4/27/20

Tom Brennan - BAD LUCK JERRY KOOSMAN





My brother asked me a question about Jerry Koosman after told him that I read that Tom Seaver, as a Met, won only 6 out of 15 1-0 games and 23 out of 38 games ending 2-1 in which he got a decision.  

THAT is a lot of low scoring games.


My brother then asked how Jerry Koosman did.


I couldn't readily find those stats, and had no desire to try to calculate them.


What I did find about Jerry, though, was jaw-dropping, and reinforces to me why a guy who pitched well enough to be in the Hall of Fame....isn't in the Hall of Fame.


Koosman had 426 career decisions, and in games where his team (mostly the Mets) scored 0 to 2 runs when he was pitching, had a stellar 3.40 ERA in those games.


His record in those games?  An astounding 31-139!   Comprising an incredible 40% of his decisions.


When his teams scored 3 to 5 runs?  103-57.   38% of his decisions.


When his teams scored 6+ runs?  82-8.   22% of his decisions. 

So Jerry was an amazing 185-65 in games where the Mets etc. scored 3 or more runs!


Compare the anemic support of Koosman to that of Hall of Famer Mike Mussina, who had a very similar level of decisions (423 vs. Jerry's 426).


25-83 in games where his teams scored 0-2 runs.   26% of his decisions.


78-60 in games where his teams scored 3-5 runs.   32% of his decisions.


167-10 in games where his teams scored 6+ runs.   42% of his decisions.


Startlingly different numbers.  I know, I know, Mussina faced DH hitters, Jerry didn't, and it was a different era.  But, c'mon, those differences in offensive support are breathtaking.


If Jerry had Mussina's offensive support, I have little doubt that Jerry would be in the Hall of Fame.


The numbers tell me so.

One more comparison, this time to a lefty Hall of Famer, Whitey Ford.

Whitey was the best of the 3, no doubt.

In games with 0-2 runs, he had a 2.70 ERA, and a 26-64 record (27% of his decisions).

In games with 3-5 runs, he had a 2.55 ERA and was 90-35. (38%)

In games with 6 runs or more, he had an ERA of 2.90 and was 112-0! (35%)

Compare those percentages to Koosman's.

He was 236-106 (227-99 as a starter), with a .690 win %.  But even Whitey had a lousy record in games where the Yanks scored 0-2 runs.

And, he never had to face the Yankees, the best hitting AL team of his ERA.  

And, Koosman never got (for the vast majority of his career) face the worst hitting team in the NL, the Mets.

6 comments:

Reese Kaplan said...

In an odd way, a guy who goes on to lose 20 games in a season is actually demonstrating he is a good pitcher. Bad pitchers don't get that chance to lose so often.

Tom Brennan said...

True, Reese.

Kooz was a borderline Hall of Fame pitcher on the wrong team. Had Koosman switched from the Mets after 1969, all other things being equal, he’d be in the Hall of Fame. Just getting to pitch AGAINST the punchless Mets throughout the 1970s would have given him 15-20 more wins.

Remarkably, Jerry was 12-12, with a stellar 3.01 ERA in 233 innings vs thr Big Red Machine.

Seaver, the great one, was a poor 12-20, 3.57 vs. the Reds sluggers

Tom Brennan said...

Koosman was also well below .500 vs. above .500 teams despite a career 3.64 ERA against those teams. His hitters failed him.

Reese Kaplan said...

He was a pre-deGrom.

Anonymous said...

Koosman was my favorite Mets pitcher. I don't think he was a HOF.

He came up with electric stuff and suffered a number of arm injuries early in his career. He really had to change his style. Used to have more sizzle on his fastball. Now THAT Koosman, the early years, yes, he was very special.

After that, he kind of slogged it out by virtue of being smart, tough, and a lefty.

His Game 2 WS performance was about as big a single-game postseason effort made by any Met, ever.

Jimmy

Tom Brennan said...

True about the early Kooz velocity. If he pitched for the Reds, and got to face the punchless Mets instead, I think he wins 50 more games, lose a bunch less, and looks a lot more dominant in winning %. Maybe enough to sneak into the Hall. But it is at this point academic.