BronXBombers51 wrote:Many of the experts here consider him one of the more overrated players of all-time, I believe.
If he were a Yankee or Red Sox he would be the "undisputed best pitcher ever." Just goes to show what happens when people put on the blinders.
Actually, Tavish, a Royals fan and one of the most knowledgeable posters on this board, gave his reasoning in this thread: viewtopic.php?t=289975&start=30
They didn't change the rules because of Gibson. They changed the rules because every decent pitcher was putting up low 2.00 ERAs. 1968 was the only season Gibson won the ERA crown and he finished in the Top 3 only 1 other time. That pales in comparison to what the truly legendary pitchers put out.
Walter Johnson - 5 ERA Titles, 10 Top 3 Roger Clemens - 7 ERA Titles, 10 Top 3 Lefty Grove - 9 ERA Titles, 10 Top 3 Pedro Martinez - 5 ERA Titles, 6 Top 3 Pete Alexander - 4 ERA Titles, 6 Top 3 Christy Mathewson - 5 ERA Titles, 8 Top 3 Greg Maddux - 4 ERA Titles, 8 Top 3 Tom Seaver - 3 ERA Titles, 6 Top 3
Gibson was a very good pitcher and was amazing in 1968. But he just isn't in the same class as the other greats where most people usually try and put him.
Most Comparable Pitchers to Bob Gibson <pre> 1. Jim Palmer (901) * 2. Jack Morris (885) 3. Amos Rusie (880) * 4. Luis Tiant (876) 5. Bob Feller (871) * 6. Vic Willis (867) * 7. Jim Bunning (861) * 8. Don Drysdale (846) * 9. George Mullin (845) 10. Juan Marichal (844) *</pre>
An excellent list of comparable players with many good HoFers filling out the list. It is hard to make a case for any of them except for maybe Feller (if you want to give him extra bonus for missing time for WWII) as being a Top 10 All-Time Pitcher.