Pedro, Koufax, Palmer, Maddux, and Grove.

Pedro 2000
Carlton 1972
Gooden 1985
Maddux 1995
W. Johnson 1913 (need a wily veteran to tell the youngsters how he walked uphill both ways to and from the mound)

Going only by pitchers that I saw:

Koufax 65,66
Gibson 68
Carlton 72
Guidry 78
Gooden 85

Pedro 2000 - mop-up
Marichel set-up man and also in case the catcher gets an attitude.
Rivera - closer

If we're going by single seasons, it's certainly hard to leave Gooden 85 or Carlton 72 off.

Who says I can't pick Satchel Paige? Screw you.

Satchel Paige, Lefty Grove, Walter Johnson, Smokey Joe Williams, Roger Clemens

Damon Rutherford
"Peppermint" Patty Reichardt
Sidd Finch
Bingo Long
Flybot (from Base Wars)

Going just with pitchers that I saw, I would take Gibson, Seaver, Carlton, Gooden, and Ryan.

Who says I can't pick Satchel Paige? Screw you.

Satchel Paige, Lefty Grove, Walter Johnson, Smokey Joe Williams, Roger Clemens

Yeah, it always bugs me when exercises like this don't include NLers. I know why they do it, but since it's all for fun, who cares. In a non DH league, I'd go with Babe Ruth, Martin Dihigo, Joe Rogan and Wes Ferrell. All good pitchers and they mash! Throw in Lefty Grove as my 5th guy and we're all set.

Single season:

1. Pedro 2000
2. Gibson 1968
3. Clemens 1997
4. Gooden 1985
5. Carlton 1972

If we're going by single seasons,

I doubt many franchises can top this (and certainly, an expansion franchise would be hard-pressed to do it):

Gooden 1985
Seaver 1971
Koosman 1969
Cone 1988
Viola 1990

(My actual choices, by the way, not limited to single season: Grove, Maddux, W. Johnson, Seaver, Pedro. I don't pick Roger Clemens, merits be damned.)

"I doubt many franchises can top this"

Can I include multiple Maddux seasons?

Why does my all-time all-star team have such a crappy bullpen?

Old Hoss Radbourn, 1884.

You guys need multiple pitchers? Wusses.

I don't pick Roger Clemens, merits be damned.

Ditto.

Not as good as that Mets rabble, but I think:

Maddux 1995
Sphan 1953
Glavine 1998
Smoltz 1996
Sain 1948

Would do pretty well. Neikro can spot start. Kid Nichols can ride the shuttle to Richmond.

Walter J - decade of the 10s, he dwarfed the mortals to an absurd degree
Rocket Man - in 100 years, they should call it the Clemens award instead of the Cy Young.
Lefty Grove - 300 wins, 140 losses, 9 ERA titles. 59 and 9 overa 2-year stretch.
Tom Seaver - best MLB pitcher between 1935 and 1985. That's a long time.
Greg Maddux - Koufax-like peak with more career.

Actually, with a 5-man rotation, for career, I thought this was surprisingly easy. Sam M. has it exactly right in his parenthetical - the best 5 are W. Johnson, Grove, Seaver, Clemens, and Maddux. If you want to eliminate a-holes, then it actually gets tougher to figure out who to replace Clemens with. I'll go with Cy Young - they did name the pitching award after him, after all (although Satchel Paige might beat him out if I get to include his NeL career).

Is this "peak value" or "career value"? Single-season or career? That would better help me make my choices. But forced to select five without such information, how about:

Walter Johnson
Lefty Grove
Warren Spahn
Bob Gibson
Greg Maddux

A blend of left and right as well as differing styles (that's why I chose Maddux over Clemens as my modern-day representative), and all are durable guys who can go deep into games.

Tampa Bay Devil Rays ultimate rotation:

Rolando Arrojo, 1998- still holds the franchise record for wins and ERA in a season.

Scott Kazmir, 2005- gotta love the sub 4.00 ERA, plus set the franchise record for strikeouts.

Albie Lopez, 2000- top 10 in both ERA and ERA+ that year.

Tony Saunders, 1998- the guy broke his arm pitching. That is SCRAPPY.

