Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greatest Pitching Season Ever

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by pheasant View Post
    Well put, Willshad. I agree with all of it. I have Pedro's 2000 season crushing every other season except one, which Pedro's 1999 season. That 1999 season is a close 2nd.
    I hope too tall Mike Smithson is on that list somewhere. He was a favorite of mine from "way back" in the day!
    "It ain't braggin' if you can do it." Dizzy Dean

    Comment


    • Since the poll is closed, and probably has been for some time, I will post my vote for King Carl Hubbell in 1933. Hubbell was the NL MVP that year and led the Senior Circuit in:

      WAR - 8.9
      pWAR - 8.8
      ERA- 1.66
      Wins - 23
      WHIP - 0.982
      IP - 308.2
      SHO - 10
      K/BB - 3.319
      ERA+ - 193
      FIP - 2.53
      Adj. Pitch. Runs - 55
      Adj. Pitch. Wins - 6.3

      One of his shutouts that year was a 1-0, 18-inning whitewash of the Cardinals in the Polo Grounds, part of a bad-weather doubleheader (both ends 1-0 Giants' victories) with superb pitching all around, that Bill Terry called the greatest two games he had managed/played in his career.

      Here is Carl Hubbell's line for 1933:

      23-12 (.657), 1.66 ERA, 45 G, 33 GS, 22 CG, 11 GF, 10 SHO, 5 SV, 308.2 IP, 256 H, 57 ER, 6 HR, 47 BB, 156 K, 193 ERA+, 0.982 WHIP, 7.5 H/9, 0.2 HR/9, 1.4 BB/9, 6.3 WAA

      And here is a quote from Dizzy Dean on Carl Hubbell's pitching, when they were both seen as the NL's top pitcher in 1937 (from Diz, by Robert Gregory, page 94):

      "There will never be another pitcher like Carl Hubbell. He's a right to all the credit he can get. I don't wanna take nothin' away from the ol'-timers, but it gives me a big laugh when their records are talked about in the same breath with his. I'd like to see them fellas work with this here rabbit they call a ball." -- Dizzy Dean, 1937.

      King Carl ruled the extreme hitter-friendly late 20s through the 1930s (1928-1943). He put up this great season in the midst of that era, not in the Deadball years like so many on this list, nor did he do it with the offense-starved 1960s advantages.
      "It ain't braggin' if you can do it." Dizzy Dean

      Comment


      • Originally posted by pheasant View Post
        This guy was a freak. He is one guy that made great hitters look absolutely stupid. Take any pitcher in history and he won't rack up much more than 200 innings under those impossible conditions. And this was not accomplished during the strike seasons of 1994 and 1995, seasons in which several players put up career highs.
        He wasn't a freak physically. He was actually very fragile, and the scouts, pitching coaches, and managers knew this from the time he was in the minors. He was almost always treated with kid gloves as a result. This is a guy who was VERY small for a pitcher and had to throw all out (max pressure on the shoulder and elbow) throughout his career. He finished in the top 5 in IP ONCE in 18 seasons.

        As far as Maddux, his run was at least as great as Pedro's 1999-2000. Maddux had already accomplished himself as the premier workhorse in baseball by the time the strike rolled around, leading the league in IP three years running (263, 268, 267). He won the Cy Young two of those years. He finished in the top 5 in IP every single season from 1988-1996.

        Maddux had about 8 or 9 workhorse seasons, Pedro had one (1997).

        And you bring up 94'-95'....you have the two years' running Cy Young winner lose 10-12 starts in 94', when they played only 114 games. Ironically, because the season was truncated, he put up Pedro like (truncated) numbers, 271 ERA+, 16-6 (poor run support), but unlike Pedro in his best seasons, he led the league in CG AND shutouts. He almost doubled the CG's of the #2 pitcher (Drabek). He did all this in 25 starts.

        The next year he goes 19-2 with a 261 ERA+ and loses 7-8 starts. Again, leads the league with the same # of shutouts, CG's, and nearly the same number of innings. Braves only play 144 games.

        What would those two years look like had they played 162 games, and had Maddux been given his 35-37 starts and 260+ IP? His two years stand up to Pedro's 1999-2000. Easily.
        Last edited by csh19792001; 06-29-2014, 12:59 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by csh19792001 View Post
          He wasn't a freak physically. He was actually very fragile, and the scouts, pitching coaches, and managers knew this from the time he was in the minors. He was almost always treated with kid gloves as a result. This is a guy who was VERY small for a pitcher and had to throw all out (max pressure on the shoulder and elbow) throughout his career. He finished in the top 5 in IP ONCE in 18 seasons.

          As far as Maddux, his run was at least as great as Pedro's 1999-2000. Maddux had already accomplished himself as the premier workhorse in baseball by the time the strike rolled around, leading the league in IP three years running (263, 268, 267). He won the Cy Young two of those years. He finished in the top 5 in IP every single season from 1988-1996.

          Maddux had about 8 or 9 workhorse seasons, Pedro had one (1997).

          And you bring up 94'-95'....you have the two years' running Cy Young winner lose 10-12 starts in 94', when they played only 114 games. Ironically, because the season was truncated, he put up Pedro like (truncated) numbers, 271 ERA+, 16-6 (poor run support), but unlike Pedro in his best seasons, he led the league in CG AND shutouts. He almost doubled the CG's of the #2 pitcher (Drabek). He did all this in 25 starts.

          The next year he goes 19-2 with a 261 ERA+ and loses 7-8 starts. Again, leads the league with the same # of shutouts, CG's, and nearly the same number of innings. Braves only play 144 games.

          What would those two years look like had they played 162 games, and had Maddux been given his 35-37 starts and 260+ IP? His two years stand up to Pedro's 1999-2000. Easily.
          Stats-wise, I agree. But I believe that the huge layoff affected several of the games' best players in 1995, which allowed some players to really separate from the pack. I also believe that the AL was much stronger than the NL, particularly when your arch-rivals were an All Star team that was the greatest team assembled in MLB history. Look at how R Johnson carved up the NL during his mid to late 30s. Throw Maddux in Fenway against the DH and the Yankees and his stats and IP go down. Maddux over his career allowed AL teams to put up a .280 Avg against him. RJ's stint in the NL allowed him to accumulate more pitching WAR than Maddux, despite fewer IP. I put Maddux down as the the 2nd best pitcher all time behind RJ and 2nd best peak all time behind Pedro.
          Last edited by pheasant; 06-29-2014, 03:39 PM.

          Comment

          Ad Widget

          Collapse
          Working...
          X