barely and he was not nearly as dominant. Pedro's 1.74 ERA came in the same year the average AL ERA was 4.92 and teams score 5.30 runs per game, the MLB .OPS was .782 ( AL was .792). His opponent slash lines was (.167/.213/.259). The next highest ERA in the AL was Clemens at 3.70, his ERA was 1.96 less than the #2 pitcher in the AL. Carlton was only about 1.5 better than the league average and .02 above the next guy in the NL.

It was the highest average OPS and most runs scored in almost 90 years and he pitched in the AL where the offense was even more dominant. He was facing the best offensive production we have seen in almost a century.

In comparison the offensive output of the league was particularly bad in 1972 and in 1968 (Bob Gibson's crazy season). The average OPS was .664, other than in 1968 the league hasn't had an average OPS that low since the end of the dead ball era in 1918. Same with runs scored, 3.64 per game is the second lowest total (after 1968) since 1918.

Pedro didn't pitch nearly as many innings but he was way more dominant, better averages in the best offensive season in the modern era than Carlton had in a historically poor offensive season. Carlton had a very impressive season but I would definitely still take Pedro's 2000 over his 1972. I'd also take Bob Gibson in 1968 and Dwight Gooden in 1985. They were much more dominant seasons. Only thing Carlton carries over those seasons is Innings Pitched.