Victor Zambrano, 2003- tough to leave Bryan Rekar off the team, but this is an elite squad.

As a Met fan myself, I appreciate Sam's Clemens-hate, but he probably wasn't all that much more of an a-hole than Grove.

Heck, here's a stab at the Tigers. I'm probably missing someone:

Bobo Newsom 1940
Hal Newhouser 1945 or 1946 (probably 1945)
Dizzy Trout 1944 (I'm sensing that the Tigers were WWII-draft-lucky)
Denny McClain 1968
Mark Fidrych 1976

Maybe Bunning in 1957 makes the cut.

Man, for a team with a history like the Tigers, that seems like slim pickins.

I'm pretty sure that a Red Sox team, given five seasons from Martinez, Clemens, Grove, Young, Wood, and "the field" could beat that Mets fivesome.

How about...
Martinez 2000: 217 IP, 285 ERA+
Leonard 1914: 224.2 IP, 279 ERA+
Young 1901: 371.1 IP, 216 ERA+
Clemens 1990: 228.1 IP, 211 ERA+
Grove 1936: 253.1 IP, 190 ERA+

Also available (among others):
Wood 1912, 344.0 IP, 180 ERA+
Ruth 1916: 323.2 IP, 158 ERA+
Parnell 1949: 295.1 IP, 157

I'll be amazed if any non-Red Sox team can beat the Red Sox (though it's possible that a better choice of Red Sox players might beat the Red Sox here).

hmm how about for the Phillies (since I'm stocking up on 2 pitchers.
Carlton '72, '77
Alexander '15-'17

If using one pitcher more than 1X is unfair (wah!)Then take your pick of....
Schilling '92
Denny '83
Short '64
(1886 Ferguson is also pretty impressive....
30-9 w/ 43CG, 396 IP, 1.98 ERA)

Yanks:

Guidry 1978
Pettite 1997
Whitey Ford 1964, but maybe 1958, but in either case I'm surprised he didn't have as many great seasons as I imagined he had.

Lefty Gomez 1934
Chesbro 1904: least impressive 40 win season evah.

Jesus, that's worse than the Tigers. Who am I leaving out?

Russ Ford had a great year once. No, I don't know who he is either.

You have to consider that Whitey was used disproportionately against the best teams in the league. He's really a lot better than his (already great) stats.

Al Downing had a big year for them once IIRC. Cone? Mussina? Bob Shawkey?

But yeah, in general it's funny how they've lacked truly dominating SP. '20s and '30s had Hall of Famers, but marginal ones. Stengel only had Whitey. Bill James rips apart the '61 staff in the New Historical Abstract. The '70s teams had Guidry and a bunch of guys who were still good but past their primes. The Mattingly/Henderson teams had nobody.

Heck, just since the Mets came into being, the Sox could put up...

Martinez 2000: 217 IP, 285 ERA+
Clemens 1990: 228.1 IP, 211 ERA+
Lowe 2002: 219.2 IP, 171 ERA+
Tiant 1972: 179.0 IP, 169 ERA+ (or 1974: 311.1 IP, 132 ERA+)
Lee 1973: 284.2 IP, 146 ERA+
Wakefield 1995: 195.1 IP, 163 ERA+
Eckersley 1978: 268.1 IP, 138 ERA+ (or 1979: 246.2 IP, 148 ERA+)
Darwin 1993: 229.1 IP, 144 ERA+
Schilling 2004: 226.1 IP, 150 ERA+

...from which one could choose a group of five which (I think) might beat the Mets group of...

Gooden 1985: 276.2 IP, 226 ERA+
Seaver 1971: 286.1 IP, 193 ERA+
Koosman 1969: 241 IP, 161 ERA+
Cone 1988: 231.1 IP, 145 ERA+
Viola, 1990: 249.2 IP, 141 ERA+

...although one might get into arguments of quantity vs. quality (given that the Mets group all had high innings-pitched totals).

one might get into arguments of quantity vs. quality (given that the Mets group all had high innings-pitched totals).

One might, and I would. I'd take Gooden and Seaver's extra 60 innings in their signature seasons over Pedro and Clemens (especially Seaver v. Clemens in the # 2 spot, where the difference in the ERA+ is relatively trivial).

