“That’s the story of my life, no respect, I don’t get no respect at all!”
Recently, my friend read me a Bleacher Report article, Major League Baseball’s Top 10 Starting Pitchers of All Time and noticed something striking; Nolan Ryan wasn’t in the top 10. That’s right, Major League Baseball’s all-time strikeout leader, the King of K, was only deemed worthy of being an honorable mention. Now, clearly everybody has their own standards and methods for weighing a player’s place in history, but this seemed wrong. As he and I went through the list, we could see at least two pitchers in the top 10 (Kershaw and Koufax) who shouldn’t be on the list in place of Nolan Ryan, but that made me even more curious.
I found another article from Pitcher’s List, where author Scott Youngson ranked his top 10 of all time, only to discover that Ryan wasn’t on that list either! Once again Kershaw was considered to be better; similar can be said for FanRankings.com’s list. What was going on? Thankfully, there were other lists that included Ryan in their top 10 rankings, but our examination of all these lists brought forth another question:
“Um, where is Bob Feller?”
Feller is one of the most famous pitchers of all time, his name is synonymous with dominance, and yet he isn’t in any of the top ten’s we looked at, not Bleacher Report, Pitcher’s List, Fan Rankings, nor Athlon Sports, or the Score. In fact, he doesn’t even crack the top 20 in some of these lists, with the height of his placement being #24 (Athlon). I’m not going to lie, even if you think Feller shouldn’t be in the top 10, having him not even be top 20 is downright disrespectful, which is why I wanted to give him his due.
Born on November 3, 1918, “Bullet Bob” Feller made his Major League debut at the age of 17, pitching to a 3.34 ERA in 14 games, with eight of those games being starts, and five of those starts being complete games. His first truly full season came two years later, and by the age of 22 he had led the league (and sometimes all of baseball) in wins (24, 27, 25), and innings (296.2, 320.1, 343) for three consecutive years, and games (43, 44), games started (37, 40), complete games (24, 31) and shutouts (4, 6) twice each. During that period, he had a sub 3.00 era twice (including leading the league once at 2.61), and from ages 19-22 led the Major Leagues in strikeouts with 240, 246, 261 and 260. While he admittedly walked a ton of men as well, his ability to limit runs during that period stands out. He was on the path to all-time greatness so early in his career; and then the United States was thrust into World War II.
With the world firmly at war, Bob Feller – like many other young Americans and ballplayers alike – entered the service in defense of his nation; from ages 23 through 25 Feller was out of Major League Baseball entirely (though he was able to pitch in Naval games, where he honed his slider into a devastating pitch), and in essence missed four years of youthful dominance. Despite playing in 1945, making his return only a couple days after being honorably discharged, he only pitched in a paltry nine games that season. By the time he had returned it was already late August and the Indians were in 5th place, effectively out of contention, so there wasn’t much time left either way; but that didn’t stop Feller from being utterly dominant. Facing the first place Tigers and MLB’s best pitcher and future Hall of Famer, Hal Newhouser, Feller, “the Heater from Van Meter,” pitched a complete game victory, giving up only two runs and striking out twelve. In this abbreviated year, Feller went 5-3 with a 2.50 ERA and had complete games in seven of his nine starts.
I’ll admit, I find it fascinating that Ted Williams missed three years in the service, came back dominant, and is consistently considered as a top player of all time, and yet Feller doesn’t seem to get the same respect among pitchers, especially considering he continued to be pretty great over five of the next six years. When all was said and done, Feller won 20 or more games six times; leading the league each time, had a sub-3 ERA in a full season four times, struck out 200 or more five times (and 300+ once), and led the league in K’s seven times. Additionally, “Rapid Robert” led the league in games started and innings pitched five times, complete games thrice, shutouts four times, and finished to a career line of 266-162 (.621 winning percentage), with a 3.25 ERA, 2581 strikeouts and an astounding 57.6% of his starts being complete games performances.
Let’s do a little comparing, shall we? Clayton Kershaw, consistently rated higher than Feller on various lists, is one of the best pitchers of his generation and is going to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, rightfully so; but is he really better? Though he is still playing, Kershaw is currently two years shy of Feller’s years played, and 56 wins (which DO matter) shy of matching him. Winning fifty-six games over a two-year span is difficult enough as it is in the modern era, but considering injuries, he would be fortunate to tie Feller in the next three years (his age 38 season) if he even pitches that long. His losses will likely never rival Feller no matter how much longer he pitches, but again, considering injuries and the fact that his games, innings pitched, and complete games are all so much lower (by 145, 1114.8, and 254 respectively), that makes sense.
