Johnson, Mathewson, or Young? Which one do you think was the best?

[Hankphenom]

It's always been a mystery as to why the award was given Cy Young's name, since few people in 1956 would have named him the best pitcher of all time. As has been pointed out here, he didn't even make the first HOF cut, whereas Walter and Matty did. I'd guess it was because he had just died when they created the award, and Ford Frick thought it would be a nice honor. But it's never really made sense. As for the greatest pitcher, that's impossible to say, since there are about 10 or so for whom a substantial case can be made. But if I had one game to play, and could pick from all the greats in history, I would be very happy to see Walter Johnson on the mound, at around 25 years old, ready to start throwing those smoke balls in one after the other. Cobb said they "hissed with danger," and Sam Crawford told how "they had a 'swish' to them as they passed by you." Yeah, I'll take that guy.

[ValKehl]

If my math is correct, here's the number of times each of these Big 3 led his respective league in the following key stats:

Wins: WaJo-6, Cy-5, Matty-4

Win-Loss %: WaJo-2, Cy-2, Matty-1

Complete games: WaJo-6, Cy-3, Matty-2

Shutouts: WaJo-7, Cy-7, Matty-4

Innings pitched: WaJo-5, Cy-2, Matty-1

Strike outs: WaJo-12, Matty-5, Cy-2

WHIP: Cy-7, WaJo-6, Matty-4

ERA: WaJo-5, Matty-5, Cy-2

Nuf ced - it's WaJo without a doubt!!
Val

[Orioles1954]

Who really knows? I dislike all-time discussions because the game has evolved and changed in so many ways. Johnson played in an era where pitching and defense was king. He didn't face a segment of the greatest ballplayers, nor was physical conditioning regimens or advanced scouting among hitters prevalent. Could he have adjusted....who knows? However, among his contemporaries I'll take him.

[Vintageclout]

I likewise vote for Johnson, especially based on his WAR and JAWS stats that clearly outdistance the rest of the pack. However, had Matty and Johnson pitched in todays game, I truly believe Matty would have been the better of the two pitchers due to his uncanny ability to throw 3 pitches for strikes. Walter Johnson was the hardest thrower of his time (with all due respect to Joe Wood), and primarily used his blazing fastball to overmatch hitters. While his secondary pitches were somewhat formidable, they could not compare to Matty's incredible fade away (screwball) and curve. Matty likewise threw hard, and considering he could pinpoint 3 world class pitches "on a dime", it makes sense that he would be the better candidate to dominate the hitters of today who feast on 95 mph fastballs. Most pitches today throw gas and it is the hurler that commands one or two of their secondary pitches that reign supreme. Some classic examples are Pedro Martinez (change, curve), Kershaw (curve, slider), Clemens (splitter), and Maddux (change). Of course this is all speculation, but it certainly appears that baseballs finest pitchers have to have a spectacular secondary pitch to dominate. Regards, JoeT

[sycks22]

Wajo and Matty are 1/2 and Young isn't a top 5 in my book. I put Rose in the same category as Young: both were really good players, but their stats were accumulated based on the fact that they played forever.

[Fred]

Hey Hank, no bias there huh....

When you read about the things the players of that era would say, then Walter definitely had the high octane stuff. Matty had the screwball and Cy Young had a lot of wins but he also had the benefit of pitching in the 1890s.

Walter's a pretty good choice!

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Fred

Hey Hank, no bias there huh....

When you read about the things the players of that era would say, then Walter definitely had the high octane stuff. Matty had the screwball and Cy Young had a lot of wins but he also had the benefit of pitching in the 1890s.

Walter's a pretty good choice!

You can't go wrong with him, so I can exercise my bias with clear conscience! And there really are 10-15 guys who have such amazing numbers that they have to be considered serious candidates for the title. Ultimately, though, the attempt to compare across generations is a fools errand.

[sbfinley]

I'm a Matty guy and I still have to say Wajo.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

It's always been a mystery as to why the award was given Cy Young's name, since few people in 1956 would have named him the best pitcher of all time.

What mystery? He held/holds the wins record. That's why the award is named after him.

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by Tabe

What mystery? He held/holds the wins record. That's why the award is named after him.

Cy Young is obviously an immortal pitcher with his 511 wins one of baseballs "unbreakable" records. However, his 2.63 lifetime ERA isn't remotely close to Matty's 2.13 and Johnson's 2.17 with both of these hurlers allowing a 1/2 run less than Young per nine innings. Young also amassed virtually half his victories in the 19th century, with 3 of those seasons pitching from 57 feet ( as opposed to 60.5 ft). Young's ERA exceeded 3.00 NINE TIMES during his 22 year "dead ball" era career including 5 seasons in a row during the 1890s. Matty only exceeded 3.00 once before his final season (discounting 3 games in his first season), and before 1920, Johnson had ZERO seasons above the 3.00 mark! Simply stated, Johnson and Matty were tougher to hit than Young and were the better pitchers.

