Is Glavine last of the 300-game winners?

[Williamsburg2599]

Is Glavine last of the 300-game winners? (http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2007/07/31/is_glavine_last_of_the_300_game_winners/)
By Bill Konigsberg, AP Sports Writer | July 31, 2007

NEW YORK --Tom Glavine will surely be the next 300-game winner. Will he also be the last? Glavine takes the mound in Milwaukee on Tuesday night with a chance to become the 23rd to reach the milestone.

"It's elite company. It's the greatest measuring stick for starting pitchers," the New York Mets ace said.

Glavine will try to be the first to win No. 300 since former teammate Greg Maddux did it on Aug. 7, 2004, for the Chicago Cubs against San Francisco.

In the last 60 years, getting 300 wins has become one of the most rare milestones: Only 10 pitchers have achieved it since the end of World War II. And since 1990, only Nolan Ryan, Roger Clemens and Maddux have made it.

With the greater reliance on bullpens, pitchers making fewer starts and teams being more careful with rich arms, huge win totals are a thing of the past.

So is the 300-game winner about to be extinct?

"The way the game has changed, we're probably pretty close to it," said Hall of Famer Tom Seaver, who won 311 games from 1967-86. "I attribute it to a kind of corporate structure in the game.

"There's a regimentation of how many innings you're going to pitch, and I think much of it is economics," he said. "You don't want paid players on a disabled list. That seems to be the underlying factor in this."

Following Glavine's 299, Randy Johnson is next on the win list with 284. But the Big Unit, who turns 44 in September, is scheduled for back surgery this week and is out for the season.

"Randy Johnson is there and he's not packing it in. He'll be there next year," Seaver said. "He loves it and he knows the importance of it."

It hasn't been an easy path for the 41-year-old Glavine, especially lately.

Glavine has four wins in 12 starts dating to May 24, with a 5.43 ERA during that stretch. He's struggled away from Shea Stadium, with an 11.96 ERA in his last five road starts. He's 9-6 with a 4.51 ERA overall.

Maddux said Glavine's willingness to adapt and his ability to work the corners are the main reasons he's on the cusp of 300.

"Part of playing past 10 years is changing things," Maddux said. "Everyone knows what you do by then. You've got to make sure you do something a little differently now and then so you don't get, you know, released."

But Glavine hasn't changed one big thing.

"He's always stayed away from the middle of the plate," Maddux said. "He's probably one of the best pitchers I've ever seen at not throwing it down the middle."

Glavine also hasn't been on a poor team since his first four years in Atlanta, before the Braves started winning regularly in 1991. If John Smoltz hadn't been converted into a closer for four seasons, he might well have been on track to reach 300. Instead, the 40-year-old Smoltz has 203 wins and 154 saves.

Clemens leads the active list with 351, followed by Maddux with 340. Cy Young holds the career record with 511.

In Young's day, pitchers started at least every other day. Over the last century, that's changed -- teams switched from four-man rotations to five about 25 years ago, and Seaver said the specialization of relievers has changed baseball.

"The responsibility of a game is spread out farther into the bullpen. Everybody has an assigned job," Seaver said. "(Bob) Gibson or I might have 18 to 20 complete games a year. Now, a high might be five, seven."

Aaron Harang of Cincinnati and C.C. Sabathia led baseball with six complete games last season. No pitcher has recorded double-digit complete games since Randy Johnson's 12 in 1999 with Arizona.

In 1970, eight pitchers had 17 or more complete games.

Not surprisingly, win totals are down, too.

In 1970, there were 11 20-game winners. Last year, no pitcher won 20 for the first time ever in a non-shortened season.

Mike Mussina, who is 38, has 244 wins.

"50-something to go. No, I don't think I'm going to play that long," he said.

Pedro Martinez has 206 wins and is 35, but he's just getting into shape after rotator-cuff surgery last October. Andy Pettitte, also 35, has 192 wins.

And look at some of the younger guys.

Atlanta's Tim Hudson is 31 and has 130 wins. Another of Glavine's former Braves teammates, Kevin Millwood, also is at 130. He's 32.

Arizona's Livan Hernandez also 32 and has 129 wins.

