Denny McLain and Dizzy Dean

[timconnelly]

I was looking at the year that McLain had in 1968 and the year that Dean had in 1934 and found some pretty interesting coincidences. And the similarities in their careers are almost spooky:

Dean was 30 and 7 plus 2 and 1 in the World Series for a combined 32 wins and 8 losses.
McLain was 31 and 6 plus 1 and 2 in the World Series for a combined 32 wins and 8 losses.

Neither led their league in ERA but both had ERA's where the league average was a time and a half higher.

Dean led in strike outs, McLain was second.

Both led the league in winning percentage.

Both were coming off seasons where they had lost a lot of games. Mclain lost 16 in 1967 and Diz lost 18 in 1933.

Both were 24 years old the year of their 30 win season.

McLain's Tigers played the Cards in the 68 WS and Dean's Cards played the Tigers in '34. Both went to 7 games with their respective teams winning both times.

And both were washed up within just a few seasons.

Craig Wright did an interesting study that showcased how many young pitchers who throw a LOT of innings wind up with arm trouble. Certainly, his study results are look good when you look at these two potentially great pitchers who won a combined 3 games after 30.

[NetShrine]

Probably why we'll never see another 30 game winner - - the risk - - coupled by the bigger rotations.

[BBapplepie]

Biggest difference between the two is the decade the performed
those numbers. The middle 60's with the high mound was pitcher
friendly to say the least, the 30's was just the opposite pole.
In 68' only 1 batter over .300, league batted .230 league era
was under 3. In the 30's there were bigger numbers, in
1934 for example league batted .279 and league era over 4.

[nyy26wc]

Originally posted by timconnelly
Craig Wright did an interesting study that showcased how many young pitchers who throw a LOT of innings wind up with arm trouble. Certainly, his study results are look good when you look at these two potentially great pitchers who won a combined 3 games after 30.

I've also done an interesting study on that topic. It's been a few years, so I'll have to see where that file is located. But, eventually, hopefully, I'll find it.

[timconnelly]

Biggest difference between the two is the decade the performed
those numbers. The middle 60's with the high mound was pitcher
friendly to say the least, the 30's was just the opposite pole.
In 68' only 1 batter over .300, league batted .230 league era
was under 3. In the 30's there were bigger numbers, in
1934 for example league batted .279 and league era over 4.

BBapplepie

I don't think there is any appreciable difference between winning 30 games in an era of light hitting and an era of tremendous slugging. You are facing another team using the same balls, playing in the same ball parks, using the same strike zones, and pooling players from the same places. McLain's season was actually more impressive than Dean's because he won all of his as a starter. Dizzy got a few (don't remember how many) in relief and at least one source thinks Dizzy should have been credited with 29. Of course, 29 or 30, that's a hell of a season.

Grove won 31 in 1931 and 28 in '30, Bucky Walters and Bob Feller won 27 in '39 and '40 while Koufax won 27 in '65 and Carlton won 27 in '72.

[BBapplepie]

Tim, of course what you are saying is correct, but what I'm trying
to explain is the mound height was in Denny favor in the way he
pitched and came off the ball with extra leverage which helped
most power pitcher in the middle and late 60's. If it wasn't for
that condition of the mound, in my opinion and I saw him through
out his career, that season would not had happen. I have seen
many Denny McLain type pitcher since, but none with that advance. I pitched many years and the feel of the mound plays
a big part in how and what type of pitcher you'll be in that park.

[timconnelly]

Thanks for that insight! The only time I've ever pitched was in little league and I don't remember having ANY awareness of the mound. I should probably fess up that I know a lot more about analyzing numbers than I do about the intricate aspects of inside baseball.