Regarding Koufax, while I am a huge fan of his incredible 4-year run, it is believed by most that the Dodger Stadium rubber was nearly 20 inches high; 5 inches or 33% higher than the standard 15 inch mound during that era!!! That constitutes a ridiculous advantage for a pitcher to create a better downhill plane on nearly all of their pitches. Trying to hit his curveball at Dodger Stadium must have been like trying to eat soup wuth a fork! No wonder his road ERA exceeded 3.00, and this must be taken into account when determining his standing among all-time pitchers.

[Peter_Spaeth]

You took that quote from Willie Stargell.

[clydepepper]

Of the three mentioned in the original post, my vote goes to Walter.
.
.

[Touch'EmAll]

Vintageclout brings up a point I have made before - the height of pitchers mound rubber - big huge advantage! I wonder how many no-hitters Ryan would have if he had pitched a decade earlier, whew!

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

Vintageclout brings up a point I have made before - the height of pitchers mound rubber - big huge advantage! I wonder how many no-hitters Ryan would have if he had pitched a decade earlier, whew!

God...imagine 6'10" Randy Johnson pitching off a 15" to 20" high rubber!!!

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You took that quote from Willie Stargell.

Yes Peter! One of my favorite pitching quotes. Another favorite is Reggie Jackson's assessment of Tom Seaver right before Game 1 of the 1973 World Series to a reporter and I quote....."Tom Seaver is so good that blind people come out to the park to HEAR him pitch"!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Vintageclout

Yes Peter! One of my favorite pitching quotes. Another favorite is Reggie Jackson's assessment of Tom Seaver right before Game 1 of the 1973 World Series to a reporter and I quote....."Tom Seaver is so good that blind people come out to the park to HEAR him pitch"!

Yeah that was brilliant too. Another great tribute to a pitcher (I believe it's real) is when Norm Cash, the last batter up against Ryan in one of his no-hitters, came to the plate with a broom handle and told the catcher and umpire it would do him just as much good as a bat.

Then there is the immortal assessment of Lefty Grove, though by a writer not a player -- he could throw a lambchop past a wolf.

And speaking of Johnson, supposedly an anonymous batter complained to the umpire about called strike three, saying, it sounded low to me.

[ValKehl]

Bill, many thanks for providing the Giants and Senators team stats, especially the breakdowns as to how these teams fared with and without their star pitchers. The key interpretation I make from these stats is:

- The Giants winning % was 20.9% better when Matty was the pitcher of record (.664/.549 - 1).

- The Senators winning % was 29.7% better when WaJo was the pitcher of record (.599/.462 - 1).

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yeah that was brilliant too. Another great tribute to a pitcher (I believe it's real) is when Norm Cash, the last batter up against Ryan in one of his no-hitters, came to the plate with a broom handle and told the catcher and umpire it would do him just as much good as a bat.

Then there is the immortal assessment of Lefty Grove, though by a writer not a player -- he could throw a lambchop past a wolf.

And speaking of Johnson, supposedly an anonymous batter complained to the umpire about called strike three, saying, it sounded low to me.

All great quotes Peter! Love the Grove quote which actually starts out: "He's so fast...."

[obcbobd]

Johnson.

And I agree with those citing Pedro or Koufax as among the all time greats.

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by Vintageclout

Cy Young is obviously an immortal pitcher with his 511 wins one of baseballs "unbreakable" records. However, his 2.63 lifetime ERA isn't remotely close to Matty's 2.13 and Johnson's 2.17 with both of these hurlers allowing a 1/2 run less than Young per nine innings. Young also amassed virtually half his victories in the 19th century, with 3 of those seasons pitching from 57 feet ( as opposed to 60.5 ft). Young's ERA exceeded 3.00 NINE TIMES during his 22 year "dead ball" era career including 5 seasons in a row during the 1890s. Matty only exceeded 3.00 once before his final season (discounting 3 games in his first season), and before 1920, Johnson had ZERO seasons above the 3.00 mark! Simply stated, Johnson and Matty were tougher to hit than Young and were the better pitchers.

Regarding Koufax, while I am a huge fan of his incredible 4-year run, it is believed by most that the Dodger Stadium rubber was nearly 20 inches high; 5 inches or 33% higher than the standard 15 inch mound during that era!!! That constitutes a ridiculous advantage for a pitcher to create a better downhill plane on nearly all of their pitches. Trying to hit his curveball at Dodger Stadium must have been like trying to eat soup wuth a fork! No wonder his road ERA exceeded 3.00, and this must be taken into account when determining his standing among all-time pitchers.

Runs per game were actually quite high in the 1890's; 2-3 runs per game (combined) higher than the dead ball era...and if Young pitched 3 seasons from 57 feet so did his opponents.