But anyway, all I said was that not many teams could beat the Mets five, not that no one could. The Sox have had some great seasons out of those guys, no doubt about it. The A's would have one heck of a rotation, too:

Grove 1931
Blue 1971
Coombs 1910
Waddell 1905
Zito 2002

One might, and I would. I'd take Gooden and Seaver's extra 60 innings in their signature seasons over Pedro and Clemens (especially Seaver v. Clemens in the # 2 spot, where the difference in the ERA+ is relatively trivial).

Gooden allowed 47 earned runs in 276 innings in 3.45 ERA environment. That's 59 fewer than league average pitching would have allowed in those innings. Pedro allowed 42 earned runs in 217 innings in a 4.97 ERA environment. That's 78 fewer than league average pitching would have allowed in those innings.

Give me Pedro.

Dwight Gooden's VORP in 1985 was 99.3. In 2nd place was John Tudor at 80.8.

In 2000, Pedro's VORP was 116.7. In second place that year was Randy Johnson at 85.0.

(1886 Ferguson is also pretty impressive....
30-9 w/ 43CG, 396 IP, 1.98 ERA)

Okay, I'll bite. How do you pitch 43 CG but get only 39 decisions? Four ties? According to BB-Ref, Philadelphia didn't play any ties in 1886.

A back-of-the-napkin shot at the Minnesota Twins:

Johan Santana, 2004: 228 IP/182 ERA+
Bert Blyleven, 1973: 325 IP/158 ERA+
Frank Viola, 1987: 252 IP/161 ERA+
Allan Anderson, 1988: 202 IP/167 ERA+
Dave Goltz, 1978: 220 IP/155 ERA+

I knew Johan and Viola would be on the list, and I figured one of Blyleven's high-IP seasons from his first stint with the team would be in there (that was before my time). Anderson and Goltz (narrowly) beating out various Radke seasons, the 1991 vintages of Kevin Tapani (244 IP/143 ERA+) and Scott Erickson (204 IP/134 ERA+), and Joe Mays' pact-with-the-devil 2001 (234 IP/143 ERA+) sorta surprised me.

I was also expecting someone from the Camilo Pascual/Jim Kaat/Jim Perry Era to show up on the list--only Pascual's 1963 (248 IP/147 ERA+) was close to making the cut.

Single season:

Wood 1912
Grove 1931
Carlton 1972
Guidry 1978
Pedro 1999

Five (or six) consecutive years peak:

Walter Johnson 1910-15
Grove 1928-33
Koufax 1962-66
Maddux 1993-98
Randy Johnson 1997-2002

Career:

Walter Johnson
Grove
Spahn
Clemens
Maddux

Of course you can have more than a few alternate choices on all three of those lists

Here's mine, I think it's pretty impressive:

Mel Clark (1994)
Rick 'Wild Thing' Vaughn (1989)
Eddie 'Crisco' Harris (1989)
Chet 'Rocket' Steadman (1993)
Whitt Bass (1994)

With star closer Henry Rowengartner (1995)
And battery mates George Knox and Rube Baker

Gooden allowed 47 earned runs in 276 innings in 3.45 ERA environment. That's 59 fewer than league average pitching would have allowed in those innings. Pedro allowed 42 earned runs in 217 innings in a 4.97 ERA environment. That's 78 fewer than league average pitching would have allowed in those innings.

My view on that is, once you reach a certain pinnacle of dominance, you are just that much better than the batters, period. It doesn't matter what the run environment is around you; you transcend that nonsense. Doc Gooden, 1985. Bob Gibson, 1968. Pedro, 2000. Maddux, 1994. You transport Doc's 1985 stuff to the 2000 American League, he just doesn't give up runs, period, any more or different than he did in the 1985 National League. These legendary seasons by these guys stand apart. The run environment in the AL in 2000 was produced by a bunch of guys pitching who had as much in common with what Doc Gooden was doing in 1985 as they do with how Jessica Alba looks in a string bikini.

