BTW, by raving about Koufax, it’s not to downplay Maddux’s achievements at all. It’s just I’ve hardly ever seen Koufax in action (only on YouTube!) so he is that much more ‘mysterious’ – and therefore a source of greater curiosity – to me.

Don Drysdale is a cool as dog balls name.

I think it’s fair to say that today’s athletes are, on the whole, “better” than those in days gone by – that we are seeing baseball (and a lot of other sports) being played better than they have ever been played.

And yet Yet Koufax’s record still stands out like dog’s balls. It’s absolutely incredible.

On a side note, Johnny Damon is one of my favourite names for a baseball player – but Don Drysdale runs it pretty close.

@Steve: See comment to big o.

Completely agree with you on both points. 60’s were brutal on batters, and it probably is directly equivalent to the 90’s offensive explosion. But, that is also why Aaron and Mays and co. partly look so good by the FBHOF standards as they are compared against their peers, whose offensive numbers are not off the charts.

YES – good idea, cross decade guys get screwed on the Razzball write-ups.

grey … this curmudgeon believes the 6″ removed from the height of the pitchers’ mound was unfairly taken by the league and has done more to damage to HOF comparisons and selections than any other rule change . (to be fair , some questioned the uniformity of compliance to the mound regulations , especially with the dodgers …although drysdale was an imposing figure , even on flat ground) .
which brings me to this point ==> few batters dug in the batters’ box , during the ’60’s , the way every batter does today .
there were more situations and pitcher/batter relationships that caused a little chin music to be expected .
not saying it was better , just a part of the game .

Second, this decade looks like the pitching equivalent to the ’90s home run years. Gibson comes in 10th the rest of the pitching was so good. So that brings me to my point — finally! — You don’t hear people discrediting 60s pitching like people discredit 90s home runs. Granted, the former wasn’t chemical induced, but the mound was unfairly high giving the pitchers an advantage that needed to be remedied by the league.

On a separate note, you need to do a post for the guys that are being unfairly penalized because their brilliant careers don’t fall squarely into one decade. For instance, you talk about how Bench is 24th overall, but he’s not listed because his career fell at the tail end of this decade and then during the 70s. That should be rectified. Anyway, I’ve gone on long enough. Another great post, Lou.