Clayton’s ERA and strikeouts are, to his credit, better, and he led the league in lowest ERA more often (5-1), but Feller has both led the league in wins and won 20 games more often (ironically 6-3 in both cases), complete games and shutouts more often (3-2 and 4-3, though by wide margins), and led the league in strikeouts seven times to Kershaw’s three. The same would apply to games started and innings pitched, both in Feller’s favor, and while Kershaw has more Cy Young Award wins at 3-0, that really isn’t fair since there was no Cy Young Award until Feller’s final season. It is worth noting that, in the vein of the Cy Young Award, it’s a little less than fair to compare innings and complete games of the more modern pitchers to someone like Feller, since the game has changed to the point where pitchers are throwing less than they used to, but I still mention these stat comparisons to emphasize Feller’s greatness.
For example, over the 15 years from 1938-52 (signifying Feller’s first and last seasons of thirty or more starts), the average number of complete games (CGs) in the American League was 8.6, in the National League, 8.1, meaning the MLB average during that period was 8.4 (8.35). Interestingly – despite some complete game merchants like Feller out of the game – during the war, the AL had a couple of higher average years, while the NL stayed consistent, and then saw lower averages post-war. Clearly while it was more common to throw a CG in Feller’s time than it is today, it wasn’t entirely common. 8.4 is a higher number than we’re used to seeing, but it is far below what Feller and other top performers were doing during the time; not to mention that more than a few of the pitchers throwing within that CG average had what can only be described as acceptable-to-terrible ERAs, in any era of the game. So, neither was “everybody” doing it, nor were they necessarily good/great if they were, making in my opinion Feller’s accomplishments all the more impressive; but make of that what you will.
None of this is a slight on Kershaw, by the way, but all in all I think it’s fair to say that Feller should be rated higher than Kershaw (and that Kershaw being top-ten all time is a little silly, all things considered).
Sandy Koufax, also often listed higher than Feller, has a similar case to Kershaw, with a much more dominant ERA, very similar strikeouts, far fewer wins, and a CG percentage that is lower (43.6% to Feller’s 57.6%), but he also only pitched in twelve seasons. This argument works both for and against him, since how could he be one of the best of all time when he barely played over the Hall of Fame’s minimum seasons requirement, but then again, the stats he put up in that time are quite impressive. That said, his truly unreal stats were put up over a five-year period, and the rest of his career was quite pedestrian, so while I think Sandy vs. Bob is a fair debate, to have the Dodgers legend end up so much higher on the lists? Not so much.
A few more, as The Score ranked Kevin Brown, Mike Mussina, Roy Halladay and Jim Palmer all higher than Feller.
Having pitched in one more season, Brown bests Feller in no relevant career stats we have been looking at except for losses (by 18), and walks (by a lot), and in terms of single-season statistics Kevin had one more season of leading the league in lowest ERA, but the amount of 20 game seasons, win-leading seasons, 200+ strikeout seasons, strikeout-leading seasons, innings, CGs, shutouts etc., all favor Feller. The Indians Ace will always have a higher WHIP than most, but as mentioned previously, his ability to get out of jams with runners on base has to be considered. “But Kevin Brown pitched during the steroid era!” Fair point, yet steroids are not magical, they do not make an average player great, so it is hard to truly measure how that impacted Brown, not to mention he was never really considered a crème de la crème pitcher during that time anyway. Additionally, Feller was facing the likes of Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Jimmie Foxx, and Hank Greenberg, not exactly a group of slouches.
Mike Mussina played the same number of years as Feller, and to his credit had four more wins and nine less losses; but his twenty-game and win-leading seasons are lacking (one each), his career ERA and era-leading seasons? Worse than Feller’s. Moose’s walks were lower, and his career strikeouts were higher despite having less 200+ strikeout seasons and lower single-season strikeout highs, but this is because he was able to keep his latter-year strikeouts and starts consistent while Feller petered off on both. Other than that Feller bests him more often than not.
