Best Game Scores in the post-season (hint: Roy Halladay makes the list)
Posted by Andy on October 7, 2010
Here are the 10 best Game Scores in post-season history:
| Rk | Player | Date | Series | Gm# | Tm | Opp | Rslt | App,Dec | IP | H | R | ER | BB | SO | HR | GSc | BF | AB | 2B | 3B | WPA | RE24 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Roger Clemens | 2000-10-14 | ALCS | 4 | NYY | SEA | W 5-0 | SHO9 ,W | 9.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 98 | 30 | 28 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.438 | 5.113 | .755 |
| 2 | Dave McNally | 1969-10-05 | ALCS | 2 | BAL | MIN | W 1-0 | SHO11 ,W | 11.0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 11 | 0 | 97 | 41 | 36 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.915 | 5.045 | 1.354 |
| 3 | Babe Ruth | 1916-10-09 | WS | 2 | BOS | BRO | W 2-1 | CG 14 ,W | 14.0 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 97 | 48 | 43 | 1 | 0 | 0.64 | 0.975 | 4.102 | 1.515 |
| 4 | Roy Halladay | 2010-10-06 | NLDS | 1 | PHI | CIN | W 4-0 | SHO9 ,W | 9.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 94 | 28 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.306 | 4.570 | .445 |
| 5 | Don Larsen | 1956-10-08 | WS | 5 | NYY | BRO | W 2-0 | SHO9 ,W | 9.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 94 | 27 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.586 | 4.560 | .852 |
| 6 | Ed Walsh | 1906-10-11 | WS | 3 | CHW | CHC | W 3-0 | SHO9 ,W | 9.0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 94 | 30 | 29 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.422 | 3.778 | .802 |
| 7 | Josh Beckett | 2003-10-12 | NLCS | 5 | FLA | CHC | W 4-0 | SHO9 ,W | 9.0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 93 | 30 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.477 | 4.570 | .796 |
| 8 | Ken Holtzman | 1973-10-09 | ALCS | 3 | OAK | BAL | W 2-1 | CG 11 ,W | 11.0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 1 | 93 | 38 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.82 | 0.650 | 3.995 | 1.126 |
| 9 | Bob Gibson | 1968-10-02 | WS | 1 | STL | DET | W 4-0 | SHO9 ,W | 9.0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 93 | 32 | 31 | 1 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.319 | 3.390 | .656 |
| 10 | Kevin Brown | 1998-09-29 | NLDS | 1 | SDP | HOU | W 2-1 | GS-8 ,W | 8.0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 92 | 28 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.565 | 4.009 | 1.329 |
How sweet is it that Halladay tied Larsen? The guys ahead of them made it in more strikeouts and/or more innings.
October 7th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
I thought about posting this in the other thread which showed Clemens's poor performance in Game Ones. He obviously didn't always pitch as well as one might hope in the postseason. I remember quite well that game vs Seattle listed above. He was just utterly dominant. And that was followed by his start vs the Mets in the WS, mostly remembered for the Piazza-bat incident, but which I remember for his brilliant 8-inning performance, game score of 87. I'll agree with the theory that he got so amped up for postseason starts that it sometimes hindered him, but occasionally made him unhittable. In the Seattle game he was throwing 98 mph, which was rarely the case during his Yankee years. And I've never thought he intended any malice by throwing the bat. I really believe he almost worked himself into a psychotic state, he was so focused on his job as well as he could. I think he did initially start to "field" the bat as if it were the ball, and once he realized it was the bat, he just rejected it because it did not fit his gameplan -- he couldn't even understand why he suddenly had it in his hands. He just wanted to pitch, get the ball and pitch, and so he flung the bat away from him without any thought as to harm it might cause.
Anyway, that's my amateur psychoanalysis.
October 7th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Great list. I see that Halladay broke the record for National Leaguers. Gibson's 93 game is the one I remember best, until yesterday.
October 7th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Hey, that "Ruth" fella, he must have been a pretty good pitcher, eh?
Glad to see Gibson's effort on the list -- such dominance!
October 7th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
I wanted to see the last time someone had two of the top 10, and it wasn't very difficult. Randy Johnson currently has spots 11 and 12 on the list, for starts in the 2001 NLCS and WS. So those would have been #9 and 10 on the list from 2001 until Beckett knocked one off in '03.
