Was 1985 Dwight Gooden the most dominant year ever by a pitcher?

[Howie115]

I know it was the high-mound era, but Bob Gibson's 1968 season still outstanding. Modern-era record 1.12 ERA, 258 ERA+, 1.77 FIP, 0.853 WHIP. Somehow he lost 9 games that season. (He was beat 1-0 five times.) I was surprised, though, that his K-rate wasn't all that spectacular. 268 Ks in 304.2 innings.

Still, you gotta be exceptional when the league makes a rule change largely because of the season you had.

 

[obxyankeefan]

I know it was the high-mound era, but Bob Gibson's 1968 season still outstanding. Modern-era record 1.12 ERA, 258 ERA+, 1.77 FIP, 0.853 WHIP. Somehow he lost 9 games that season. (He was beat 1-0 five times.) I was surprised, though, that his K-rate wasn't all that spectacular. 268 Ks in 304.2 innings.

Still, you gotta be exceptional when the league makes a rule change largely because of the season you had.

While Gibson's 1968 season was the best ever using the older stats it is one of the top reasons to use Sabermatric stats, and I do not like most Sabermatrics. Gibson's ERA of 1.12 is the post deadball record, but there were 8 pitchers with sub 2 ERAs that year and 51 pitchers with an ERA of 3 or lower.

 

[Howie115]

While Gibson's 1968 season was the best ever using the older stats it is one of the top reasons to use Sabermatric stats, and I do not like most Sabermatrics. Gibson's ERA of 1.12 is the post deadball record, but there were 8 pitchers with sub 2 ERAs that year and 51 pitchers with an ERA of 3 or lower.

Agreed, relative to the rest of the league, it is not nearly the best. The mean MLB batting average that season was something like .230. I just thought it was worth a mention.

 

[soxfan1468927]

While Gibson's 1968 season was the best ever using the older stats it is one of the top reasons to use Sabermatric stats, and I do not like most Sabermatrics. Gibson's ERA of 1.12 is the post deadball record, but there were 8 pitchers with sub 2 ERAs that year and 51 pitchers with an ERA of 3 or lower.

It may have been "post dead ball" but that 1968 season may as well have been another dead ball season. That season had a lower ERA than 1901, 1902, 1903, 1911, 1912, and 1913. All of which were considered part of the dead ball era.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Another way to look at it: The league National League average starter ERA in 1968 was 2.92. The average National League starter ERA from 1901-1918 was 2.83.

 

[obxyankeefan]

It may have been "post dead ball" but that 1968 season may as well have been another dead ball season. That season had a lower ERA than 1901, 1902, 1903, 1911, 1912, and 1913. All of which were considered part of the dead ball era.

basically what I was saying, with the number of pitchers that also had low ERAs.