A truly dominant pitcher like that, having a historic season, simply shuts batters down. When that happens to occur in a high-run environment (AL, 2000), it will of course look stronger, because he's doing it at a time when batters are otherwise succeeding. Put another way, the same level of dominance "saves" more runs relative to league average pitching, because league average pitching is not as good (or at least not as successful). Gooden was simply not pitching in an environment in which his dominance could translate into as much run savings per inning. Think of it this way: a CG shutout for Pedro earned him more "runs saved" than the same outing for Gooden, because of the run environment -- but it doesn't tell us that Pedro was actually more dominant or better. Only our evaluation and appreciation of what they each did can give us an opinion on that.

Don't forget Ebby Calvin 'Nuke' LaLoosh (1988) for long relief/spot starts

The Baltimore Monumentals:

Bill Sweeney (1884)
Tom Lee (1884)
Al Atkison (1884)
Ed Smith (1884)
John Ryan (1884)

Some people have come up to me in bars and made a strong case for Yank Robinson (1884), but he was more of a media darling than an effective pitcher.

Okay, here's an attempt at an all-Yankee rotation, with three lefties and two righties:

Ron Guidry 1978 273.7 IP 208 ERA+
Lefty Gomez 1937 278.3 IP 191 ERA+
Spud Chandler 1943 253.0 IP 197 ERA+
Whitey Ford 1964 244.7 IP 170 ERA+
Allie Reynolds 1952 244.3 IP 160 ERA+

A few notes. First, the Yankees had a lot of pitchers who gave them a one or two great years without giving them great 8-year or 10-year stretches. But if you get enough starters like Guidry and Reynolds, you can win championships. Second, Andy Pettitte of 1997 (204.3 IP and 154 ERA+) was a contender to represent the more recent teams, but that would give me too many lefties. Third, Reynolds's 1952 was better than any single season from Red Ruffing, but Ruffing's 1937 deserves honorable mention. And fourth: I would definitely pick this rotation to beat the Arrojo-led Tampa Bay top five.

Blue Jays

Clemens, 1997
Halladay, 2003
Stieb, 1985
Hentgen, 1996
Guzman, 1995

Okay, I'll bite. How do you pitch 43 CG but get only 39 decisions? Four ties? According to BB-Ref, Philadelphia didn't play any ties in 1886.

hmm - kind of mad at myself for not noticing that.
I took the stats directly from BB-ref myself.

The two previous years he was 47-25 with 91 CGs (combined). The following year he was 22-10 with 31 CG. I've got no idea.

Walter Johnson
Koufax
Clemens
Grove
Randy Johnson

I see your point Sam, but we don't really have any evidence for it. It's a plausible scenario, but it doesn't seem to be more than that. Not sure how much further we can get than that. Fair enough however.

I'm not reading through all of these just yet to see if it matches someone else, but (in rotation order):

Clemens
Koufax
Seaver
Grove (I'm torn between him and Carlton here)
Maddux

The rotation order should not be taken as rankings, just my ideal way to mix them.

Four ties? According to BB-Ref, Philadelphia didn't play any ties in 1886.

Sure they did. B-R lists them with a 71-43 record but 119 games played, leaving room for five ties.

Astros:

Larry Dierker, '69 (305.1, 153 ERA+)
Mike Scott, '86 (275.1, 163 ERA+)
Darryl Kile, '97 (255.2, 156 ERA+)
Roger Clemens, '05 (211.1, 221 ERA+)
Andy Pettitte, '05 (222.1, 174 ERA+)

(It would have been fund to put Oswalt's '05 on there, too, to put 3/5 of that rotation in there, but his 241.1, 141 ERA+ that year didn't quite stack up. Other HM: Mike Hampton '99, JR Richard '79, Ryan '81, Don Wilson '71, Joe Niekro '82)

Royals:

Saberhagen, '89 (262.1, 178 ERA+)
Appier, '93 (238.2, 178 ERA+)
Leibrandt, '85 (237.2, 154 ERA+)
Gubicza, '88 (269.2, 149 ERA+)
Cone, '94 (171.2, 170 ERA+)

(HM: Dennis Leonard '77, Larry Gura '80)

The District Attorney Posted: May 29, 2007 at 02:05 PM (#2382650)

Russ Ford had a great year once. No, I don't know who he is either.

Emery ball!

Damon Rutherford

Nice.

