Mathewson Vs. Johnson

[robw1959]

Is it my misperception or does Christy seem to be gaining significant ground on Walter as of late in terms of pre-war card sales lately?

[Touch'EmAll]

In 2008, Eric Seidman wrote a very nice article entitled, "Why Cy ?" The Cy Young award started in 1956. So Seidman went back and statistically analyzed the pre-war greats to get a better fix on dominant pitchers. His results had Walter Johnson winning 8 Cy Young awards, Matty & Grove winning 7 each, G. Alexander nabbing 6 awards, and Cy Young hoisting 4 awards. Seidman thinks it should be called the "Christy Mathewson Award" and rightly so.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

In 2008, Eric Seidman wrote a very nice article entitled, "Why Cy ?" The Cy Young award started in 1956. So Seidman went back and statistically analyzed the pre-war greats to get a better fix on dominant pitchers. His results had Walter Johnson winning 8 Cy Young awards, Matty & Grove winning 7 each, G. Alexander nabbing 6 awards, and Cy Young hoisting 4 awards. Seidman thinks it should be called the "Christy Mathewson Award" and rightly so.

Then why not the Walter Johnson award?

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Then why not the Walter Johnson award?

+1

From a WAR perspective:

Times led a league in WAR:

Walter Johnson - 8
Cy Young - 6
Christy Mathewson - 3

[Touch'EmAll]

In reading the article, the author concludes that, "Mathewson was much more dominant than Cy Young during the career of Cy Young". Maybe he was matching up actual year-for-year comparisons. Johnson pitched a little later than both Matty and Young.

[Throttlesteer]

511 wins. Almost 100 more than WaJo and 140 more than Mathewson. Longevity does count for something.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

In 2008, Eric Seidman wrote a very nice article entitled, "Why Cy ?" The Cy Young award started in 1956. So Seidman went back and statistically analyzed the pre-war greats to get a better fix on dominant pitchers. His results had Walter Johnson winning 8 Cy Young awards, Matty & Grove winning 7 each, G. Alexander nabbing 6 awards, and Cy Young hoisting 4 awards. Seidman thinks it should be called the "Christy Mathewson Award" and rightly so.

Question: Why Cy?
Answer: 511 career wins, 94 more than the next highest total.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Question: Why Cy?
Answer: 511 career wins, 94 more than the next highest total.

Hi Corey! I think it is almost universally agreed that Walter Johnson was the greatest pitcher ever. His ERA is almost half a run better than Young’s. His shutout total dwarfs Young’s. There is an argument for Mathewson, albeit a weak one, but really none for Young.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Hi Corey! I think it is almost universally agreed that Walter Johnson was the greatest pitcher ever. His ERA is almost half a run better than Young’s. His shutout total dwarfs Young’s. There is an argument for Mathewson, albeit a weak one, but really none for Young.

Perhaps true Jay, though to some degree it is not an accurate comparison in that Young debuted almost a generation before Johnson, and in order to know what these statistics really mean, one would need to do an analysis of how league pitching stats might have changed over that period.


That said, for purposes of creating an award that would resonate with the public, it is a lot simpler to sell a guy that was the all-time win holder with no close second.

[itjclarke]

IMO WaJo is the greatest, but I don’t think it’s entirely fair to penalize Cy for his ERA. During the early part of his career, he had to pitch through a major rule change, when they moved the mound back to its present day 60’ 6”. ERAs understandably shot up league wide. Cleveland’s team ERA increased almost 2 full runs from 1892 to 1893. Cy Young still outperformed the rest of the league in the 1890s, then had an amazing 7-8 year run during the latter part of his career (ERA barely above 2.00) as he approached 40.

To the OPs original question, I collect Matty pretty heavily and seem to have noticed an uptick over the past year or so. Not like the WaJo portrait, or the Cobbs, but each of Matty’s T206 poses seem to be creeping up, especially tougher backs. T205, and his many T202s seem pretty strong too.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Hi Corey! I think it is almost universally agreed that Walter Johnson was the greatest pitcher ever. His ERA is almost half a run better than Young’s. His shutout total dwarfs Young’s. There is an argument for Mathewson, albeit a weak one, but really none for Young.