Interesting that Johnson, Brown, and Clemens were all knocked at times for "choking" in the postseason. You get enough chances, your numbers in the big spots will probably start resembling your numbers in all the other spots. Only get a couple chances, and you'll be branded for life as a hero or goat.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
I thought that Livan Hernandez would be there with his 15 K performance against Atlanta in the NLCS (courtesy of Eric Gregg's 48" wide strike zone). However, his game score was only 90, and just missed the list above.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
I've talked about it before on this blog...that game called by Eric Gregg was the worst umpiring job I've ever seen.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:25 pm
#5 & #6
That was a terrible game, and very hard to watch. I remember the Holzman game. And somehow it doesn't surprise me that Ruth makes this list!
October 7th, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Doesn't the value of a strikeout diminish when talking about these performances (90+ game score).
A K is no better than any other out if there is no one on base. And for these performances where there are very few (if any, as in Larsen's case) men on.
I guess I bring it up because of Clemen's game (3 base runners) has a higher score than a perfect game or no-hitter (w/ 1 base runner).
Is the theory that the Strikeout doesn't allow the batter to get a cheap hit or fielder to make an error? That doesn't make sense since the statistics usually (if not always) are based on end result, as opposed to what could have happend.
I can see the K more valuable in situations with more runners on base (i.e. not advancing the runners), but the game score statistic seems to over value the strikeout at the extreme (very few total baserunners).
October 7th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
This is what makes me question how anyone can say Babe Ruth is not the best baseball player of all-time. Very few can match his batting numbers, but to add in that he was a REALLY good pitcher also...I don't get it.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
Good list, but how does Larsen's perfect game end up behind "imperfect" ones. I won't quibble about the WS vs. ALCS/NLCS or ALDS/NLDS distinctions, but some value must be added to the calculation for a perfect game.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
What's the game score for the game 7 of the 91 WS, the 10 inning CG by Jack Morris?
October 7th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
8. "Is the theory that the Strikeout doesn't allow the batter to get a cheap hit or fielder to make an error? That doesn't make sense since the statistics usually (if not always) are based on end result, as opposed to what could have happend."
Strikeouts are a sign of dominance. When half the guys you face aren't even able to put the ball in play (as in Clemens's start), you've been dominant. That's part of what game score is measuring--how dominant a pitcher has been. So I think the weight game score gives to strikeouts is appropriate.
A strikeout is a guaranteed out (except in the rare instance of the batter reaching on a dropped third strike). To boot, runners can't advance on a strikeout (unless they're stealing), which they potentially can on flyouts and groundouts. So yes, a strikeout is more valuable than a groundout. That's also why strikeouts are such a crucial (though certainly not the only) component of estimating a pitcher's true talent and projecting his future success. A certain percentage of balls in play are always going to result in hits (and sometimes errors). The fewer balls a pitcher allows to be put in play, the better, (everything else being equal).
October 7th, 2010 at 4:13 pm
It's also worth noting that the highest game score of the regular season belonged not to one of the several no-hitters, but to Brandon Morrow's 17-K one-hitter.
October 7th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
@12 David,
I had mentioned that Strikeouts were more valuable than other outs when there are baserunners (for the same reasons you list above), I am not really questioning that.
I don't agree with the "guaranteed out" as being a part of the equation, in that we can only go by end result and not what could or couldn't happen if the ball is put in play.
My actual point was that the value of a Strikeout (being more than other outs) does not really apply in games like these where there are limited baserunners. But I guess you answered my question by stating that the Game Score statistic is supposed to include some kind of "dominance" quotient, embodied by the Strikeout.
It is just weird to see any game that is supposedly better than a perfect game. But game score is not really about the best game pitched, it is about being the most "dominant" (or pitching a lot of innings really well).
October 7th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Game score shouldn't really be taken tooo seriously, either. It's not based on hardcore sabermetric dogma. It's a simple formula designed to give one number to indicate how well or poorly a pitcher performed. If you take groups of games -- a pitcher's average game score, or how often pitchers win with a game score of at least X, it's quite a handy tool. Certainly its flaws will show up if you assume that no game could be better-pitched than a perfect game.
Tangotiger recently talked about different types of game scores one could use instead, depending upon what one is trying to measure. http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/felix_game_score/
October 7th, 2010 at 4:34 pm
[...] an extension of Andy's post from earlier today, here are the pitchers with the highest game scores in their first career post-season game. [...]
October 7th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
@11
I get 84 for Jack Morris' 1991 7th game performance. Start with 50, add 30 for his 10 IP, add 12 for pitching the 5th-10th, add 8 for his K's. So he's at 100 with the positive points, but subtract 14 for his 7 hits and 2 for his 2 walks to give 84.
