This may be the 10th article you’ve read about Jacob deGrom in the last 12 hours. But he’s been so good he’s deserved every one of them. He’s one pitch away from having not allowed a run in three starts. Even with that gopher ball, he’s got a 0.94 ERA in 19.1 IP. Raise your hand if you saw that coming. I see some liars out there.
Coming into the season, ZiPS forecasted deGrom for a 3.30 ERA and Steamer projected a 3.92 mark for this season. Three games don’t a season make, but this has been going on awhile now for last season’s Rookie of the Year Award winner. In his last 15 games of 2014, deGrom posted a 1.99 ERA with a 4.4 K/9. Additionally, he allowed just 2 HR over 99.1 IP.
Adding his first three games of 2015 to his terrific finish last year, we get deGrom with a 1.82 ERA, a 9.6 K/9, a 1.028 WHIP and he’s allowed just 3 HR in 118.2 IP. How does that compare to some of the best 18-game stretches in Mets history? When including stats from over two seasons, it’s difficult to say you’ve got the very best. Below is a chart of the pitchers who’ve had the best individual seasons in team history and then looking to see the year before and the year after to see if we can make an even better 18-game stretch.
| Player | Years | IP | ERA | K/9 | WHIP | HR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| deGrom | 2014-15 | 118.2 | 1.82 | 9.6 | 1.028 | 3 |
| Matt Harvey | 2012-13 | 122.0 | 1.99 | 10.2 | 0.893 | 6 |
| R.A. Dickey | 2011-12 | 127.2 | 1.83 | 8.5 | 0.909 | 8 |
| Johan Santana | 2008-09 | 126.1 | 1.50 | 9.8 | 1.053 | 7 |
| David Cone | 1988 | 134.2 | 2.14 | 7.1 | 1.017 | 5 |
| Dwight Gooden | 1984-85 | 145.1 | 1.36 | 10.6 | 0.833 | 5 |
| Jon Matlack | 1972 | 137.1 | 2.03 | 6.8 | 1.136 | 8 |
| Tom Seaver | 1971-72 | 154.1 | 0.99 | 9.2 | 0.797 | 6 |
| Jerry Koosman | 1968 | 134.1 | 1.94 | 6.1 | 1.072 | 6 |
The chart above only includes one stretch for each pitcher. Obviously we could have multiple terrific 18-game stretches for Gooden and Seaver. Also looked at were Mike Hampton, Al Leiter, Bobby Ojeda, Craig Swan and Frank Viola. While all had wonderful 18-game stretches, they failed to match what we see from the nine guys in the chart.
It’s also important to note that while ERA was used as the initial determinant, the run environments were not nearly the same. Santana’s run was in a much more offensive-happy era than Koosman’s. Ideally we would have used ERA+ but when taking parts of two seasons – that would have made the calculations much, much more difficult. Accuracy was traded for expediency. Still, this seems like a reasonable list of the best 18-game stretches in team history and a sub-2.00 ERA is still impressive, even for 1968.
Seaver won Cy Young Awards in ’69, ’73 and ’75 but his pitching in ’71 might have been the best of his career. He finished second that year in Cy Young balloting, despite besting winner Ferguson Jenkins by 53 points in ERA+, having a WHIP .103 points lower and having more strikeouts in fewer innings pitched. For the line in the chart above, we took his final 16 starts in ’71 and the first two in ’72. The NL scored 3.91 runs per game in ’71, where the bulk of Seaver’s run here comes.
Gooden’s run contains nine starts in both ’84 and ’85. Down the stretch in ’84, he went 8-1 with his lone loss coming in a game where he had 8 IP, 1 ER, 0 BB and 16 Ks. He had a 1.07 ERA in this span with 13 BB and 105 Ks in 76 IP. The NL scored 4.06 runs per game in ’84 and 4.07 runs per game in ’85, slightly more than what the league did in Seaver’s run, but in my opinion, not enough to take the top spot in the list.
This exercise was worth doing if for no other reason than to remind everyone how absolutely terrific Santana was down the stretch in ’08, even if looked at in a vacuum and disregarding how everyone around him, especially the bullpen, was falling apart. Seaver and Gooden have the World Series rings with the team, even if they didn’t come in their best stretches. Santana didn’t even have a playoff appearance with the club. But it certainly wasn’t his fault in ’08. That year the NL averaged 4.54 runs per game. In his final 11 starts, he was 7-0 with a 1.90 ERA and lost two wins because of the bullpen.
Those three players form the top tier for best 18-game stretch in team history. Factoring in the run environment, you can make a case for any of them having the best. However, Santana has to be docked a tiny bit for having the fewest innings pitched of the three.
deGrom falls in the next tier, along with Harvey and Dickey. It’s interesting to see how tightly packed these three are in both innings and ERA. That Dickey was able to match the other two, despite noticeably inferior marks in both K/9 and HR allowed is impressive. The NL averaged 4.22 runs per game in 2012, higher than either 2013 (4.00) or 2014 (3.95) meaning Dickey pitched in a tougher environment, too.
Cone, Koosman and Matlack form the third tier. And if it was on an ERA+ basis, ’98 Leiter, with a 2.16 ERA in an era where 4.60 runs were scored, would knock out Koosman, and possibly challenge for the second tier. But we were just talking about how underrated Koosman has been in Mets history last night in the Game Chatter, so it didn’t feel right to do that.