And then there was Doc. Roy Halladay in comparison to Feller has less wins and losses in two less years played (63 and 57 respectively), less 20-game and win-leading seasons (6-3 and 6-2), a worse career ERA (3.38 to Feller’s 3.25), fewer strikeouts by four-hundred and change, less walks by plenty, the same amount of 200+ strikeout seasons (though he never led the league), pitched over 1100 less innings, and had less games started, CGs and shutouts by margins that are quite sizeable. Again, Halladay’s career was quite good, and clearly Hall of Fame worthy in the eyes of many, but he was no Bob Feller, so why rank him higher? Even if we wanted to argue Halladay was the best pitcher of his generation (which can be fairly debated), one could argue Feller has a case for being the best of his generation as well, in addition to being one of the best of all-time.
Lastly, Jim Palmer has been listed higher (usually within five spots of Feller) as well, with a similar win-loss record, a lower ERA and more twenty-win seasons (though less seasons leading the league), but he also had less strikeouts and CGs despite more games started and innings pitched in one more season than Feller, so at least it’s a pretty fair ranking comparison.
I’m a big believer in only judging a player by the career he had, not on what would have potentially happened. Bob Feller never reached 300 wins or 3000 strikeouts for example, and thus his Hall of Fame case is judged based on the numbers he actually achieved. That said, given his performance both before and after the war, especially with how many games he started and completed, I find it hard to believe that he wouldn’t have reached both those milestones had he not done what he believed to be his duty to the nation, as he was clearly on pace; and while all that is amazing, we still haven’t talked about his fastball.
You see, Bob Feller threw hard, like, really hard.
While it is always difficult to judge a past player’s physical performance such as speed or rotation of their pitches “metriculously,” (“to accurately judge using metrics,” and yes, I just made that word up) due to technological disadvantages of past eras, it is very likely that Feller was a physical specimen, and a man out of time. Using a machine called a “Lumiline Chronograph,” in 1946, the Indians Ace hit 98.6 mph, though as Robert Weintraub notes in his book, The Victory Season:
“However, since the machine measured the speed of the ball as it passed through its sensors, unlike modern radar guns that clock the ball as it leaves the pitcher’s hand, it actually flew much harder. Some estimates put the fastball at 101-103 mph, others as high as 107.6 mph.”
Of course, anybody throwing 107 mph seems at this point to be unlikely, given that the fastest pitch ever recorded in a game was 105.8 mph by Aroldis Chapman, but even if his fastball was “only” 98.6-100 mph, we should take a moment to marvel at that feat. We live in a world where dang near every professional or soon-to-be pro can hit triple digits, but to do so in the 1940s? People like to mock Babe Ruth and other legends of eras gone by, saying they wouldn’t be able to even make the big leagues were they alive today (total nonsense in my opinion), but the fact that Feller’s fastball could touch what modern players are throwing, and he was still both dominant AND occasionally hittable would lend credence to opposing such claims.
Furthermore, modern speculation is that shorter starting appearances and more injuries is due to throwing as hard as we do nowadays; and while I think there is a lot of truth to that sentiment, Feller is a prime example of how to throw hard, pitch long, and avoid serious injury; it can be done, you just need to know how to pitch.
Anecdotally, there are two other instances to examine if we want to understand just how fantastically ferocious it felt to face the fastball of Feller (oh for f’s sake). First, consider this video where Bob puts up his heater against a speeding motorcycle.
Standing on flat ground, while wearing dress clothes of all things, Feller releases his fastball after the motorcycle, which is going roughly 86 MPH, has already passed him (with a supposedly ten-foot head start), and the ball still breaks through the (bullseye!) of his target before the motorcycle breaks through its own target. Of course, this is not a perfect 1-1 to how fast he would be throwing in a game scenario, though it is an insane feat in and of itself and speaks to the power of his arm; and if Feller was wearing a uniform more conducive to pitching and was doing so from a small hill that is the mound? My gosh.
Finally, consider this: according to reports, while pitching in an Old Timer’s Game at Cooperstown in 2009, the long-retired Feller threw a fastball that touched 70 mph, which is insane given that I don’t think my fastball could touch seventy now at age 33!
Oh yeah, he was also 90 years old when he did this. So please, let’s start giving Bob Feller all the respect he is due, because man, he deserves a lot of it.