Among those under 30, 29-year-old Barry Zito heads the wins list with 109, one more than 29-year-old Roy Oswalt. The 26-year-old Sabathia already has 94 wins.

"No one was supposed to touch Roger Maris or Hank Aaron," Maddux said. "You never know what might happen in this game. I'm sure there's some kid in elementary school right now who's planning to play 20 years. Who knows? Maybe he'll win 400."

Glavine just can't believe he'll be the last.

"Nobody looked at me 20 years ago and thought we'd be having this discussion so I'm sure there's somebody out there," he said. "They're just a little bit off the radar screen right now."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[PVNICK]

In the next half century probably. I would have thought otherwise because this argument comes up every time someone gets to 300 for the last twenty years. However, having seen the numbers and ages of Hudson, Zito and Oswalt it seems very unlikely. Johan Santana is @ 89 and is 28. Its a tough road to hoe getting 14-17 rather than 15-22. The way starters get pulled after 95 pitches it is going to be too difficult to amass the number of decisions necessary. Now that being said in 5 years it may dawn on managers that you're doing the other team a favor pulling out your ace after 103 pitches to bring in a middle reliever and guys will win 15-20 every year.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

They said the same things back in the 1980s. Then we got Clemens, Maddux, Glavine and Johnson. The following have had great career starts in terms of wins.

Oswalt
Sabathia
Zambrano
Beurhle
Santana

and a few others.

[Seattle1]

I think Randy Johnson makes it next year.

[redlegsfan21]

I believe that C.C. Sabathia will have a serious shot at 300 wins.

[Edgartohof]

I think Randy Johnson makes it next year.

1.) Johnson is out for the season for Back Surgery

2.) He's still 16 wins away, and at 45 (which he will be next season - assuming he comes back), that is a bit of a stretch.

[Matt1901]

They said the same things back in the 1980s. Then we got Clemens, Maddux, Glavine and Johnson.You are correct. They also said things about players making so much money that they wouldn't need play as long as it would take to win 300 games, hit 500 home runs or challenge career records.

[KCGHOST]

The Unit has dropped to a very low probability of making it. Asking a 44 year old with back problems to win 16 games is a bit much.

I suppose if Mussina, 38, can get his health back and pitch another five years for a good club he might make it. Pedro, 34, would have to have 6 strong years after he finishes rehabbing his arm. Even Tim Hudson, 31, would need 10 strong seasons to make it.

If none of those guys make it we are looking at at least a 15 year hiatus.

[Seattle1]

1.) Johnson is out for the season for Back Surgery

2.) He's still 16 wins away, and at 45 (which he will be next season - assuming he comes back), that is a bit of a stretch.

I know I still think he does it.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

You are correct. They also said things about players making so much money that they wouldn't need play as long as it would take to win 300 games, hit 500 home runs or challenge career records.
No doubt! I don't know how many times I heard his argument! :) I yet to see a player retire at say age 36 and healthy because he has already made enough money. :rofl:

[rsuriyop]

I've never quite understood the mindset behind those who ask these type of questions: "Is such and such going to be the last of the 300-game winners?" As mentioned earlier, there are two currently active pitchers who have already exceeded the 300-win mark; one which is just a game shy; and another who may have a decent shot of reaching it. So to even ask a question such as this is like totally selling future generations of pitchers really short. There will always be great pitchers who will play long enough to surpass the 300-win mark.

[Sean Casey]

Mark Buehrle might have the best shot among the under-30 pitchers; he's 28 and he has 105 wins, and unlike many younger pitchers he doesn't rely on a fastball to get batters out, so he could possibly have a Maddux-like career and stay in the majors into his 40's without having to worry too much about his fastball losing velocity.

Johnson might make it to 300, but it's certainly not a sure thing. If he can at least get to 290 by the end of next year, I would see a small market non-contender signing him as more or less to attract fans to see him pitch/chase 300, but even then I'm not sure if he could win 10 more. Still, Glavine aside, no post-1900 pitcher has ever won 290 without reaching 300.

[Sean Casey]

There will always be great pitchers who will play long enough to surpass the 300-win mark.

