|
Who was the better pitcher?
Grover Cleveland Alexander of Christy Mathewson?
|
I would love to help you, but even at my age I never got to see either of them pitch. :D
|
Me neither, tho some say I did. I would say from my reading however that Matty was, plus he's a folkhero in many eyes, etc, and the 3 shutouts in the 05 World Series will never be approached either.
|
Great post - a tough call, really, when looking at the numbers.
I'm going with Mathewson. Although Pete had more shutouts and Triple Crowns, Matty may have been better: 1. Had a slight edge in winning .pct. 2. .5 run lower ERA 3. '05 Series performance 4. 400 more strikeouts 5. 4 more 20 win seasons Other comparisons: Mathewson:
Alexander:
|
Since I was born in 1972, both men had passed away long before I was around.
However, I'd like to point out one similarity between the two: both went to France for WW1 and brought home issues that would plague them for the rest of their lives. Captain Mathewson was a trainer with the Army Chemical Warfare Service. During a readiness drill in Chaumont with 80 soldiers, a poor warning was given before mustard gas was dropped into the chamber and several men died. Both instructors (Mathewson and Ty Cobb) survived, but the event made them both ill for a few days. Cobb had some discharge from his lungs for a few days but Mathewson took loner to get over it. Then, before leaving France, Mathewson caught the flu during a pandemic where influenza killed more Americans than the War's fighting did. Mathewson's health was never the same, and he died young from tuberculosis. As for Sgt. Alexander, he was assigned to the artillery. While working around the big guns and the constant noise and having some near hits from German return fire, Alexander suffered hearing loss and was soon diagnosed with epilepsy. The shell shock from his time in the trenches likely led "Alex" to hit the bottle more heavily once he returned Stateside. Today, the general populace understands that wartime service often results in post-traumatic stress issues but in the 1920s, the guys who'd served in the Great War were expected to get over their demons quietly; his drinking was seen as a sign of weakness in an era where booze was illegal. On the field, I'd give the edge to Matty; however, there is a big difference between the two pitchers. One had finished his career before the War and the other returned to continue afterward. Alexander had put up some gaudy numbers just before the War...it's not known if he'd have had a better record if he returned without the problems he brought back from France. Similarly, what would Matty's record look like had WW1 broken out 8-9 years into his career? |
Mathewson is almost always ranked higher in the various polls and lists.
|
Walter Johnson :D
|
These kind of questions usually need refinement; not that I have an answer either way, but as Chris brought out so nicely, are you asking who had a better career, or in his prime, who was the better pitcher?
|
Mr Alexander was better
only because he was a Cub!!!! :D
|
Both were great pitchers, but sadly Matty is remembered as losing the two crucial games in his life, the "makeup game" against the Cubs which decided the pennant on the last day in 1908 and the infamous "Snodgrass' Muff game" which decided a World Series. Pete is most remembered for striking out Tony Lazerri of the Yanks with the bases loaded and two outs in the ninth inning and winning a World Series. Old Pete was hung over from a drinking bout the night before, celebrating after winning Game 6 with a stellar performance and never gave a thought to pitching the next day. One Yankee fan of the day said it best when he said he still remembered that dusty, drunk old man slowly wandering in from the bullpen still wearing his jacket and snatching away victory from the jaws of defeat, pitching on nothing but guts and guile to face one batter and achieve glory.
|
Hmmm, I don't think there were two outs in the ninth, from what I recall reading in Glory of their times. Didnt Babe Ruth get caught stealing to end that game and the series? I thought that Lazzeri was the 7th. If Im incorrect, I stand corrected. ;)
|
I think Scott's right.
In that Carmichael book about My Greatest Day in Baseball my recollection is that for Hornsby it was tagging Ruth out at second base to end the game and win the Series for the Cardinals in 1926. Everyone was surprised that Babe was going, which may be why he did it. |
Scott, you're right, it was the bottom of the 7th, not the 9th. Pete retired all 7 batters he faced, getting the save. Frank is right also that Babe walked and then was thrown out trying to steal 2b so technically he retired all 7 batters although it took a pitch to the 8th batter to throw out the Babe. B. Meusel was up when Babe took off with Lou Gehrig on deck.
The rest of the post still stands though, the great quote, and Pete's shining moment. |
tbob, while the Snodgrass game is famous, I think that Mathewson, himself, is most remembered for the three shutouts that he threw in the 1905 World Series - the most dominating pitching performance in a Series ever.
|
Kevin, I agree and disagree. The 3 shutouts in a World Series will never be equalled, especially now in these days of 4 man playoff rotations and closers. Unbelievable record even in the deadball era. But, his two most critical games were the Snodgrass muff in the 9th inning of the 7th game of the Series (I believe also he and Chief Meyers failed to catch an easy pop up which would have rendered the Snodgrass muff moot) and failing to win against 3 Finger Brown in their 1908 one game playoff which prevented perhaps the greatest Giants team of all time from playing in the World Series. Matty had a great career and more than his share of glory but these 2 games were arguably the two biggest games of his career and easily the most bitter to swallow for The Christian Gentleman and his fans. One wasn't his fault, one was, but still the two biggest games of a career filled with many big games.
|
A contrarian view: ALEXANDER!