Cardinals:
Bob Gibson '68
John Tudor '85
Dizzy Dean '34
Chris Carpenter '05
Bob Caruthers 1886

Parisian Bob plays outfield with his 200 OPS+ when he's not pitching.

Not a Houston fan, but they could throw a pretty good set out there:

JR Richard 1979
Nolan Ryan 1987 or 1981
Mike Scott '86
Oswalt 2005
Clemens 2005

Bob Feller
Addie Joss
Mel Harder
Bob Lemon
Cy Young

emergency starter
Early Wynn.


Indians Oh yeah.

My view on that is, once you reach a certain pinnacle of dominance, you are just that much better than the batters, period.

This is a terrific point, and I wholeheartedly agree. I've always disagreed with people on this site about Koufax, and I think this is a reason - I believe Koufax, pitching like he did in the mid 60s, would have been dominant no matter when or where he pitched. Gooden, Pedro, etc. - it just didn't matter where they pitched. The fact that one pitcher had a ERA+ of 190 and the other of 210 is kind of meaningless in evaluating the individual seasons.

Has anyone mentioned John Clarkson's 1885 season?

My view on that is, once you reach a certain pinnacle of dominance, you are just that much better than the batters, period.


If that is the take, then no way does any of the more recent dominant seasons stack up against the older ones. If the level of dominance is the same and the IP much higher for the earlier guys, they win hands down.

Koufax 1963 IP 311 ERA 1.88
Gibson 1968 IP 304 ERA 1.12
Gooden 1985 IP 276 ERA 1.53
Clemens1990 IP 228 ERA 1.93
Maddux 1994 IP 202 ERA 1.56
Maddux 1995 IP 210 ERA 1.63
Clemens1997 IP 264 ERA 2.05
Pedro 1999 IP 213 ERA 2.07
Pedro 2000 IP 217 ERA 1.74

If you determine that the difference in ERA is negligible then the IPs are what is left.

I don't think you can ever take away the hitting environments completely, even if we could discount them somewhat on a pitcher by pitcher basis. At the end of the day, modern guys' mistakes -- and even the elite make them over the course of a season -- are being hit in smaller parks with less foul territory and the strike zones are smaller. This will pump up modern guys' ERAs a bit no matter how much overall dominance they demonstrate.

In no necessary order, Walter Johnson, Bob Gibson, Lefty Grove, Grover Alexander and Sandy Koufax.

Giants:

Mathewson 1905 338.7 IP - 230 ERA+
Hubbell 1933 308.7 IP - 193 ERA+
Schmidt 2003 207.7 IP - 183 ERA+
Tesreau 1912 243.0 IP - 171 ERA+
Marichal 1965 295.3 IP - 169 ERA+ (or 1966, or 1969)

or:

Schumacher 1933 258.7 IP - 148 ERA+
Perry 1969 325.3 IP - 140 ERA+

Of course, with Mickey Welch, Tim Keefe, and Amos Rusie the Giants would need only 3 starters and no pen.

LaGrow 1974
Lerch 1980
Gohr 1996
Navarro 1998
Lima 2005

Pitchers I saw. All 90's.

Pedro 1999
Maddux 1995
Clemens 1997
Randy 1999
Glavine 1998

Combined record of 100-28. What slouches. But seriously imagine getting that from your starters?

What Craig Calcaterra said.

Sam's argument is good to some extent, but it assumes the only difference in league ERA comes from other bad pitchers, rather than from a whole host of factors (park size, strike zones, better hitters from top to bottom, steroids, a juiced ball?, and so on). I absolutely refuse to believe that Gooden's season (good as he was) would have produced the same ERA in 1999. There's just no way.

Also, are people just refusing to pick Clemens because they don't like him, or do the majority of posters here seriously think he doesn't make the list of top FIVE starters?

Four ties? According to BB-Ref, Philadelphia didn't play any ties in 1886.

Sure they did. B-R lists them with a 71-43 record but 119 games played, leaving room for five ties.

Once again my reading comprehension skills sink below replacement level. The five ties came on 9/13, 9/20, 9/27, 10/6, and 10/7.

Maybe Ferguson pitched CGs in four of those five ties, but I'm skeptical.