Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Cole
I think the problem with nominating WaJo is that his post-season didn't come until late in his career and, while it was good, it wasn't great. And the post-season is pretty well where it is in terms of being clutch. Doesn't matter if you win 30 and finish 30 behind IMO. I imagine he probably would have been great if he had been in the post-season earlier, but he wasn't, so his clutch greatness in that arena simply isn't demonstrable. The fact that the other guys were is.
|
Johnson's world series games, in his 18th and 19th seasons:
1924, game 1: Loses 4-3 in 12 innings, 165 pitches, only runs in regulation are two home runs into temporary bleachers in left field, otherwise a shutout win.
1924, game 5: Loses 6-2, 13 hits, behind 3-2 into last inning.
1924, game 7: With one day's rest, comes in to a 3-3 tie in the 9th, holds the powerful Giants (8 HOF hitters) scoreless for four innings, possibly the great "clutch" pitching performance of all time.
1925, game 1: 4-1 win, 5 hits over Pirates team with .316 season BA.
1925, game 4: 4-0 win, 6 hit shutout.
1925, game 7: Loses 9-7, 15 hits, 5 Pirate runs in last two innings of famous "rain game," possibly the worst conditions any major league game has ever been played in.
A mixed bag, as has been said, but not even close to showing that he wasn't a "clutch" pitcher. What would he have done in the world series in his dominant decade of 1910-1919?