19 Responses to “Best Ever World Series Game 1 Pitcher’s Duel”

1. Tony Says:
   October 26th, 2010 at 8:14 pm

   Lee will drop a 96 on the Giants. 2-hit shutout, 13 Ks, no walks.

2. Kahuna Tuna Says:
   October 26th, 2010 at 8:57 pm

   Is Game 1 of the 1949 Fall Classic the greatest pitchers duel ever in the first game of a World Series?

   Wherever you rank it, that game took place on the day Bill James was born. Or vice versa.

3. Robert Says:
   October 26th, 2010 at 9:07 pm

   I'm kind of partial to the Sain-Feller matchup of 1948, but Feller didn't make the list. Not enough K's I guess.

4. Dan Says:
   October 26th, 2010 at 9:29 pm

   I like game 1 from '86. Hurst is on the list, but Darling allowed 1 unearned run (Tuefel's error) and had a game score of 74 and just missed the top 30 game 1 performances.

5. Kahuna Tuna Says:
   October 26th, 2010 at 9:38 pm

   And at the other end of the spectrum is Game 1 of the 2004 Series: Red Sox over Cardinals 11-9. Tim Wakefield amasses the lowest game score for any starter whose team won (32), and Woody Williams (11) has to be taken out before his game score hits zero.

6. BCC Says:
   October 27th, 2010 at 12:21 am

   1948-1950, all Game 1's won by 1-0. That's pretty unlikely.

   2004 Game 1 was good enough for me. Mark Bellhorn.

7. steven Says:
   October 27th, 2010 at 6:47 am

   This may be off-topic, but for games two, three and four, it's tough to top the 1966 Orioles whitewashing of the Dodgers for great Series pitching performances.

8. Larry R. Says:
   October 27th, 2010 at 8:30 am

   @7

   How about 1905, Steve? EVERY game was a shutout, 3 of them by Christy Mathewson as the Giants win in 5.

9. StephenH Says:
   October 27th, 2010 at 9:31 am

   If you just go by game scores, the 1949 WS game one is the answer to your question. Its the only game were both pitchers have a top 30 game score. Newk pitched a helluva game, but Reynolds and the Yanks were just a bit better.

   I was at the 1986 BoSox/Mets game. Hurst looked awesome that day, but Darling was keeping up with him until Teufel let one go through the wickets!

10. John Autin Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 10:37 am

    My choice doesn't cut it on Game Score total, but for sheer intrigue, I'll take the 1950 game 1 matchup of Vic Raschi and Jim Konstanty.

    Although Konstanty had a superb year, setting new records for Games and Games Finished, and would be rewarded with the NL MVP, he hadn't started a game in 4 years. But Robin Roberts had pitched the final game of the season, clinching the pennant with his 20th win on 2 days' rest (his 4th short-rest start in September) and cresting the 300 IP mark (the first of 6 straight 20/300 seasons). With Roberts having pitched 70 innings in 9 starts during the final month, it was deemed wiser to give him 3 days before facing the Yankees.

    Philly's #2 pitcher, the lefty Curt Simmons (17-8, 3.40), had been inducted into the service in September; he missed the rest of that season and all of 1951, and had to wait 14 years for another crack at the WS (and the Yankees) with the '64 Cardinals. Their 3rd-best starter, Bubba Church (2.73 ERA in 142 IP), was a rookie who'd had a rough September, and the same was true of #4 man Bob Miller.

    So manager Eddie Sawyer reached into his bag of tricks and pulled out Konstanty for game 1. And Konstanty responded with the best start since his rookie year with Cincinnati during the war, holding the potent Yanks (5.9 R/G during the season) to 1 run on 4 hits in 8 innings. But it wasn't enough, because Raschi pitched the game of his life -- a 2-hit, 1-walk shutout. Raschi retired the first 13 batters; allowed a pair of singles in the 5th, but slew 2B Mike Goliat to end that threat; and retired the final 11 men in order, striking out Dick Sisler to end it.

    The Yankees went on to sweep the Series, but the competition was much closer than that sounds. Game 2 was a 2-1 affair won by Joe DiMaggio's 10th-inning HR off Roberts; the Phillies got the tying run to 2nd in the bottom half with 1 down, but Ashburn fouled out and Sisler took strike 3 for another game-ending whiff. In Game 3, Philly had a 2-1 lead in the 8th behind the shockingly effective Ken Heintzelman; with 2 out, he walked the bases loaded, and Konstanty was summoned to quell the threat. But SS Granny Hamner, the offensive star of the game who had scored the go-ahead run in the 7th, couldn't handle Bobby Brown's grounder, and the tying run scored. Hamner nearly atoned for his error by leading off the 9th with a double, and moved to 3rd with 1 out, but he tried to score on a grounder to 1B, and defensive replacement Joe Collins gunned him down. NY won it with another 2-out rally in the bottom of the 9th. Philly pitching had held the Yanks to 6 runs in 3 games, but to no avail. In Game 4, Konstanty relieved Miller with 1 out in the 1st after the Yankees had scored twice; he held them in check until the 6th, when the Bombers scored 3 for a 5-0 lead. The Phils put up a fight in the 9th, scoring 2 and getting Stan Lopata to the plate as the tying run. But Allie Reynolds, the 10-inning winner of Game 2, came out of the pen to fan Lopata and complete the sweep.

    Incidentally, there were no off days in the 1950 Series. Konstanty pitched 8 innings in Game 1, faced 2 batters in Game 3, and tossed another 6.2 IP in the finale.

    P.S. Konstanty was waived to the Yankees in 1954, and spent '55 as their relief ace, with a 2.32 ERA in 74 IP. But he didn't pitch in the World Series, even though the Yankees sorely needed an effective reliever. I suppose Konstanty must have been hurt, but he pitched several times in the final week of the regular season. Does anyone know the story here?

