Filling the Saberhagen gaps (Volume 3)
The up-and-down careers of hitters have had three turns at “Filling the Mickey Vernon Gaps” at-bats, but the same phenomenon as viewed from the pitcher’s mound has had only two. So it’s the hurlers’ turn again.
For the structure of this exercise, see the References and Resources section below. All adjusted stat lines appear in blue, all actuals are in black.
Swingmen par excellence
Here are a couple of tall righthanders who had a lot more than that in common. Both were primarily fastball pitchers, but neither accumulated many strikeouts. Both were control artists who were sometimes prone to the gopher ball. Both showed great promise as young starters, then found themselves slotted for many years in the swingman role for strong contending teams, before enjoying late-career returns to top-starter prominence.
The swingman, rarely deployed in the modern era, was for many decades the unsung yeoman of pitching staffs, in the starting rotation for stretches here and there as required by circumstances, otherwise taking long relief stints and spot starts. Few of the many who have performed the task were as good at it as these two.
Gaylord’s older brother wasn’t a great pitcher, but he was a very good one. Nevertheless, after a very impressive first two seasons, he sharply regressed. At age 24, he was one of the top starters in the league, but by 28, he was hanging on as a mop-up middle reliever.
But Perry responded well to the relief assignment, and the following year he stepped forward as a first-rate swingman. The Twins made excellent use of Perry in that role through his age-32 season. In 1969, rookie manager Billy Martin continued to deploy Perry in his accustomed manner until late May, and then decided to leave the 33-year-old in the regular rotation. Perry performed wonderfully, producing a surprise 20-win season, and the following year he led the majors in wins and won the Cy Young Award.
Our revised version of Perry’s career avoids the early-60s funk, and working primarily as a starter throughout, he delivers a glittering 265-176 career.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1959 23 12 10 44 13 8 153 122 10 55 79 2.65 139 1960 24 18 10 41 36 10 261 257 35 91 120 3.62 104 1961 25 15 12 39 36 9 249 251 33 90 110 3.94 100 1962 26 15 11 38 32 9 228 235 28 75 97 3.84 101 1963 27 16 8 42 32 9 234 227 23 72 115 3.37 108 1964 28 15 6 43 24 7 196 187 20 60 109 3.24 111 1965 29 18 10 39 32 9 236 219 24 65 125 3.15 113 1966 30 18 10 38 34 10 241 221 24 67 137 3.12 116 1967 31 14 7 42 24 8 196 184 13 58 124 2.89 120 1968 32 16 6 41 30 9 221 201 15 53 125 2.71 115 1969 33 20 6 46 36 12 262 244 18 66 153 2.82 130 1970 34 24 12 40 40 13 279 258 20 57 168 3.04 122 1971 35 17 17 40 39 8 270 263 39 102 126 4.23 84 1972 36 13 16 35 35 5 218 191 14 60 85 3.35 96 1973 37 14 13 35 34 7 203 225 22 55 66 4.03 101 1974 38 17 12 36 36 8 252 242 11 64 71 2.96 122 1975 39 4 10 23 17 2 105 107 15 44 44 5.38 69 Career 265 176 662 529 142 3804 3633 364 1133 1854 3.39 108
This hard thrower emerged during World War II as Cleveland’s ace, outperforming Allie Reynolds. But Gromek had an off year in 1946, and in the post-war period he wasn’t again able to elbow his way to the head of the immensely talented Indians’ staff. Not being as good as Feller, Lemon, Wynn and Garcia is hardly a disgrace, though, and Gromek performed just fine in the supporting role.
