Denny McClain

[bigunreal]

I've said it before and it bears repeating; Denny McClain's 31 win season in 1968 is the most underrated accomplishment in the history of sports. Recall that no one had won 30 games in the Majors for over 30 years at that point in time, and no one has really approached 30 wins since then (Steve Carlton won 27 games in 1972). That translates into a feat that no other pitcher has accomplished in over 70 years. Don't you think that might warrant just a little bit of media attention?

I was reminded again about the media blackout of McClain's incredible feat tonight, when I briefly caught a bit of a t.v. program hosted by Bob Costas. Now, since the thoroughly objectionable Costas was the host, I could only take a few minutes of it, but I watched long enough to hear this unsufferable elitist snob state that "1968 was the year of the pitcher, and no one approached what Bob Gibson did that year." Really? McClain's 31 wins didn't "approach" Gibson's season, which was undeniably great, but included only 22 wins, which was hardly remarkable for that era?

Is McClain still in prison? If not, why isn't he being interviewed, like Gibson was for this program? Why isn't his fantastic season being trumpeted by the jock sniffers who love to trumpet all sorts of far lesser accomplishments? I think the answer is all too obvious. Btw, the program in question featured Gibson and McCarver from the St. Louis Cardinals team, and Willie Horton and Al Kaline from the Tigers. From what I could gather, almost all conversation, directed as always by the arrogant Costas, was centered around Gibson and his "greatness." Funny, why wasn't McClain there? How about Mickey Lolich, who was the true hero of the '68 World Series, with 3 wins, including the deciding game 7 over the superhuman Gibson? And why was Horton a guest? Hmmm- what was different about him than all the other starters on that Tigers' team? I'm sure you can figure that one out.

I'd love to see a nice interview with McClain. I wonder if perhaps he doesn't agree with my assessment about how his accomplishment has been underreported and almost ignored by the press.

 

[foreverfree]

bigunreal, what network did Costas's show air on?

Every so often, MLB TV (ch. 213 on DirecTV) shows an installment of a series called Baseball Seasons. One night during the past season, the show highlighted 1968 and the varying pitching achievements of that year, including McLain's 31 wins, airing an audio soundbite from McLain (it sounded like McLain was contacted by phone; where and when they called him was not indicated; for all I know it may have been an archive). What McLain said and what else was said about his feat, I do not know.

Back around 2001, ESPN Classic did a SportsCentury about McLain and it looked like his sound bites then were done in prison.

John

 

[bigunreal]

Not sure what network it was on; my son was watching and I assumed it was one of the ESPN channels. It just caught my attention, but I was so distracted by Costas's idiotic comment that I neglected to note what channel and what the name of the show was.

We're long overdue for an depth television interview with McClain, lauding his unbelievable feat. Edited by: bigunreal

 

[foreverfree]

I neglected to mention that Baseball Seasons on MLB TV was NOT narrated by Mr. Costas, though I forget who did narrate it.

John

 

[Solomon Kane]

i remember that, I was just a kid, but I remember everyone talking about it...a truly remarkable feat---better than Gibsons low-era in my opinion. (And yes, Mickey Lolich did outclass Gibson in the WS.)

For those two years: 68-69, DM was the best starter in baseball no question. I'm sorry his career went to the dogs after that, but we'll always have those memories.

 

[Don Wassall]

Even with that spectacular ERA in '68, Gibson only managed a 22-9 record. His career mark was 251-174 for a .591 winning percentage, not all that impressive especially given that he was usually on good Cardinal teams, including three pennant winners.McLain's career did indeed go to the dogs, but even so his career winning percentage was .590,almost identical toGibson's.

Gibson iseasily the most over-rated pitcher in baseball history, one whois alwaysmentioned every time the topic is great pitchers yet he doesn't rank in the top 40 of any statistical category except for strikeouts (14th) and shutouts (13th). His best category is the dubious one of most homeruns given up per nine innings, where he ranks 8th all time. In career wins he's 46th, in career winning percentage he's 142nd. Even in career ERA he's 140th.

Gibson's career wasn't noticeably better than that of Don Drysdale, yet no one, for good reasons, considers Drysdale an all-time great. Gibson and Drysdale were known as intimidating pitchers who liked to throw chin music, but in no way does Gibson belong in the top echelon of all-time great pitchers.

