THE FINAL TWO YOUNG ARMS OF THE 1969 METS
In my 4 recent articles that outlined the remarkable convergence of amazing young pitchers on the 1969 world champ NY Mets... Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Nolan Ryan, and Tug McGraw...those 4 were still not enough to make it all happen.
Thankfully, two more fine young arms joined the fray:
Jim McAndrew and Gary Gentry.
Jim McAndrew was an 11th round righty who kicked it into high gear in 1967, after a fine 14-9 minors season in 1966.
In 1967, Jimmy Mac had a 13-10 minors record despite a microscopic 1.43 ERA...at which point he had earned a Mets No Support Badge of Honor.
In 1968 in AAA, he was 8-3, 2.54 and got a call up. He felt that no support pain, as he went 4-7 with the Mets the rest of the way in 1968 despite a 2.28 ERA. But he proved to be another piece ready to turn the Chumps into Champs in 1969.
MacAndrew went 6-7, with a fine 3.47 ERA, in 135 innings as a starter and reliever in 1969. And was a vital cog for these World Champeen Mets.
Thereafter, he had very solid seasons in both 1970 and 1972 as well, but went 4-12 in 1973 and 1974 and was done at age 30. He ended his Mets career with a 36-49 losing record despite a fine 3.54 ERA. And, as I occasionally have to remind the reader, when he compiled most of that ERA, he did not have the advantage of pitching against the weak hitting Queens kids.
Gary the Great Gentry was a 3rd round selection of the Mets who, in his very first minor league campaign in AA...yes, AA...he went 4-4 In 79 innings, with an incredible 1.59 ERA.
In 1968, at age 21, Gentry watched Seaver and Koosman emerge as Mets co-aces as he finished his minors tutelage - Gentry went 12-8, 2.91 in 198 innings and 30 starts in AAA.
A Mets rookie at age 22 in 1969, after less than 280 minor league innings, Gentry gentrified and electrified the Shea Faithful, going 13-12, 3.43 in 35 starts and 233 innings!
He (over) pitched from 1969-72 with the Mets, and probably due to that workload, the slender righty broke down physically, and was done at 28, going 46-49, 3.57 for his career.
One could wonder how much better the hard throwing righty's career might have gone with current baseball era innings limits and the improved medical skills of the present.
Suffice it to say, though...the Mets likely miss the 1969 playoffs without the 19-19, 3.47 pitching of these two oh-so-timely pitchers, Jim McAndrew and Gary Gentry.
To recap the last several articles, with a focus on 1969, through a remarkable convergence of talent:
Seaver, Koosman, Ryan, McGraw, McAndrew and Gentry - at an average age in 1969 of slightly under 24 years of age, went:
76-41 (.650)
2.76 ERA
1,073 innings
47 CG
16 Shutouts.
Amazing! Simply Amazing!
I'm happy you did this series.
ReplyDeleteFor the young readers... to see what once was
For us older fans... to remember
Great memories from 1969 - and even when Nolan Ryan showed up for his 19 year old cameo in late 1966, and Tug at that point stunk, and Gentry, McAndrew and Koosman were either in that "will the good minors #'s translate to the majors" camp, or just getting started in the minors, to a powerhouse pitching staff in late 1969.
ReplyDeleteI'm an "imagine if" guy...imagine if the Mets had kept Ryan and Seaver and Koosman for their careers, and not been as cavalier with letting slender Gentry rack up innings and break down so young...they could have had an elite staff from 1969 to about 1980. Especially if you add in Matlack and Swan.
When you got gold arms - best to try to keep tham and care for them.
Right now, the only potential gold arm we have in the upper levels is Anthony Kay.
ReplyDeletePossible David Peterson and Thomas Szapucki in a year
47 CGs? Cups of Gatorade? You can't possibly mean COMPLETE GAMES. After all, having 4-7 on the entire staff over the course of a 162 game season would cause people to think they'd entered a parallel universe or something.
ReplyDeleteMack, I add one name to your pitcher list - Tony Dibrell.
ReplyDeleteReese 47 CGs was completely Amazin"!!
Very cool look back, Tom.
ReplyDeleteToday's pitchers could learn a thing or two, right?
Mike, so true,
Delete