It appeared that’s all he would ever be, until at age 33 he was traded to Detroit. The Tigers were a little short in the pitching department, and gave Gromek a shot as a full-time starter. He rewarded them with a terrific performance at age 34, gaining 18 of the team’s 68 wins, and finishing fifth in the league in innings, ERA and ERA+. Here’s our version at what kind of a career Gromek might have displayed had he more consistently been prominently deployed.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1941 21 1 1 9 2 1 23 25 0 11 19 4.24 93 1942 22 2 0 14 0 0 44 46 2 23 14 3.65 94 1943 23 0 0 3 0 0 4 6 0 0 4 9.00 34 1944 24 10 9 35 21 12 204 160 5 70 115 2.56 128 1945 25 19 9 33 30 21 251 229 6 66 101 2.55 128 1946 26 13 19 42 33 13 254 251 22 73 115 3.63 91 1947 27 11 9 42 19 8 185 177 11 62 79 3.33 104 1948 28 13 5 45 15 8 180 183 12 64 70 3.64 112 1949 29 12 10 40 24 11 192 203 11 66 62 3.65 109 1950 30 17 13 45 26 11 214 210 23 59 84 3.81 114 1951 31 14 10 41 21 11 208 196 17 52 81 2.85 133 1952 32 14 13 43 26 10 224 215 26 51 106 3.56 94 1953 33 14 15 38 31 13 238 255 29 62 108 3.99 101 1954 34 18 16 36 32 17 253 236 26 57 102 2.74 134 1955 35 13 10 28 25 8 181 183 26 37 73 3.98 97 1956 36 8 6 40 13 4 141 142 25 47 64 4.28 96 1957 37 0 1 15 1 0 24 32 3 13 11 6.08 63 Career 178 146 551 318 149 2820 2748 243 814 1209 3.43 107
Solid Senior Circuit southpaws
After achieving Whiz Kid stardom, Simmons slowly faded as the decade of the 1950s unfolded. By 1959 he and his sore arm spent almost the entire season on the sidelines, and the following spring Simmons showed no signs of coming around. The Phillies, drawing the not unreasonable conclusion that he was washed up, released Simmons.
The Cardinals took a flyer on him, and for whatever reason, in St. Louis Simmons immediately blossomed anew. He never again threw as hard as he had when young, but he perfected his control, and mixing a curve and change into the mix, employing a herky-jerky crossfire delivery, Simmons defined the term “crafty lefthander” into the mid-1960s. The whole time, the Phillies had to be thinking, “Thanks a lot, pal.”
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1947 18 1 0 1 1 1 9 5 0 6 9 1.00 403 1948 19 7 13 31 23 7 170 169 8 108 86 4.87 81 1949 20 4 10 38 14 2 131 133 7 55 83 4.59 86 1950 21 17 8 31 27 11 215 178 19 88 146 3.40 120 1952 23 14 8 28 28 15 201 170 11 70 141 2.82 130 1953 24 16 13 32 30 19 238 211 17 82 138 3.21 131 1954 25 14 15 34 33 21 253 226 14 98 125 2.81 143 1955 26 13 8 28 25 7 172 163 17 69 102 3.97 100 1956 27 15 9 31 28 15 200 178 14 68 115 3.09 121 1957 28 14 12 32 30 14 225 213 14 66 115 3.32 114 1958 29 11 15 32 30 14 211 211 13 69 102 3.44 115 1959 30 4 7 18 14 4 89 106 7 20 41 4.39 93 1960 31 10 8 30 24 6 184 188 13 44 80 3.28 125 1961 32 12 10 31 31 9 214 206 14 56 113 2.77 158 1962 33 14 10 33 28 11 199 200 21 41 89 3.46 123 1963 34 15 9 32 32 11 233 209 13 48 127 2.48 143 1964 35 18 9 34 34 12 244 233 24 49 104 3.43 111 1965 36 9 15 34 32 5 203 229 19 54 96 4.08 95 1966 37 5 8 29 15 4 111 114 10 35 38 4.23 86 1967 38 5 8 31 18 4 117 144 11 32 44 4.24 81 Career 216 193 588 495 190 3618 3486 264 1157 1893 3.44 114
This lefty forged not one but two epic comebacks in his long career. First was the long, hard bush-league road back to the majors following his humiliating adolescent Cincinnati debut. Nuxhall gave up at one point, spending an entire season on the Voluntarily Retired List. Then, when he decided to give it another shot, over the following two seasons Nuxhall surrendered 258 walks in 198 innings in three separate minor leagues. Still the young southpaw persisted, weathering another campaign in which he lost 22 games in the Texas League, but finally at age 23 he made it back to the big leagues with the Reds, and this time he was ready.
