But he seems to have veered off that with this opinion, dont you think? No.

Maddux seems like a guy Terry would love. He does. He stated Maddux was an all-time great and definite HOF. Not including him in his top 5 is typical Boers. Remember how he feels about Joe Montana and Larry Bird.
I could be wrong. You are.

Later in the show, in typical fashion, Bernstein was berating a caller who had the nerve to suggest Maddux was one of the best RHP of all time. Bernstein, always eager to put down the white athlete, was skeptical. The caller made the mistake of using wins as his first argument, to which DB reflexively launched into his "wins mean nothing, we've moved on from stats like ERA to more advanced metrics", etc.). So then DB suggests looking at WAR. Lo and behold, Greg Maddux was 4th all-time.

That clearly surprised Dan, who then said lifetime WAR was basically a compiler stat, and that pitchers like Pedro had much better "peak WAR" and he proceeded to read off some of Pedro's admittedly impressive seasonal WARs. So then he says he is going to list the top pitchers by 7-year peak WAR. Maddux is 10th (still elite), and I was waiting for Pedro's name...he was like 25th.

He loves WAR until it fails to support the argument he is attempting to make.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

This is a great example of the problem with statistics and people that constantly spout them. danny was obviously shopping for the stat that supported the conclusion he had already drawn. He loves WAR until it fails to support the argument he is attempting to make.

If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.