If there’s one thing sports fans/writers/analysts/general observers like to do, it’s to compare supremely talented up-and-comers to prior greats, labeling them “the next [so and so].” It happens in every sport. Kobe Bryant was the next Michael Jordan, until Lebron James was the next Jordan. For the Mets, the latest iteration of this trend involves ace-in-the-making Matt Harvey. Many pundits, writers, and even opposing managers have compared him to former Mets great Tom Seaver.
There are many comparisons made regarding their personalities. Harvey’s calm demeanor and confidence are very Seaver-like. He has the “bulldog mentality” and competitiveness that were Seaver trademarks as well. Even his interviews, in which he speaks with the insight of a 10-year veteran, seem pulled out of the Seaver handbook.
Their pitching styles are eerily similar, too. After Harvey decimated the Philadelphia Phillies in his second start of 2013, Charlie Manuel said “He’s got a bit of style like Seaver. He’s a drop and drive guy. He gets a lot of torque from his backside pitching off the rubber.”
It sure seems that Harvey possess all of the intangibles that, in part, made Seaver such a great pitcher and a fan favorite. But just how close are they in on-field performance? As it turns out, pretty close. Below are some basic and advanced statistics to compare Harvey’s first 13 major league starts (from July 26, 2012 to April 13, 2013) with Seaver’s first 13 major league starts (April 13, 1967 to June 18, 1967).
| Player | W | L | ERA | G | GS | CG | IP | H | ER | HR | BB | SO | WHIP | BB/9 | SO/9 | SO/BB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harvey | 6 | 5 | 2.22 | 13 | 13 | 0 | 81.1 | 48 | 20 | 6 | 32 | 95 | 0.99 | 3.55 | 10.54 | 2.97 |
| Seaver | 5 | 4 | 2.54 | 13 | 13 | 7 | 95.2 | 86 | 27 | 10 | 26 | 57 | 1.18 | 2.46 | 5.39 | 2.19 |
Their first 13 games are incredibly similar. Harvey struck out many more batters than Seaver did, while Seaver walked less. Seaver also gave up many more hits, which elevated his WHIP above Harvey’s. The difference in SO/9 is staggering, with Harvey almost doubling Seaver’s. The difference in strikeouts is also pretty interesting considering Seaver went on to accumulate over 3,600 of them. Also of note here are the differences in innings pitched (IP) and complete games (CG). Obviously these are different eras, but it really highlights the difference in how young pitchers’ workloads were handled. Keep in mind that Seaver was 22-years-old during this time period while Harvey has been 23-24. Not a huge difference, but a difference nonetheless.
Does this mean Harvey will be as good as Seaver was and go on to have a 20-year hall of fame career? Of course not, but it sure is a great start. The comparisons to Seaver appear warranted in terms of intangibles and production, but is it fair? No, Kobe wasn’t the next Jordan. Neither was James. They were their own players who have and continue to make their own mark on their game. Harvey will not be the next Tom Seaver. He will be Matt Harvey, and that prospect sure is exciting.
He has the poise and the confidence in himself to be as good as any pitcher of this generation. It’s so hard to compare because most starters back then went at least 7 innings or more. We’ll see how many blown saves the Mets pen will have this season and how it will affect Harvey.
“They were their own players who have and continue to make their own mark on their game. Harvey will not be the next Tom Seaver. He will be Matt Harvey, and that prospect sure is exciting”
Sums up pretty much everything in life.
Harvey is a stud and if it wasn’t for Morneau’s bomb yesterday there was a good chance that he was going to get that no-no. Harvey has unbelievable stuff and most likely will have more opportunities to flirt with a no-hitter in the future. As for the comparisons to Seaver, enough already, I remember when the Mets signed Santana, the next day they were heralding him as the Mets next Seaver, Cy Youngs and 300-wins, and what-not, just enjoy it for the time being, with the Mets luck, Harvey could very well blow out his shoulder in the next three years, good post!
As Harvey’s body of work grows, we see that he is better than what we imagined. All ST the talk was all Wheeler all the time. Let’s make it clear. Harvey rapidly will become this teams undisputed ace, and our success will be anchored to him. His delivery is flawless. His drive and ethic is exemplary. The Seaver comparison is hard to deny, and true enough, let Harvey be Harvey, but we will see the stat side-by-sides with Seaver for years to come (I hope). We need it. I couldn’t be happier.
On January 31st I posted this concerning Harvey’s 2013 projection.
“When you look at Matt Harveys 2012 stats they compare favorably to another Met rookie pitcher. A 2.76 ERA, 170 k,78 bb and a rookie of the year award. I really don’t expect a repeat of 2012 but I can dream that a once in a lifetime pitcher has come around again.”
Watching Harvey this year it appears that my dreams have come true. Many Seaver like traits but I am convinced that Harvey is Harvey which seems to be a very good thing.
Through 12 starts they put up a comparison to Nolan Ryan and it was very similar.
Ryan? Seriously? He was frustrangingly godawful as a Met. He hated NYC, too.
Near no-no in his third start? That is damn impressive. Harvey is cool and collected on the mound and it is always impressive seeing him pitch. He definitely has the potential to be an ace for the club.
Mitch Williams compared Harvey to Roger Clemens last weekend. I’d have to agree more with your Seaver comparison.
I love watching Harvey pitch, he’s looked amazing!
Harvey is old and that shouldn’t be forgotten. 22 is not 24. I think the league will catch up and he will end up being a very good pitcher, but not a Seaver. Also, his motion is not like Seaver. He has a very strange motion which gave him control problems when he was younger. We’ll have to see if he can maintain the arm slot control over time. This is not the masterpeice of pitching motion that Seaver was. Harvey’s shoulders seem to fly out in front.