Within a few years Nuxhall was the ace of the Cincinnati staff. But the stardom that now seemed within his grasp eluded Nuxhall. He receded into lesser roles, and finally struggled to a 1-8 record at age 31, and found himself traded to the Kansas City A’s. Nuxhall struggled there too, and the following December was released by the A’s.
If that wasn’t the essence of the end-of-the-major-league-career rope, this was: Over the next six months, two more organizations signed Nuxhall, but both quickly released him. In what had to be seen as his truly last chance, the Reds returned Nuxhall’s call, and all of a sudden things clicked for him. In his mid-30s, Nuxhall pitched the best baseball of his career, endearing himself to Cincinnati fans, and setting himself up for the long broadcasting career in which he became a franchise institution.
Our version of Nuxhall strolls across a smooth bridge between his early and late big league phases, and wins 167 games.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1944 15 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 5 0 67.50 5 1952 23 1 4 37 5 2 92 83 4 42 52 3.22 117 1953 24 9 11 30 17 5 142 136 13 69 52 4.32 101 1954 25 12 5 35 14 5 167 188 11 59 85 3.89 108 1955 26 17 12 50 33 14 257 240 25 78 98 3.47 122 1956 27 15 12 47 33 12 229 218 22 83 109 3.58 112 1957 28 14 11 45 31 10 216 216 25 66 99 3.99 103 1958 29 15 12 43 30 10 216 205 20 71 105 3.60 115 1959 30 14 10 38 28 11 202 196 16 51 114 3.33 122 1960 31 8 8 37 18 7 165 162 11 33 121 3.23 119 1961 32 10 8 36 21 8 173 165 13 52 125 3.62 113 1962 33 13 4 35 24 8 180 163 11 50 144 2.78 144 1963 34 15 8 35 29 14 217 194 14 39 169 2.61 129 1964 35 9 8 32 22 7 155 146 19 51 111 4.07 89 1965 36 11 4 32 16 5 149 142 18 31 117 3.45 109 1966 37 6 8 35 16 2 130 136 14 42 71 4.50 87 Career 167 124 566 334 119 2689 2591 235 820 1570 3.56 112
Lively American League lefties
Barber’s fastball was exceptional, a wicked high-velocity sinker. At his best, he was as tough to hit as any pitcher. But Barber always struggled with his control, and intermittently he struggled with arm trouble as well. He bounced between major stardom and ragged mediocrity, and the sore-armed mediocrity eventually won out. As portrayed by Jim Bouton in Ball Four, Barber in 1969 was a rather pathetic character, doggedly expecting to soon regain stellar performance while soothing his elbow in the diathermy machine.
This version of Barber grapples with the arm health, but generally sustains his effectiveness.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1960 22 10 7 36 27 6 182 148 10 113 112 3.22 118 1961 23 18 12 37 34 14 248 194 13 130 150 3.33 117 1962 24 16 10 35 30 10 216 197 11 94 140 3.13 121 1963 25 20 13 39 36 11 259 253 12 92 180 2.75 128 1964 26 15 12 37 31 7 212 191 14 85 143 3.00 120 1965 27 15 10 37 32 7 221 177 16 81 130 2.69 128 1966 28 10 5 25 22 5 133 104 6 49 91 2.30 145 1967 29 14 15 35 33 9 210 172 11 123 134 3.64 87 1968 30 13 9 30 28 7 194 190 10 78 134 2.91 99 1969 31 10 9 31 24 4 154 138 13 65 100 3.28 111 1970 32 5 4 18 12 3 77 66 5 30 53 2.81 155 1971 33 5 3 30 11 2 102 110 7 45 64 3.81 97 1972 34 4 4 39 3 0 74 55 5 36 40 2.81 110 1973 35 3 2 50 1 0 89 90 5 32 58 3.53 101 1974 36 0 1 13 0 0 14 13 0 12 13 5.27 72 Career 156 115 490 324 84 2383 2098 137 1064 1539 3.09 114
Few career progressions were quite as unpredictable as that of Peters.
