The playoffs, whether fair or not, determine a lot in terms of historical value for both baseball fans and writers alike. Why should it not? It is obviously the most important games a player can play in, the nation is watching, and a great performance can turn any mediocre player like David Eckstein or Don Larsen into a folk hero.
As mentioned in my previous article on this topic, it is also where Jack Morris built his own Hall of Fame case, with his many supporters pointing to his epic 10 inning performance in the 1991 World Series. Undeniably, it was a great moment.
However, Blyleven, outside of innings pitched, was a far better postseason pitcher than Jack Morris. For his career, Blyleven threw 47 1/3 innings in the postseason, recording a 5-1 record, a 2.47 ERA, a 1.077 WHIP, and an excellent 4.5 K/BB ratio. Morris, in 92 1/3 innings, recorded a 7-4 record with a 3.80 ERA, a 1.245 WHIP, and a 2.0 K/BB.
But this article is not about Blyleven versus Morris. All that needs to be said about comparing these two has been said. One threw over 1,000 more innings, had a significantly better ERA, ERA+, WHIP, K/9, and BB/9, and it's pretty obvious knowing all that who is better.
No, this article is about Blyleven's great postseason moment, the one that many people who argue against him seem to conveniently forget.
The 1979 World Series was not going very well for the NL Champion Pittsburgh Pirates. Down 3-1 to the Orioles, the Pirates faced a one-run deficit entering the sixth inning of Game Five. To make matters worse, Lee Lacy had pinch hit for pitcher Jim Rooker in the bottom of the fifth. While Lacy collected a hit, his teammates were unable to drive him in.
Into the game came Bert Blyleven, who had thrown six innings of two-earned run ball just three days before. On two days rest, Blyleven's task: shut down the Orioles and keep our season alive. No pressure, right?
Here's what Blyleven went on to do in those 4 innings:
4 IP, 0 R, 3 H, 3 K, 1 BB, 52 pitches.
The Pirates, with a big assist from Blyleven (who was even left in to hit), cruised to a 7-1 victory. This was all the momentum Pittsburgh needed, and won the next two games in Baltimore 4-0 and 4-1 to win the World Series.
Now, obviously when your team gives you seven runs of support in three innings, one does not need to be at his best to "do the job." But what if the Pirates continued to be shut down offensively, but managed to eek across two runs in the bottom of the eighth or ninth? Would Blyleven and his great four inning performance on short rest get the credit it truly deserved?
While Randy Johnson is not a perfect comparison (he did, after all, win Game Seven of the 2001 WS on no days rest), Johnson did only have to go 1 1/3 innings and 17 pitches. Blyleven, albeit on more rest, saved the day while throwing three times as much on short rest.
There are many players who have seen their profiles elevated for a "clutch" factor, or some great playoff games and moments. However, looking at Blyleven's career line in the postseason, and factoring in the big spot he brilliantly pitched through in the 1979 series, offers the question: why is Blyleven not similarly credited for this performance?
Hell, why should Blyleven even need it? Why does over one quarter of the BBWAA still need convincing of Blyleven's greatness? Hopefully after the 2011 vote, we will not have to begin trying to convince the Veteran's Committee.
For my third edition, I will discuss something I have wanted for awhile. The opinion may surprise the readership.
Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com
- Login to post comments