Most dominant seasons?

[etothep]

Just curious as to what you guys' opinions are on this.

What would you guys say is the single most dominant season by a pitcher in the modern era?

How about by a hitter?

[DarthJaker]

Batter id say Roger Maris 1961

[justanewguy]

The first thing that comes to mind is Bob Gibson, 1968. A 1.12 ERA, 258 ERA+, 0.853 WHIP, 268 K to 62 BB, and 28 CG with an UNREAL 13 shutouts. This earned him a Cy Young and MVP both, of course.

I hate to say this, but for a hitter, I can't deny Barry Bonds in 2004. He was intentionally walked 120 times. Most hitters don't even walk UNINTENTIONALLY that many times, or anywhere close. That speaks to his dominance more than anything. So dominant that his opponents gave up when he came to the plate. He struck out ONLY 41 times against 232 walks. Sorry, but steroids alone aren't doing that. He got on base at an unheard of .609. Add in an .812 slugging percentage and 45 HR in 373 AB, and you've got, in my opinion, the most insane season a hitter has ever had.

I'd love to see that Bonds face that Gibson...

[RickD]

Ron Guidry 1978!
Sparky Lyle 1977!
Babe Ruth pick a season!

[twinsGM]

Hate to say it, but Bonds 2001. Without the asterick, probably Maris '61.

[metsguy234]

Bonds 2001 or 2004

Hmm, a few pitchers come to mind: McClain, Gibson, Clemens, Gooden, Seaver, Ryan, Maddux, Pedro, Eckersley, Koufax, just pick a season

[HoustonGM]

How was Maris in 1961 dominating? If he hit 59 home runs that season, how many mentions would Maris get when this question comes up? He wasn't even the best player on his own team that season.

For a pitcher, Bob Gibson's 1968 certainly was fantastic. I'd be more inclined to take Pedro Martinez in 1999 or 2000 (take your pick), although Gibson was more valuable due to the innings total. Greg Maddux 1994/1995 deserves mention too.

For hitters, Babe Ruth 1920...outhomering every single team but one is pretty dominating. Barry Bonds 2001-2004, as well. Only somebody completely blinded by their biases against the man would deny how dominating those seasons were. Ted Williams .406 season was pretty amazing too. My jaw still drops every time I see that he didn't get the MVP award that season.

[justanewguy]

For a pitcher, Bob Gibson's 1968 certainly was fantastic. I'd be more inclined to take Pedro Martinez in 1999 or 2000 (take your pick), although Gibson was more valuable due to the innings total. Greg Maddux 1994/1995 deserves mention too.

2000 Pedro posted the craziest numbers of any pitcher ever, probably. But you're right, those 304 innings and 28 CGs put Gibson over the top.

Those Maddux seasons were incredible too. He refused to walk you, you probably weren't going to have any luck in picking up a hit against him, and if you somehow found yourself on first, sorry, but there's not a chance in hell you were going to score.

For hitters, Babe Ruth 1920...outhomering every single team but one is pretty dominating. Barry Bonds 2001-2004, as well. Only somebody completely blinded by their biases against the man would deny how dominating those seasons were. Ted Williams .406 season was pretty amazing too. My jaw still drops every time I see that he didn't get the MVP award that season.

I agree about the Ruth and Williams seasons. But the 120 IBB is what does it for me with Bonds. Making grown men and professional athletes simply give up... no athlete in American professional sports has ever done that.

[DarthJaker]

How was Maris in 1961 dominating? If he hit 59 home runs that season, how many mentions would Maris get when this question comes up? He wasn't even the best player on his own team that season.

For a pitcher, Bob Gibson's 1968 certainly was fantastic. I'd be more inclined to take Pedro Martinez in 1999 or 2000 (take your pick), although Gibson was more valuable due to the innings total. Greg Maddux 1994/1995 deserves mention too.

For hitters, Babe Ruth 1920...outhomering every single team but one is pretty dominating. Barry Bonds 2001-2004, as well. Only somebody completely blinded by their biases against the man would deny how dominating those seasons were. Ted Williams .406 season was pretty amazing too. My jaw still drops every time I see that he didn't get the MVP award that season.

61

[HoustonGM]

61

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

2000 Pedro posted the craziest numbers of any pitcher ever, probably. But you're right, those 304 innings and 28 CGs put Gibson over the top. I also love watching footage of him on the mound. He had a beautiful delivery.

Do all those extra innings that Pedro didn't have really make up for the difference in eras though? Pedro had two of the most dominating seasons in the history of the game at the height of the Steroid Era, that really has to be considered. I think the extra innings probably balance out with the extra hundred or so IP, but its close either way. In my objectivity, I'd go Pedro .

Sandy Koufax was damn good, obviously , as well.

A-Rod and Pujols and Griffey Jr. were all dominant in their recent era's.

Historically, Musial in '48 was damn good, Williams' .406 as mentioned above, Nap Lajoie in 1901, Mays in '54 or '55 all deserve mention.

[HoustonGM]

Do all those extra innings that Pedro didn't have really make up for the difference in eras though? Pedro had two of the most dominating seasons in the history of the game at the height of the Steroid Era, that really has to be considered. I think the extra innings probably balance out with the extra hundred or so IP, but its close either way. In my objectivity, I'd go Pedro .

Speaking purely in terms of "level of domination", I'd agree it's Pedro. When speaking in terms of overall value, it's Gibson.

[ohms_law]

I agree about the Ruth and Williams seasons. But the 120 IBB is what does it for me with Bonds. Making grown men and professional athletes simply give up... no athlete in American professional sports has ever done that.

In the modern era as well. Yea, that only goes so far, but...
*shrug*

[justanewguy]

Do all those extra innings that Pedro didn't have really make up for the difference in eras though? Pedro had two of the most dominating seasons in the history of the game at the height of the Steroid Era, that really has to be considered. I think the extra innings probably balance out with the extra hundred or so IP, but its close either way. In my objectivity, I'd go Pedro

Speaking purely in terms of "level of domination", I'd agree it's Pedro. When speaking in terms of overall value, it's Gibson.

First off, I personally think the ability to dominate for an entire GAME does indeed speak to the level of domination.

Second, I think when comparing eras, you have to be careful not to short the guy whose numbers are dimmed more with adjustments. An ERA difference, comparative to league average, or adjusted, is not necessarily a LINEAR function. What ERA would Bob Gibson have needed to "match" Pedro's? 0.50? Pedro stood out from the league more, but there's only so low an ERA can go.

It's almost inevitable that at least 1 run will be scored in a game, so when ERAs approach 1.00, some extra consideration has to be taken.

It's not simply linear.

[ohms_law]

61

How was Maris in 1961 dominating? If he hit 59 home runs that season, how many mentions would Maris get when this question comes up? He wasn't even the best player on his own team that season.

Reading comprehension...