Article: The Case for (Jim) "Kitty" Kaat

[Seth Stohs]

But if you're comparing Kaat to Blyleven on the basis of Strikeouts, I think Bert wins that comparison quite handily. Kaat averaged 4.9 K/9 for his career.

 

Of course.

[Seth Stohs]

I don't think this holds up. Obviously, Kaat's Twins career was longer, but not by a *ton* -- he pitched about 15% more innings with the team than Bert did. It's more like Bert's NON-Twins career was longer than Kaat's, but I don't think that makes a difference here.

 

And I'm not sure how it works out that Kaat was better during their Twins careers alone; they have identical 3.28 ERAs with the team, but Kaat got the benefit of the pitchers' era, so Bert's 3.28 is better than Kaat's (119 ERA+ to 112). And while you're right that Blyleven didn't strike out many guys by today's standards, the key point is that "it was a different game back then": he was in the top 6 in the league in strikeouts per 9 every year during his first Twins stint, and in total strikeouts every year but the first; Kaat was on the list for total K four times because he threw so many innings, but finished 10th in K/9 once and that's it. I think it's clear enough from the basic numbers, but if you want to look at WAR, Bert has Kaat beat for their Twins careers to the tune of 49-32 by Baseball-Reference (but  a much narrower 57-51 by Fangraphs). And as to the argument that Blyleven had some of his best years elsewhere, both of them actually had two great years elsewhere -- Blyleven 1984 with Cleveland and 1989 with California, Kaat 1974-75 with those annoying Chicagoans. 

 

There's room to argue how MUCH better Bert really was than Kaat (and every other pitcher in team history), but I think it's really very hard to argue that anyone but Bert is #1. The scale is hugely different, but in my opinion Bert is the best Twins pitcher almost as clearly as Walter Johnson is the best pitcher in franchise history.

 

Yup, I actually did some comp stuff like this as well between Kaat and other Twins greats, and Blyleven is well above him... In fact, Radke finishes above him. So, the retired number thing probably isn't the right thing to do. I do wish that the Twins would recognize him more... and I don't know how...

[Bark's Lounge]

I'm a big fan of Kaat. He is my favorite person to listen to or watch talk about the game, especially when he and Costas team up. The guy is as good behind the mic as he was on the field and obviously his career stats are definitely worth a very healthy argument if not more.

 

To me he is a National Baseball HOFer. His overall contribution to the game surpasses more than a few that in are already in the Hall. I know that is not how it works, but I don't give a rat's behind, get him in there. Sometimes you have to make exceptions.

 

I hope he gets in.

[Bill Parker]

Yup, I actually did some comp stuff like this as well between Kaat and other Twins greats, and Blyleven is well above him... In fact, Radke finishes above him. So, the retired number thing probably isn't the right thing to do. I do wish that the Twins would recognize him more... and I don't know how...

 

I wouldn't be opposed to the retired number thing (I mean, I don't care much either way, but even if I cared, I'd probably be in favor of Kaat getting one...and Radke, for that matter). He contributed about as much to the Twins as Oliva did, and probably as much as or more than Hrbek, depending on how you value the World Series contributions. He's even much closer to HOF level than I would've thought going into this, and I wouldn't even be upset if he got in there (I'd be a bit upset that he got in ahead of Minoso, Allen, Tiant, or Boyer, but he's got a case, anyway). My only point was that he wasn't a better Twin than Blyleven -- who's probably one of the top 20 pitchers of all time -- not to disparage Kaat in any way.

[nicksaviking]

Yup, I actually did some comp stuff like this as well between Kaat and other Twins greats, and Blyleven is well above him... In fact, Radke finishes above him. So, the retired number thing probably isn't the right thing to do. I do wish that the Twins would recognize him more... and I don't know how...

 

That's wholly surprising but I see that WAR and ERA+ back that up.  I liked Radke but he never seemed more than a really good pitcher to me where as Kaat was a really good pitcher who also seemed to have a handful of elite seasons.  Radke's traditional numbers surely were inflated pitching in the steroid ERA which were then nutralized with the more advanced metrics.  Still, it just doesn't seem to jive.  Eleven of Kaat's 13 seasons with the Twins and 18 of his 25 seasons total his ERA was under 4.00.  That just seems like great pitching no matter which era you threw in, though perhaps today's numbers should outweigh history.

[DJL44]

Pitching in the 1960s you needed an ERA under 3 to have a really good season.

[ashbury]

Pitching in the 1960s you needed an ERA under 3 to have a really good season.

See?  That's why it was so much tougher to pitch then.  All that pressure.  Pitchers today have it easy.

[Otto von Ballpark]

That's wholly surprising but I see that WAR and ERA+ back that up.  I liked Radke but he never seemed more than a really good pitcher to me where as Kaat was a really good pitcher who also seemed to have a handful of elite seasons.  Radke's traditional numbers surely were inflated pitching in the steroid ERA which were then nutralized with the more advanced metrics.  Still, it just doesn't seem to jive.  Eleven of Kaat's 13 seasons with the Twins and 18 of his 25 seasons total his ERA was under 4.00.  That just seems like great pitching no matter which era you threw in, though perhaps today's numbers should outweigh history.

League average ERA was notably under 4.00 for basically Kaat's entire career (once even below 3.00).

 

League average ERA was notably above 4 for Radke's entire career (once an even 5.00 too).