In 1963, he was sensational, going 19-8 and leading the league in ERA and ERA+, waltzing away with the American League Rookie of the Year Award. But Peters achieved this as a 26-year-old rookie, after having spent four full seasons at the Triple-A level, during which he had been blandly so-so, going 13-11, 12-9, 13-10 and 8-10, with ERAs of 3.56, 4.34, 3.59 and 3.69. Nobody, least of all the White Sox, saw the dazzling 1963 performance coming.
He followed it up with another brilliant year in 1964, but in the seasons following Peters ping-ponged between league-elite performance and disasters such as 1968, in which he went 4-13 with an 81 ERA+.
Here instead we see a Peters with a more normal ascent and descent, and it’s a darn fine career altogether.
Peters was one of the best hitting pitchers of his era, delivering doubles, triples and home runs aplenty, and being deployed as a pinch-hitter nearly 100 times.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1959 22 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 2 1 0.00 inf 1960 23 1 1 7 1 0 16 17 2 7 13 4.16 91 1961 24 1 4 13 8 2 65 59 2 22 43 3.44 113 1962 25 13 10 32 27 8 184 185 16 67 128 4.12 95 1963 26 19 8 41 30 13 243 192 9 68 189 2.33 151 1964 27 20 8 37 36 11 274 217 20 104 205 2.50 138 1965 28 14 10 33 31 8 218 185 17 71 143 2.64 120 1966 29 12 10 30 27 11 205 156 11 45 129 1.98 160 1967 30 16 11 38 36 11 260 187 15 91 215 2.28 136 1968 31 10 12 35 31 9 211 167 11 76 163 2.85 107 1969 32 12 13 35 32 9 216 198 16 78 155 3.59 108 1970 33 16 11 34 34 10 222 221 20 83 155 4.06 98 1971 34 14 11 34 32 9 214 241 25 70 100 4.37 85 1972 35 3 3 33 4 0 85 91 10 38 67 4.32 75 Career 150 111 404 328 100 2413 2117 173 821 1705 3.09 112
Newk
Speaking of your good-hitting pitchers: Newcombe’s line in 1955, over 117 at-bats, was nine doubles, one triple, seven homers and a batting average of .359. His OPS+ was 165 that year, which, had he qualified among the league leaders, would have placed Newcombe fourth, close behind Willie Mays, Eddie Mathews and Duke Snider, and ahead of Stan Musial and Roy Campanella.
Newcombe isn’t in the Hall of Fame, and he shouldn’t be. But there’s a plausible scenario in which Newcombe might have been deserving: His major league career was truncated by a year or two on the front end thanks to Jim Crow, he lost two more prime seasons to his Korean War draft board, and he deteriorated rapidly in his early 30s, likely as a result of excessive alcohol consumption.
The Newcombe we see here doesn’t arrive any sooner or last any longer than the real one, but he dodges the draft and generally sustains his strongest level of performance. His career win-loss record of 205-100, yielding a percentage of .672, would be among the best of all time. In this case he’d likely draw serious Hall of Fame support, and might have won the vote.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1949 23 17 8 38 31 19 244 223 17 73 149 3.17 130 1950 24 19 11 40 35 20 267 258 22 75 130 3.70 111 1951 25 20 9 40 36 18 272 235 19 91 164 3.28 120 1952 26 19 7 36 31 18 239 223 26 56 146 3.18 115 1953 27 23 9 39 36 19 268 239 28 61 135 3.38 125 1954 28 13 10 32 30 12 205 197 24 58 112 3.64 112 1955 29 20 5 34 31 17 234 222 35 38 143 3.20 128 1956 30 27 7 38 36 18 268 219 33 46 139 3.06 130 1957 31 15 8 31 29 15 218 212 29 33 111 3.27 127 1958 32 13 10 35 26 9 191 197 27 35 90 3.87 107 1959 33 13 8 30 29 17 222 216 25 27 100 3.16 129 1960 34 6 9 36 17 1 137 160 18 22 63 4.48 85 Career 205 100 429 367 183 2765 2601 303 613 1482 3.40 118
38 pitches
Love him or hate him, Schilling has been among the most singular personalities of his era, as well as being among the best players.