11. Frank Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 1:48 pm

    Doesn't a duel require two participants? One identified pitcher in any given game does not a "duel" make. I also can't see how any game that ended up 10-0 qualifies as a "pitching duel"

12. Robert Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    @ 11

    I think the idea was to find duels among the top 30. Since those two guys are the only ones to have pitched on the same day it proves they were the best duel. The rest is just bonus stat fun showing other all-time great game one efforts.

13. Robert Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 2:39 pm

    @ 5

    This can be explained by how each team got to the series. They had both rallied to win in 7 games and had to go with what they had, not what they wanted.

14. John Autin Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 3:49 pm

    @13 / @5 re: 2004 Game 1 matchup of Wakefield vs. Woody Williams --

    Why wasn't Pedro Martinez available to start that game? Pedro had started ALCS Game 5 on a Monday, so he would have been right on track to start WS Game 1 on Saturday with 4 days' rest. But Francona made the curious decision to bring Pedro into ALCS Game 7, despite an 8-1 lead.

    I presume there is some story behind that, but I've never picked it up. Perhaps Francona wanted Pedro to "slay the demon" from the 2003 ALCS Game 7 (and no doubt BoSox fans felt faint as Pedro was quickly strafed for 3 hits and 2 runs). On the surface, though, it looks very strange.

15. joseph taverney Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 3:56 pm

    Good pitching beats good hitting and vice...
    So much for H2O.
    Since 1961 there have been 22 teams (23 if you count Roy Oswalt and the 2010 Phils) to have 3 ERA qualifying pitchers post an ERA+ of > 125.

    1. Atlanta 1997
    2. Astros 2005
    3. D-backs 2003
    4. Cubs 2003
    5. Athletics 2003
    6. Braves 2002
    7. Redsox 2002
    8. Braves 1999
    9. Braves 1998
    10. Braves 1996
    11. Braves 1995
    12. Braves 1993
    13. Whitesox 1993
    14. Mariners 1993
    15. Angels 1989
    16. Mets 1986
    17. Dodgers 1985
    18. Cubs 1972
    19. Giants 1965
    20. Whitesox 1964
    21. Yankees 1963
    22. Tigers 1961

    I put the 1997 Braves first, because they are the only post '61 team to have 4 starters turn in > 125 ERA+s.
    Common sense would say the team with three quality horses would prove to be too much in a lopsided series. But besides the Atlanta Dynasty in the 90's, most of these teams didn't make the playoffs, and only the 1995 Bravos and the '86 Mets won it all.
    Looking back, I know the '86 Mets won that series with a heck of a lot of luck, but in my opinion, that was the strongest pitching staff since the advent of the modern bullpen.
    Anyway, having three studs in the post season is great of course, but then the team seems to treat each starter's performance as something bigger than the team. The Phils really imploded mentally after Halladay couldn't get it done in game 1.
    Also, just curious; What is the consensus on Linecum's appearance in game 6?

16. John Autin Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 4:24 pm

    @15, Joseph -- I'm a Mets fan and I agree that the '86 club had a tremendously deep pitching staff -- 4 good SPs and a capable 5th, 2 solid closers and a pair of long men. But they lacked a dominant #1 guy; the ERA+ for their top 4 SPs was 140, 127, 126, 102.

    Depth was the hallmark of that team on both sides. Eight of their 9 most-used hitters had an OPS+ of 113 or better, as did 13 of the 15 hitters who logged at least 200 PAs.

17. joseph taverney Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 4:41 pm

    @ 16
    Couldn't agree more.
    6 pitchers over 10 wins.
    2 pitchers with 20 saves.(I can't believe outside of a few exceptions, why more teams don't have a multi-closer.- The early 90's Reds' Nastyboys are the best example.)
    10 pitchers under 4.00 ERA.
    At the plate, with the exception of Hernandez at first, they platooned nearly everyone.
    No one was exempt from sitting.
    Also only Strawberry struckout more than 75 times. Granted guys had fewer PAs with the platoon on, but that still is amazing.

18. Kahuna Tuna Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 7:59 pm

    @ 5 – This can be explained by how each team got to the series. They had both rallied to win in 7 games and had to go with what they had, not what they wanted.

    Oh, no doubt. You'd love to have your No. 1 guy on the mound to open the Series, but he may have just finished pitching you there. All of us who attended Game 7 of the 1988 NLCS were in ecstasy when Orel Hershiser shut out the Mets. The feeling we had a couple of days later when rookie Tim Belcher gave up the grand slam to José Canseco early in Game 1 of the World Series . . . not so ecstatic. (Granted, that game did end well.)

    All that having been said, how on God's green earth did McGraw settle on Mule Watson to start Game 1 of the 1923 Series for the Giants against the Yankees? Watson may have been the weakest Game 1 starter ever.

19. John Autin Says:
    October 27th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    @18, Kahuna -- Mule Watson might have been one of the worst Game 1 starters. But looking at the '23 Giants' staff, he might have been their best option. His 3.41 ERA with NYG was tied for the best among their 6 main starters. Their other best starter, Hugh McQuillan, may not have been in top form; he pitched just 6 innings in the final 2 weeks of the season. The veteran Art Nehf, who was so brilliant in the 1921-22 WS, had an off year, with a 4.50 ERA in just 196 IP.

    And maybe McGraw was feeling just a little cocky after beating the Yankees in 2 straight WS, sweeping the 2nd one.

    Whatever his rationale, there are few managers whose judgment I'd trust blindly more than McGraw. And in any case, the Giants rallied to win that opener -- on Casey Stengel's 2-out, inside-the-park home run.