 

[sport historian]

The year 1968 was the Year Of The Pitcher. Most every pitcher had a good year. Juan Marichal was 25-9 for the Giants, Luis Tiant went 21-9 for Cleveland. Steve Blass was 18-6 for Pittsburgh.

As I have written, a big reason Gibson is always rated so high is because he had his best games in the World Series on national TV.

 

[Don Wassall]

1968 truly was an aberrant year. Batting averages had been trending downward in the years leading up to '68, especially in the AL, but really took a plunge that season. A bigstory that summer was whether or not the American League batting crown would be won with a sub-.300 average, somethingthat had never occurred before in either league. Carl Yastrzemski managed to finish at .301. Danny Cater wassecond at just .290. Only 12 batters in the league finished at higher than .268, still very hard to believe.

 

[foreverfree]

Don, you mentioned Hoot Gibson's all time rankings NOW; I wonder where he stood in the various categories when he retired.

A very intriguing year, 1968, on and off the diamond (my parents got divorced that year).

John

 

[jaxvid]

I listened to every game McLain pitched that year. He was dominant but the Tiger offense exploded every time he pitched. I don't think McLain would win 10 games nowadays because his best pitch was an unhittable high fastball at the letters. A high fastball today is a pitch at the waist. The strikezone has changed so much over the years it's unbelievable. Averages are higher now because pitchers have to hit such a tiny strikezone. Gibson was good but he was no Mickey Lolich.

 

[Bart]

I don't think McLain would win 10 games nowadays because his best pitch was an unhittable high fastball at the letters. A high fastball today is a pitch at the waist. The strikezone has changed so much over the years it's unbelievable. Averages are higher now because pitchers have to hit such a tiny strikezone. Gibson was good but he was no Mickey Lolich.

I agree jaxvid.Yes, a high fastball is very tough to hit. It looks fat, then it's past you. Goose Gossage made his living on that pitch, today it would be a ball. The strike zone has been shrunk to accomodate the hitters. Also, the pitcher can't throw inside without the risk of being ejected. The batter can set himself close to the plate and reach the outer edges easily. The fear of a brushback or getting beaned was always on the hitter's mind. They were more trepidatious, not so much today. The strike zone will soon be the size of a postage stamp. Pretty near that already.

 

[Don Wassall]

Don, you mentioned Hoot Gibson's all time rankings NOW; I wonder where he stood in the various categories when he retired.
John

I'm not sure what your point is, as I was referring to the way Gibson is almost always included NOW as one of the all-time great pitchers, more now than in the past,reminiscent ofthe way Jackie Robinson's legend has continued to grow over the years. Gibson retired with 251 wins, which doesn't even rank him in the top ten among his peers from that era-- Carlton (329), Ryan (324), Sutton (324), Niekro (318), Perry (314), Seaver (311), John (288), Blyleven (287), Jenkins (284), Kaat (283), and Palmer (268) all finished with more wins than Gibson. Ferguson Jenkins, who won 20 games six straight seasons and seven out of eight,was the best black pitcher ever, but as Sport Historian noted, Gibson gained much more acclaim by pitching well in World Series, and from his microscopic ERA in 1968. Jenkins never made it to a World Series. Edited by: Don Wassall

 

[foreverfree]

Don, I have the 1996 Macmillan Baseball Encyclopedia on my lap as I type, and looking at that 1.12 ERA from 1968, in '69 (with the mound lowered and the strike zone reduced) it was 2.18 and in '70 it was up to 3.12 although Gibson was 23-7. 1970 was Gibson's last 20-win season. Carlton led the staff in '71 (Steve's last year with STL) with 20 wins to Gibby's 16. Meanwhile, Jenkins was cobbling together his streak of six straight 20-win seasons.

Gibson tailed off his last 5 seasons ('71-'75), going 61-57, just as Carlton was coming into his own. I would have agree that Gibson and his stuff were overrated. The WS is baseball's greatest spotlight. It made Gibson. Too bad it never shined on Jenkins.

I guess to answer my own question, I would have liked to have consulted the 1976 edition of The Sports Encyclopedia: Baseball* (not to be confused with the Macmillan encyclopedia) to find out where Gibby ranked at his retirement in various stats. He was probably overrated even then.

*Unfortunately my local library weeded out its copy of TSE: Baseball.

Sorry if I raised any hackles.

John