So, while deGrom’s current stretch is clearly not the best in team history, he’s also going up against multiple award winners. It’s no shame to fall short of guys named Seaver, Gooden and Santana. But his pitching has been remarkable and it feels like it hasn’t been properly appreciated. We get caught up in the return of Harvey – rightfully so – but deGrom is a true co-ace and the rest of the National League better get used to it.
Great article. My wife and I were talking about DeGrom after reading some of those 100 plus articles this morning. She asked, “How do we classify him?”
I knew what he meant. “Pitcher”, “flame thrower”, “control”, “finesse”, “placement”, “smart”, “lucky” and so on. He is obviously intelligent and his smile seems to belie his strongly competitive streak, whereas Harvey glares with anger. His easy demeanor in interviews doesn’t match his “pounding the zone” when down 3-1 to a slugger. He’s exciting to watch, and even adds a bat to our line up.
We looked at some of the descriptions from NY Post and NY Daily News and knew Mets360 would have something.
She finally settled on “freak.”
He may just not only avoid “sophomore jinx” status, but challenge the NL for Cy Young.
Let’s hope our bull pen supports him when he leaves with a lead, and that our offense picks him up when the inevitable gopher ball is delivered.
Great article, Brian. Refreshing after reading “the usual.” It’s interesting to have his streak put in historic perspective.
Thanks Peter!
My hope is that Harvey and deGrom end up pushing each other to greater heights than they would have gotten if they didn’t have another terrific pitcher on the staff. It’s a good time to be a Mets fan.
“Freak” seems like a good description, Peter. I can see deGrom putting up some numbers to match early Lincecum in more than just hair length…
I loved Jerry Koosman when I was a kid. I have a clear memory of watching him pitch against the Giants in 1968 — I can still see that black-and-white TV — and he struck out Mays and McCovey in a row. He really had pop on his fastball before a series of arm injuries forced him to alter his game (and he still managed to win).
DeGrom gives me that same feeling.
What Koosman was to Seaver is quite similar to deGrom’s relationship to Harvey. Jake is so modest, so humble in his interviews. He acts like a high school student who is glad that he passed the exam. We read a lot about Harvey’s swagger, and Seaver had that same aura of invincibility. Yet in the end, it was Jerry Koosman who pitched that phenomenal Game 2 of the 1969 World Series. No hits through six, the day after a Seaver loss. And it was Jerry who told the dugout in Game 5, “They get no more runs from here on out.” He was the guy who Gil wouldn’t take out of that game.
DeGrom gives me that same feeling. And for me, just my own predilections, but I’ll always find it easier to fully embrace a guy like that. Don’t get me wrong: Loved Seaver, love Harvey. To be in the stands on those days. But I prefer Jerry and Jake.
Great stuff, Brian. Love the historical context of deGrom’s run. Like you said, no shame playing second-fiddle to Santana, Seaver and Doc.
BTW, is it too early to start talking about the perfect game Jerry Blevins is throwing? 13 batters up, 13 batters down. He’s almost halfway there.
Shhhhhhhhhhh.
Loved the blending of eras (and ERAs!) in your assessment. It does help fans really appreciate that the Seaver’s and Gooden’s are not just famous names, but real A1 bad asses. I mean to think of Harvey and deGrom as a tier down is practically unreal. And thanks for giving Kooz his due. His numbers in the ’69 WS are incredible beyond words, and to me that matters given that every pitch was a high leverage situation. Go back to the B-R page for his starts.
The idea of Seaver/Harvey and Kooz/deGrom pairing brings cheers to every Mets fan heart.
As far as deGrom goes, he simply does not have the outward projection of the killer he is (also like Kooz?). That naive, Opie-from-Mayberry appearance just covers up that he is really Hannibal Lecter with nothing but sinister intentions. What we saw last night was superlative, whether it be shutting down a situation that took Stanton out of being able to change a game, or simply attacking Stanton head to head and ultimately emasculating him. It is a privilege to be able to watch this big-smiled, flowing-locks monster pitch for the Orange and Blue.
Jerry Koosman was a big guy, with a big smile, and he had a farmboy’s good nature. His visits to Kiner’s Korner were always filled with laughter. At the same time, he’d nail a hitter with a fastball in the back when he thought it was necessary.
Imagine: He could have been a great LOOGY.
I can’t force myself to imagine Kooz as a reliever let alone a LOOGY, but sure, he would be almost priceless in the present market. As much as we all loved Seaver, Kooz was my fave Met as a kid, I suppose because I’m a lefty too, and pitched in Little League.
Well, the LOOGY comment was a joke, turning him into a “one out guy” would have been absurd.
Like you, I’m a lefty and pitched in Little League, etc. Koosman was my guy and, in fact, the first baseball card I ever bought on eBay.
Great article, great research.
Harvey/deGrom parallels well with Seaver/Koosman .
Koosman is the most underated Met pitcher.
deGrom is 1A. (Or is he 1?)
Brian, let me add in my appreciation for your work on this article. How long did it take you to do the research?
What I like about deGrom, aside from his skill, is the flowing grace of his motion.
It is a thing of beauty.
The research didn’t take long thanks to the B-R Play Index. The two biggest issues are always: 1. Idea and 2. What to leave in and what to leave out. I knew I wanted to write about JDG but the issue was how to do it in a way that 20 other people weren’t going to do it.
Not shown in the stats is how much fun he is to watch.
Great article and comparisons. And I love the shout-out to Johan, who was as good as good gets for a stretch.