According to the record, Mathewson (career 1900-1916) was a great guy and a great pitcher. But my vote as to the greater would go to Alexander.
While pitching for the Giants, Matty had excellent support at the bat and in the field and the New York staff also included Iron Man McGinnity (1902-08) and Rube Marquard (1908-15), not to mention Red Ames (1903-13) and Dummy Taylor (1900-08). At a Midwest Sports Collectors Show/Plymouth, MI about 25 years ago I picked up a copy of a little self-published book titled Kings of the Mound by Ted Oliver. The idea behind the book was to evaluate each pitcher by the quality of support he enjoyed from his team against other pitchers of the day. Mr. Oliver also ranked pitchers on an All-Time list. From Ted Oliver's All-Time list in Kings of the Mound (1947): 1. Walter Johnson.......... 89,345 career points (89.345 wins) 2. Grover Alexander........ 83,636 career points (83.636 wins) 3. Cy Young.................. 82,624 career points (82.624 wins) 4. Christy Mathewson...... 59,143 career points (59.143 wins) I found (still do) the book to be of great interest. Baseball hobbyists and Hall of Fame bugs (like me) might also be interested to know others who rank well under Oliver's Weighted Rating System. As one might expect, All-Time rankings for the next few included Hall of Famers exclusively: #5 Grove, 6 Griffith, 7 Lyons, 8 Vance and 9 Nichols - but several surprises, I think. At numbers 10 and 11 are two NON-Hall of Famers: Jess Tannehill and Wes Ferrell, respectively. Then, 12 Bob Feller (still active for several more years when this second edition of Kings of the Mound was published. Another NON-HoF'er Urban Shocker fittingly came in #13 followed by yet another HOF reject, Eddie Rommel. Carl Hubbell ranked at #15. Three of the final five comprising the All-Time top 20 are also NON-Hall members: #16 through 18 being Nap Rucker, Ted Bretenstein and Claude Passeau, in order. Numbers 19 and 20 were a pair of Hall of Fame White Stockings, Red Faber and Ed Walsh. (Since Passeau was still active for one more season and posted a lowly 2-6 mark that year, he doubtless dropped down the list - probably several spots. So, at #21 (really #20 after the '47 season) was Gettysburg Eddie Plank.) Finally, some other NON-Hall of Famers who did well under Oliver's system are: Red Lucas (#25), Jack Taylor (26), Hippo Vaughn (27), Ed Pfeffer (29) and Slim Salee (30). Sorry for the length. I got carried away.... Bottom line for me is that Alexander pitched for generally poorer clubs and into a hitter's era for the latter portion of his career. (All the while dealing with monstrous personal difficulties.) Steve |
Based on Jacksons' research, Matty is the Man.
|
Normally a 0.43 difference in ERA would end the discussion immediately. However Mathewson pitched a good chunk of his career in the really dead ball era (before 1909), then finished before the live ball era took off. Alexander on the other hand started in 1911 and finished in the late '20s when the live ball era had clearly been established.
Mathewson was a bit better at striking guys out, but Alexander pitched 400 more innings over his career. I'm going with Alexander in an extremely close call, but will certainly listen to statistics based (specifically park factors) arguments that would push Mathewson over the top. |
Babe beat Walter - a lot !
Jeez, I am not with my "Ruth Biography" book for specific reference, but...
In 1914 and 1915, Ruth and Walter Johnson went head-to-head something like 5 or 6 times. I remember Ruth won all but one game, maybe won them all. And Walter Johnson is supposed to be tops on the all-time best pitcher list, hmm? |
W.Johnson #1 easily :)
#2 is Alexander IMO...... mainly because he played for less talented teams overall and had less time in the dead ball era (pitchers era) |
more on Ruth
1915 Beat W. Johnson 4-3
1916 April 17, beat W. Johnson 5-1 1916 June 1, beat W. Johnson 1-0 1916 Aug 15, beat W. Johnson 1-0 in 13 innings 1916 Sep 9, beat W. Johnson 2-1 for 5th in row over Johnson 1916 Sep 12, lost to W. Johnson 3-4 wow. |
Backstroke, not to take anything away from Ruth, but in all fairness, Johnson didn't have the team support that Ruth did with Boston. Three of those games were either 1-0 or 2-1. To hold the 1916 world series champions to a total of 4 runs in 3 games is an indication of what type of pitcher Johnson was. Holding the Senators to 1 run isn't much of an accomplishment. I'm sure that had Johnson played for Detroit, there could possibly be a much different result.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:46 PM. |