Why Tom Seaver is better than Nolan Ryan

[seaver41]

Since people don't believe me, I will explain.

Nolan Ryan had an amazing career. But he did only 2 things better than anyone ever has: Throw really, really hard for a really, really long time.

Because Ryan played on some cruddy teams, we'll ignore Wins and Losses.

Let's look at strikeouts:
Seaver: 3,640
Ryan: 5,714

Pretty obvious who wins. Ryan's 5,714 were a result of throwing hard for a long time.

Let's examine there control by looking at K/BB
Seaver: 2.61
Ryan: 2.04

Seaver wins. Ryan had horrible control early on. In 5 of his 6 300 K seasons, Ryan never had fewer than 157 BB. The one season he didn't he had 301 K's and 98 BBs in 1989.

Let's examine WHIP
Seaver: 1.121
Ryan: 1.247

Pretty big difference

Now H/9
Seaver: 7.47
Ryan: 6.56

Ryan wins. Another effect of throwing very hard.

BB/9
Seaver: 2.61
Ryan: 4.67

HUGE difference here

K/9
Seaver: 6.85
Ryan: 9.54

Another huge difference, this time favoring Ryan.

ERA
Seaver: 2.86
Ryan: 3.19

A pretty big difference

Total
Seaver: 4
Ryan: 3

Finally, Seaver won 3 Cy Young Awards and finished top 5 eight times, 2 other times he finished 7th and 8th. He was a ROTY and finished top 10 MVP five times.

Ryan never won a Cy Young Award. He finished top 5 six times, 2 other times he finished 8th and 9th. The highest ranking he reached in MVP balloting was 14th out of 6 times.

In conclusion, Tom Seaver is better.

[georgegrande]

ok but who had 7 no hitters?

While Seaver was amazing and one of the greatest ever, Ryan was astoundingly good and showed his superiority via the no-hitter. He was definitely more impressive in that respect. They are both excellent in different areas

[seaver41]

No-Hitters are just one game and don't make a career. 7 is amazing but it doesn't make him better overall.

[georgegrande]

I think your right. What you're saying is correct, but that doesn't prove that Seaver was a better player than Ryan. Regardless of the walk totals and ERA which obviously goes to Seaver and shows that he was technically and fundamentally more sound, Ryan was the more of a "baseball player" than Seaver. He was a natural and really innovative in terms of the extremely hard-throwing, overwhelming fastball pitcher.

Seaver was probably better throughout his career but at Nolan Ryan's peak of 27 years I would take Ryan any day. He created fear in the batter.

[seaver41]

That reminds me. Nolan Ryan hit 158 batters. Tom Seaver only hit 76. Ryan hit over twice as many batters.

Seaver was a smart, talented pitcher. Ryan was gifted with an incredibly strong, resilient arm that let him throw very hard for a very long time. He was one-dimensional. If you had to win 1 game, Seaver would be a much better bet than Nolan Ryan.

[diehardmetsfan]

nice...i luv it

[georgegrande]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, agree to disagree. It's really all opinion. Seaver is better in certain situations than Ryan and likewise.

How about this: Harang vs. Zambrano....a somewhat similar comparison on a lesser level....Who would you rather have?

[diehardmetsfan]

damn...that is a good 1...u should make a whole nother thread for that

[seaver41]

The one that isn't a hydrophobic nut.

[diehardmetsfan]

seaver41 said:

The one that isn't a hydrophobic nut.

who's hydrophobic?

[georgegrande]

hmmmmm maybe the crazy hispanic one who would kill his own teamate if he could

[diehardmetsfan]

georgegrande said:

hmmmmm maybe the crazy hispanic one who would kill his own teamate if he could

lol...is he really hydrophobic?

[seaver41]

No. But the start against the Mets in Chicago where he had 7 walks he didn't drink any water. It was like 100 degrees that day. I was at that game.

[diehardmetsfan]

how do u know he didnt drink any water?

[seaver41]

Because he said it in the post-game. Or Piniella did.