Single Greatest W.S. Performance By A Player

[Max Power]

.........I'm thinking Barry in 2002.

You?

I understand what he's done over 6 games so far... and the accumulation of results he's produced have just been astronomical..

But in 1991, in game 7, Jack Morris produced what I consider the greatest performance I've ever seen in the World Seires.

But I'm not that old.

[VNV Nation]

I frankly don't see how Barry has dominated the World Series. He's been the best player, by a mile, but he hasn't been the decisive force in the Series.

The greatest WS performance would almost have to be a pitcher. Mickey Lolich in '68, going 3-0, beating Gibson in Game 7; Bob Gibson in '67, Jack Morris in '91 (1.17 ERA, 10-inning shutout in Game 7) or Mathewson in '05 (three shutouts in five-game Series) come to mind.

[JamesI]

Unless the Angels pitch to Bonds tomorrow, he isn't going to be the single greatest ever. For world series I've watched, I'll take Jack Morris in 1991. Looking back at other series, Mathewson seems hard to ignore.

[moose]

for position players, i'll take gehrig in 1928 [followed closely by the Babe in that same series]

[chrisfostermusi]

Mathewson 05 gets my vote... hard to top perfection.


My favorite world series recap though is 1929 game one Howard Ehmke beating the Cubs and setting a World Series record with 12 strikeouts. Posting his last victory ever. Great story.

[Max Power]

Through 6 games so far, Barry has been to the plate 26 times and reached base 19 times. Nineteen out of twenty-six. Plus, a few of the measly seven times he has been retired, he hit rockets right at someone. He has 4 HR and 2 doubles in six games. All but one of his hits have been for extra bases.

His OPS is the series so far is 2.231. Yes, 2.231.

He should only add to those numbers in game seven.

Lolich, Bob Gibson, Jack Morris, and Mathewson did indeed have great series. But, they only won the games that they appeared in, Bonds has had an impact in every game that he has played - and he has played all of them.

It's not about wins and losses - - - the question is "Greatest Performance." And, Bonds has to be considered, IMHO.

[pathogan]

...then Gibson in 67,Lolich in 68,[gibson was more dominant than lolich in the series] Orel in 88 ,certainly JackMorris in 1991,.I try not to bend to my general dislike of bonds, but i cant see how he has dominated this series.if he pulls a reggie tonight then ok...

[spitball]

Max, I'm with you on this one. Bonds looms every inning, every at bat. Scioscia is running through every scenario there is trying to take the sting out of any of Bonds' at bats.
Every out is crucial because if you don't get them it puts you closer to Bonds faster.
Kent has finally started to take advantage of the pitchers giving in to him.
It's Bonds......Then Morris in '91.

[chrisfostermusi]

..........................G ERA W-L SV CG IP H ER BB SO
Christy Mathewson 3 0.00 3-0 0 3 27.0 14 0 1 18



I don't know Steve, you make a good point for Barry but I am with Pat, if he has a Reggie night then I might jump ship.

[tortured angel]

Originally posted by spitball
Max, I'm with you on this one. Bonds looms every inning, every at bat.

I agree. All I could think of in the ninth last night was don't let Bonds get to bat. There's still a few tunnels out there he hasn't hit one into yet.

[VNV Nation]

He looms every inning, but the Angels have done a good job of minimizing his damage. His two misplays in the eighth inning had more impact than any of his hits.

I'd take Molitor in '93 over Bonds.

[Max Power]

Originally posted by VNV Nation
I'd take Molitor in '93 over Bonds.

Compare Molly's OPS that series with Bonds' this year. No contest. Bonds.

[VNV Nation]

Um yeah and so what. Molitor scored more runs, drove in more runs, had more total bases, and even played better defense at a position he hadn't played in four years.

[Max Power]

Originally posted by VNV Nation
Um yeah and so what. Molitor scored more runs, drove in more runs

That means those around him had better series than the guys around Bonds. Doesn't mean Molitor was more productive than Bonds.