA's better than Mark's?

[rxmeister]

As I was reading Rog's post I was thinking about Randy. A post supposedly about Melancon turned quickly into a Kershaw post. I'm actually thinking Rog is just doing it now to piss him off!

[Rog]

I'm guessing you're joking, Mark.

One thing I hope our posters are noticing is that I'll post on a topic -- or even create a thread -- that leads me into thought about another related topic, which then sometimes leads me even into a third topic. I love the Giants, baseball, sports and life, and sometimes one topic leads me into another and even another.

I also know that I oft times go on way too long. But I hope our posters realize I write mostly for the fun of writing and when a thought pops into my mind even while I'm writing about another topic, it's tough let that thought go unsaid. Hopefully we are able to learn from those additional thoughts as well. Heck, because they often involve added study, I often learn a lot myself while writing them. Thanks, guys, for your patience, and I hope you are learning along with me.

[Rog]

By the way, I hope Randy realized that while the post began about Mark's having the best ERA over the past four years (which I learned while watching the MLB Network) and then went on to cover the other four pitchers in the top five, only to morph into the best four-year peaks of starters (given how Kershaw somehow had the second-best ERA over the past four seasons), it wound up morphing back into the possibility that Melancon may have had the third-best peak of any reliever ever.

I go where my mind takes me, not to where Randy will enjoy or not enjoy the post. If I write about the Dodgers or Cubs, Randy is going to say I'm not a true Giants fan, and if I write that a Giants signing was good, he simply moves on to the next big spending he wants.

Hey, I want those big signings too, but I also understand the economics of baseball. The luxury tax threshold makes teams think twice, and it isn't going up nearly as fast as free agent salaries are. The big spenders are going to be squeezed, which will have the effect of allowing the lesser-spending teams to develop more flexibility compared to the big boys. And it will also curb the increase in free agent salaries, although not necessarily at the very top level.

The next two free agent classes are expected to be much better than this one. The big boys will either venture further into the luxury tax, cut loose payroll, or see the lesser-spending teams have a shot at some big signings that normally go to the big spenders. Probably some combination of the three.

More and more, teams will prosper based on high-quality prospects they can either save money with or trade for big stars. That began happening more often a year ago when Dansby Swanson was traded. Now Yoan Moncada just got traded. Swanson and Moncada were top five prospects, and Moncada is now generally rated #1.

Two of the three teams with the most young talent, the Cubs and Red Sox, are using that talent RIGHT NOW to build for RIGHT AWAY, and they have likely become the top two teams in the major leagues. The Dodgers are the third team with huge talent in prospects, and that makes them dangerous going forward, even though I believe at this moment the Giants are the better of the two teams.

The Dodgers have very nice young players and prospects, and they are the biggest spenders. What helps even things out for the Giants is that the Dodgers have had even more injuries they the Giants, that the Dodgers are reigning in spending, and that they are in danger of losing two of the top free agents in Turner and Jansen.