But he’s been extremely inconsistent, and in addition to that his career has had an odd shape: the conversion from full-time reliever to starter in his mid-20s, the mushrooming strikeout rate in his late 20s, and the peak in his mid-30s. Though he’s never won a Cy Young Award, it’s pretty clear that at his best, Schilling was a Hall of Fame-caliber performer. The question remains whether the entire uneven career is Hall of Fame-worthy. My suspicion is that he will win the vote, because rightly or wrongly he’ll get significant Bloody Sock bonus points.
This version, with the valleys largely filled in, would cruise to Cooperstown.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1988 21 0 3 4 4 0 15 22 3 10 4 9.82 40 1989 22 1 2 23 1 0 32 29 3 13 22 3.55 107 1990 23 3 4 37 5 2 77 66 4 27 55 3.06 124 1991 24 9 8 49 13 5 151 122 7 49 109 2.71 129 1992 25 14 11 42 26 10 226 165 11 59 147 2.35 150 1993 26 16 7 34 34 7 235 234 23 57 186 4.02 100 1994 27 9 8 24 24 4 159 161 17 43 122 4.14 104 1995 28 12 8 26 26 4 185 152 19 42 217 3.16 136 1996 29 14 12 32 32 10 235 198 21 56 267 3.13 140 1997 30 17 11 35 35 7 254 208 25 58 319 2.97 143 1998 31 15 14 35 35 15 269 236 23 61 300 3.25 134 1999 32 18 8 31 31 7 230 201 29 47 255 3.12 148 2000 33 16 11 33 33 9 246 219 26 46 261 3.40 138 2001 34 22 6 35 35 6 257 237 37 39 293 2.98 154 2002 35 23 7 36 35 5 259 218 29 33 316 3.23 136 2003 36 17 7 31 30 4 218 189 23 33 238 3.17 148 2004 37 21 6 32 32 3 227 206 23 35 203 3.26 150 2005 38 15 7 32 25 1 175 182 21 28 158 3.97 111 2006 39 15 7 31 31 0 204 220 28 28 183 3.97 116 Career 256 147 601 487 99 3654 3265 371 765 3654 3.30 132
Ol’ Buck
His career was completely unbelievable from about seven different angles, his perplexing inconsistency being just one of them. Suffice to say that if someone invented the story of Bobo Newsom, we would laugh it away as totally implausible.
Here we have Bobo with a more normal career arc, and it’s still hard to believe. Something worth wondering about is whether this version of Newsom would have made the Hall of Fame. The career line of 285-264, with a 114 ERA+ in 4,859 innings, is eerily similar to that of Bert Blyleven: 287-250, 118 ERA+, 4,970 innings.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1929 21 0 3 3 2 0 9 15 0 5 6 10.61 44 1930 22 0 0 2 0 0 3 2 0 2 1 0.00 inf 1931 23 4 6 13 9 4 69 69 4 39 36 4.18 111 1932 24 9 13 36 20 11 168 178 9 82 74 4.26 114 1933 25 13 12 42 30 16 224 225 12 125 129 4.56 102 1934 26 16 20 47 32 15 262 259 15 149 135 4.01 124 1935 27 15 18 43 34 19 267 276 13 137 134 4.23 104 1936 28 17 15 43 38 24 286 294 13 146 156 4.32 111 1937 29 18 14 42 38 24 296 292 20 158 185 4.46 105 1938 30 20 16 44 40 31 330 334 30 192 226 5.08 98 1939 31 20 11 41 37 24 292 272 19 126 192 3.58 137 1940 32 21 5 36 34 20 264 235 19 100 164 2.83 169 1941 33 17 13 39 35 19 268 254 16 107 168 3.45 132 1942 34 17 13 38 35 20 267 254 14 104 158 3.47 104 1943 35 16 11 37 31 15 249 233 14 98 143 3.23 102 1944 36 13 15 37 33 18 265 243 11 82 142 2.82 124 1945 37 12 16 36 33 17 253 241 10 92 128 3.01 114 1946 38 14 13 34 31 17 237 224 7 90 114 2.93 116 1947 39 11 11 31 28 7 199 208 10 67 82 3.34 108 1948 40 7 11 41 25 7 176 193 7 71 74 3.43 115 1949 41 8 11 36 23 9 160 167 9 83 69 3.96 107 1950 42 6 9 42 11 2 125 133 8 69 52 4.26 105 1951 43 5 6 24 11 3 93 97 5 39 38 3.69 110 1952 44 4 4 24 5 1 60 54 4 32 27 3.88 100 1953 45 2 1 17 2 1 39 44 3 24 16 4.89 87 Career 285 264 828 617 323 4859 4796 272 2218 2648 3.78 114
Lefty
He was obviously one of the greatest pitchers of all time, but it isn’t much of a stretch to say that Carlton might have had a distinctly better career, because he wasn’t consistent at all. Of course, in his “down” years Carlton was a very good pitcher, instead of a great one. In this regard his career has something in common with that of Roger Clemens.