He also received more votes for the Hall of Fame. So, he was seen as the better pitcher during his lifetime. I have always wondered about that. Was it his low World Series ERA? 3 Shutouts in 1905? More team success? Early death? I would take WaJo over Matty.

I agree with the article though. I would take Matty over Young. Longevity means something, but not that much. Matty's ERA is a half run better than Young, better than WaJo too, No Dodger fan would take Don Sutton over Sandy Koufax. Tom Glavine wasn't better than Pedro Martinez.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by rats60

He also received more votes for the Hall of Fame. So, he was seen as the better pitcher during his lifetime. I have always wondered about that. Was it his low World Series ERA? 3 Shutouts in 1905? More team success? Early death? I would take WaJo over Matty.

I agree with the article though. I would take Matty over Young. Longevity means something, but not that much. Matty's ERA is a half run better than Young, better than WaJo too, No Dodger fan would take Don Sutton over Sandy Koufax. Tom Glavine wasn't better than Pedro Martinez.

Longevity means a lot more than it's getting credit for. I don't know who was best but it's hard to fault the all time win leader for having the award named after him for most wins in a season?

[markf31]

Originally Posted by rats60

He also received more votes for the Hall of Fame. So, he was seen as the better pitcher during his lifetime. I have always wondered about that. Was it his low World Series ERA? 3 Shutouts in 1905? More team success? Early death? I would take WaJo over Matty.

I agree with the article though. I would take Matty over Young. Longevity means something, but not that much. Matty's ERA is a half run better than Young, better than WaJo too, No Dodger fan would take Don Sutton over Sandy Koufax. Tom Glavine wasn't better than Pedro Martinez.

Not sure HOF voting can be used for much of a barometer, or it should be taken at least with a grain of salt. Lou Crigar received 8% of HOF voting in 1937 and Johnny Kling garnered 10% of voting in 1937, both receiving more votes on the 1937 ballot than 31 other eventual HOF members and nobody would argue that either Crigar nor Kling were better than those 31 eventual HOF members. Some of those names include Evers, Chance, Simmons, Roush, Clarke, Crawford, Baker and Gehringer.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Question: Why Cy?
Answer: 511 career wins, 94 more than the next highest total.

+1

Cy Young died in 1955, and the award was first given out in 1956. Perhaps it was done more in his memory, despite the fact there were pitchers with arguably better stats.

[NotVader]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

In 2008, Eric Seidman wrote a very nice article entitled, "Why Cy ?" The Cy Young award started in 1956. So Seidman went back and statistically analyzed the pre-war greats to get a better fix on dominant pitchers. His results had Walter Johnson winning 8 Cy Young awards, Matty & Grove winning 7 each, G. Alexander nabbing 6 awards, and Cy Young hoisting 4 awards. Seidman thinks it should be called the "Christy Mathewson Award" and rightly so.

Walter Johnson is best ever based on stats back then while Nolan Ryan is the best modern pitcher.

Easy stuff, people.

CV

[bigtrain]

What amazes me most about Johnson is the 110 shutouts, a record that will never be broken. Second most impressive statistic of his is the 417 wins in spite of losing 63 games in which he allowed only one or two runs.

[Cooper1927]

I was awarded a Johnson...that’s probably why not...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by Cooper1927

I was awarded a Johnson...that’s probably why not...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LOL! Perhaps just the WaJo award instead?

[ruth_rookie]

Originally Posted by Cooper1927

I was awarded a Johnson...that’s probably why not...

And lemme guess... you polish it daily? I know I would if I had that impressive piece of hardware.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by ruth_rookie

And lemme guess... you polish it daily? I know I would if I had that impressive piece of hardware.

I used to have someone else polish mine but she quit a few years ago, so now I am back to doing it myself. Between that and collecting cards I feel like a 13 year old again.