Seeing Ruth on this list reminds of a potential "What if" blog entry for you all. What if Babe Ruth had remained a full-time starting pitcher?
October 7th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
is there a list Ruth's not on?
October 7th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
I admit it's weird to consider a performance where (any) hits and walks were given up could be better than a perfect game. Bear in mind though a ball in play relies on your defense, which means it's no longer the pitcher performing. You could have a perfect game with 27 great defensive plays behind you on hard hit balls. Or you could give up one bloop hit and strike out 27 guys. Ok it's an extreme example but the point is a strikeout does infer a better pitching performance than any other type of out, even if the end result is the same (with no baserunners).
October 7th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
@15
Johnny Twisto, thanks for that point about Game Score. It's not really a scientific tool. I'm not saying it's worthless; far from it. But I'm not willing to believe that small differences are meaningful.
And while I buy into the value of strikeouts over the long haul, I don't concede that a difference of a few strikeouts in a game is worth as much as Game Score says it is. Game strikeout totals are subject to the umpire, to the K tendencies of the opposing team, etc. I don't agree that Clemens's 1-hitter with 15 Ks and 2 walks is necessary a better performance than Halladay's 1-walk, 8-K no hitter.
October 7th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
how awesome would halladay vs lee be in the world series? it will be like hulk hogan vs andre the giant in wrestlemania.
October 7th, 2010 at 6:02 pm
20. "But I'm not willing to believe that small differences are meaningful."
Exactly--same as with any statistic, really. Game score is definitely a better measure of single-game performance than W-L or quality starts, but the difference between a 98 and a 94 is not a difference worth making a big deal out of.
October 7th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Dave McNally, making Montanans proud long after his death.
October 7th, 2010 at 7:15 pm
It seems like the GSc formula values innings pitched too highly. Every IP completed after the 4th is worth more than an earned run is penalized.
The Ruth game is impressive, of course (for a number of reasons), but his line doesn't look like the game should be considered the second most dominant post-season pitching performance of all time. He pitched a great game, but he's on this list because he pitched a lot of innings.
October 7th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
And pitching a lot of quality innings is usually more valuable than many fewer fantastic innings, so Ruth is rightly rewarded. There are simply a lot of innings in a baseball game and in a baseball season, and getting guys to eat them up is very difficult.
October 7th, 2010 at 7:56 pm
[...] good Halladay was last night? According to the ever helpful Baseball-Reference.com, Halladay’s pitching performance had a game score of 94, which tied it with Don [...]
October 7th, 2010 at 11:10 pm
And Lincecum just tops him with a 96!
October 7th, 2010 at 11:56 pm
This! 96!
What a performance
October 8th, 2010 at 1:58 am
I agree with LarsenFan. There should be more of a kicker for a perfect game. Any one who saw Halladay from start to finish yesterday saw perfect game type dominance that a few more strike outs wouldnt have added to. Those poor Cinci guys looked stuned and were just throwing their bats at the ball the last two innings.
My favorite pitcher in the world Tim Lincecum throw an even higher score 96 tonight but it wasnt as dominant as Halladay was last night and in my humble opinion doesnt dsereve as high a score.
October 12th, 2010 at 11:59 am
You missed Tim Lincecum's gem that was actually rated a higher game score of 96.
October 12th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
agressoca- Did you watch Lincecum's game? That was one of the most dominant starts this year...14k's with only a 1 run lead. One swing of the bat could have changed that game.
October 12th, 2010 at 12:17 pm
I didn't miss Lincecum's game...this post was written before Lincecum's game.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:38 am
To settle the arguement of "perfect" games always being the best game pitched I offer you this example: lets say pitcher A pitches a perfect game with 9 INN and 0 K's. Every ball was hit hard and each out was recorded via a web gem like play. Now pitcher B pitches a 9 INN shutout but allows 2 hits and a walk and strikes out 22. The 2 hits were bloops and the walk was due to a bad call. Which start was better? Obviously pitcher B's start is better, "more dominant". Striking a batter out means he can't even TOUCH the ball. It's better than putting it in place by any measure, at that point you rely in other ppl to make the out FOR you. Making the out yourself is the point here. I think perfect games and no hitters are vastly overrated at times. They are rarely the best pitched games but rather a standard for well pitched ones, even though luck can be applied to any game pitched.