Here we smooth things out a bit, and the result is a career amazingly similar to that of Warren Spahn, who was 363-245 in 5,244 innings. The machinelike production of 20-win seasons is also quite Spahnian.
Which might serve to remind us just how stunningly great Spahn was.
Year Age W L G GS CG IP H HR BB SO ERA ERA+ 1965 20 0 0 15 2 0 25 27 3 8 21 2.52 153 1966 21 3 3 9 9 2 52 56 2 18 25 3.12 116 1967 22 14 9 30 28 11 193 173 10 62 168 2.98 110 1968 23 13 11 34 33 10 232 214 11 61 162 2.99 97 1969 24 17 11 31 31 12 236 185 15 93 210 2.17 164 1970 25 14 15 33 32 13 245 212 20 101 202 2.98 139 1971 26 24 10 39 39 24 310 266 20 93 241 2.67 135 1972 27 27 10 41 41 30 346 257 17 87 310 1.97 182 1973 28 20 15 41 41 24 320 275 23 100 267 2.86 134 1974 29 22 12 40 40 24 319 253 19 112 275 2.54 148 1975 30 19 12 37 37 16 269 223 25 97 195 3.08 122 1976 31 22 9 36 36 15 268 227 22 81 197 2.87 123 1977 32 23 10 36 36 17 283 229 25 89 198 2.64 151 1978 33 20 12 35 35 15 265 229 28 76 180 2.73 131 1979 34 21 10 37 37 13 278 223 20 90 250 2.92 132 1980 35 24 9 38 38 13 304 243 15 90 286 2.34 162 1981 36 13 4 24 24 10 190 152 9 62 179 2.42 150 1982 37 23 11 38 38 19 296 253 17 86 286 3.10 119 1983 38 15 16 37 37 8 284 277 20 84 275 3.11 115 1984 39 13 7 33 33 1 229 214 14 79 163 3.58 101 1985 40 1 8 16 16 0 92 84 6 53 48 3.33 111 1986 41 9 14 32 32 0 176 196 25 86 120 5.10 78 1987 42 6 14 32 21 3 152 165 24 86 91 5.74 80 1988 43 0 1 4 1 0 10 20 5 5 5 16.76 24 Career 361 231 746 715 278 5373 4652 394 1797 4352 2.96 125
References & Resources
Everyone’s actual career (especially pitchers) includes a certain degree of year-to-year variation, and I wanted these smoothed-out versions to reflect some of that. So instead of using strict formality, I allowed myself to be a little looser, and apply a bit of artistic license. However, I did require myself to stick to some basic rules:
– I couldn’t just make stuff up; all adjusted stats have to start with the particular pitcher’s actual stat lines.
– In most cases, the stats from the season being adjusted were included (even if in a minor weighting) in the adjusted line, to give the adjusted line some of the flavor of that actual season’s performance.
– No pitcher’s career can start earlier than it did, or end later than it did.
– No adjusted season can surpass the pitcher’s actual peak season(s); the adjusted seasons act as a bridge to and from peaks, not a new peak.
I’ve endeavored to create a new version of each pitcher’s career that is idealized, but in a plausible manner. The intended effect is to enhance the actual career while not overwhelming it, to create an easily recognizable version of the actual career that is, to a reasonable degree, the best it might have been.
Feel free to e-mail me with any questions about the precise formulae used for any particular pitcher.