Dwight Gooden

[timconnelly]

It seems incredibly strange for me to be writing about Doc Gooden in terms of history. It blows my mind that we are further away from the retirement of Mickey Mantle today than we were from the retirement of Lou Gehrig when I saw my first big league game in 1964. Am I getting old or something?

I remember first hearing about Gooden. He was supposed to have it all: Great control, great stuff, and he was a great person. It all comes together like that once every couple of generations. He proved he was the real deal with his 24-4 1.53 season at the age of 20!! His 1985 season paled any of the great seasons of Tom Seaver. Gooden was not just headed for Cooperstown; it appeared they might have to create a special Dwight Gooden room for him there.

My questions is what went wrong? Didn't they change the strike zone in 1986? Did that hurt him more than anybody else, with the batters being able to lay off the high fastball?

Did he have arm problems? Did his 20 year old arm just have a kind of zip that was never there again? Was it too much too soon? WHAT HAPPENED???

If 1985 had never happened, Gooden would have had quite a career. But 1985 throws a shadow over his whole career and makes you think of what could have been.

[Skipper Steve]

Gooden had a fine year in 1986. No one could have repeated the year he had in 1985.

Most pitchers who had a similar type season as Gooden's 1986, had a slide off that the next. Still Gooden was one of the best pitchers in the game in 1986.

Here's a Bill James trick: Reverse Gooden's career - - instead of having his stats read 1984 to 2000, read them from 2000 back to 1984 (meaning have his last 5 years be 88-87-86-85-84).

Makes him look like Koufax, no?

One of the unfair things about a baseball career -- start out weak and get better, you're a star. Start out strong and get weaker, you're a has been. Doesn't seem fair.

[BuzzBuzzard]

Well, when you put a lot of white powder up your nose you tend not to get too much sympathy. Gooden had the potential to be one of the greatest of all-time, but he F'ed up. I don't care which way you want to read the stats, being fair to Doc is not something he deserves, IMO.

I do like Doc as a person. He made some bad mistakes and I do feel sad for him. However, I can't let him off the hook.

[Skipper Steve]

Agreed - the drug problem will cost him a few points in the eyes of the general public. But, here's a thought - - -

Many believe that drug and booze addictions are a genetic thing - - at least being prone to them is - - and, therefore it's an illness.

So, to some, Gooden's nose is the same as Puckett's eye.

I'm just saying some may see it this way - - - don't flame me Kirby fans.

[BuzzBuzzard]

Originally posted by Skipper Steve
Many believe that drug and booze addictions are a genetic thing - - at least being prone to them is - - and, therefore it's an illness.

Fair point.

[Duque]

Too many pitches at too young an age. But, I suppose it's a Catch-22. The better you are, the more innings your manager wants you to throw, especially if you're in a pennant race.

Same thing goes for Saberhagen - if these guys had been handled like young pitchers today often are, they could've been long-time greats.

Nose candy has ruined many careers and it must be far greater than alcohol. Mickey Mantle ruined his liver by being a party boy who lived the fast life, yet he played about 18 seasons in pinstripes and is still considered one of the finest players and switch hitters out there.

Looking at Doc, I thought it was the reincarnation of Tom Terrific. CSmooth said that blind people came to shea to hear Tom pitch. I watched Doc, not to see a baseball game, but to see artistry on the mound. His delivery was like it was it was choreographed. Perhaps I was young but he certainly knew how to toss a ball.

There were lots of fans holding up those "K" signs one right after the other, since he was alternatively called "Doc Gooden" and "Dr. K". He was that good.

Interestingly, when he got caught for cocaine abuse, he was supposed to be an invited guest at some party for the retirement of Dr. J, Julius Erving. There was Dr. Ruth and a few other "Drs." but he had to cancel that obviously.

I'd read that Mets Manager Davey Johnson personally recruited him from the farm and he was definitely responsible for filling in a few seats over in Flushing, Queens.

He'd followed the unfortunate steps of his closest buddy, Straw in his coke battles. From being the toast of the town to being declined by the Mets after the DRays released him even though they were short of pitchers.

Very sad tale. When I'd first seen him, I figured the next Bob Gibson was making an entrance.

[Golden Bear]

I could add that after 1986, which was about the same time that drugs began to overrun Gooden's personal life, the Mets hierarchy decided the Gooden was giving up too many stolen bases (like it mattered). They tinkered with his delivery, shortening it. After that, his strikeout totals dropped -- his velocity was the same, but the movement on his fastball diminished significantly. He was never the same pitcher.

Since the drug problems occured at the same time as the changes that were made in his pitching motion, it's hard to tell which problem drove Doc's decline in performance. The drugs couldn't have possibly helped. But I thought messing with success was folly then, and I still do now -- they should have left his pitching motion alone. Bad coaching, and atypical of both Davey Johnson (the manager) and Mel Stottlemyre (the pitching coach).

[BuzzBuzzard]

That I agree with 100%.

I always thought that Doc was one of the better defensive pitchers. I'd always seen him keeping tabs on the 1B runner. I hadn't realized his pitching style was messed with.

Sometimes a change can be for the better. Gonzo (Luis Gonzalez) changed to a wider stance and his dingers went to 57, which even surpassed Thome, and he even beat Sammy in the AS HR derby.

On the subject of shorter deliveries, I'm wondering if the tinkering of the delivery of Orlando Hernandez is what has made him less than the marvel he used to be. He doesn't seem to kick as high w/RISP as much as when the bases are empty. I guess this is a defensive choice, what with speedy runners and all, but if it messes with a pitcher's overall effectiveness, would you consider this a good or bad thing? Open question to all.