Exactly. Now, if say 50 years goes by without another 300-game winner, then perhaps at that point the question will be more valid. At this point in baseball history, it would be more significant to ask if any pitcher will ever win 30 games in a season, an accomplishment that we have not seen in 39 years and only once in the past 75 years (and that one was during a fluke pitching-dominated season)

[STLCards2]

I believe that C.C. Sabathia will have a serious shot at 300 wins.

I guess it is possible, but there are several reasons why I have a hard time believing C.C. will win 300 games:

1. His weight problem will be a big issue for a guy who needs massive durability and longevity for 300 wins.

2. Yes, Sabathia has led the league in IP this year, but in the previous 6 seasons, Sabathia has only squeeked over the 200 IP plateau once, not once entering the league's top 10. This is supposed to be this guys prime too! If he can't be durable now...

3. He hasn't been that good. Sabathia had a great 139 ERA+ last year, but besides that, his ERA+ has been in the 105-110 range for the most part. Through almost 7 seasons, Sabathia's ERA+ is 113. Good, but hardly great. Yes, there are 300 game winners with lower ERA+ than 113 ( Wynn, Welch, Sutton), but they also had plenty of years past their primes to regress. Sabathia should be way over 113 now.

I would pick Santana (despite being a little older) to be the "next guy."

1) He is great ( 145 ERA+)

2) He is durable.

3) He will most likely be signed by deep pocket teams his whole career, who typicaly showcase high-offensive clubs as well.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I guess it is possible, but there are several reasons why I have a hard time believing C.C. will win 300 games:

1. His weight problem will be a big issue for a guy who needs massive durability and longevity for 300 wins.
Gaylord Perry and Early Wynn were some big boys themselves. Rick Reushel was another long lasting "Fat Boy".


2. Yes, Sabathia has led the league in IP this year, but in the previous 6 seasons, Sabathia has only squeeked over the 200 IP plateau once, not once entering the league's top 10. This is supposed to be this guys prime too! If he can't be durable now...

3. He hasn't been that good. Sabathia had a great 139 ERA+ last year, but besides that, his ERA+ has been in the 105-110 range for the most part. Through almost 7 seasons, Sabathia's ERA+ is 113. Good, but hardly great. Yes, there are 300 game winners with lower ERA+ than 113 ( Wynn, Welch, Sutton), but they also had plenty of years past their primes to regress. Sabathia should be way over 113 now.
Sabathia just turned 27 a few weeks ago and it may be that he may just now be entering his prime. He'll have over 100 career wins before this season is over by the way.

[NewEnglandAmazins]

Expect Randy Johnson to probably stick around until W #300.

Then some of these guys could get to 300 Wins also:

Oswalt
Zito
Halladay
Sabathia
Beurhle
Santana
Zambrano
Peavy
Beckett

[NYMets523]

I don't think he will be the last. I think Peavy, Zambrano, Santana, and Buehrle have a shot.

[natsnsoxfan]

I think he'll be the last for a good long while, but last ever, definitely not.

[rockin500]

They said the same things back in the 1980s. Then we got Clemens, Maddux, Glavine and Johnson. The following have had great career starts in terms of wins.

Oswalt
Sabathia
Zambrano
Beurhle
Santana

and a few others.
in the next 25 years doubtful. everyone of those guys you mentioned has a tough task ahead. Will they be able to stay healthy enough to last until they are over 40 years old? because thats what it is going to take.

[NYMets523]

in the next 25 years doubtful. everyone of those guys you mentioned has a tough task ahead. Will they be able to stay healthy enough to last until they are over 40 years old? because thats what it is going to take.

It's not out of the question. Players stay in better shape and the health care is improving. The only one I would disagree with is Sabathia. I don't think he'll have the longevity to pitch for 20+ years.

[rockin500]

It's not out of the question. Players stay in better shape and the health care is improving. The only one I would disagree with is Sabathia. I don't think he'll have the longevity to pitch for 20+ years.
its not out of the question, true. im just saying its going to be damned tough. Buerhle has been having the down year and hes already lost a step on his fastball, which was already not as good as the others.

Zambrano, as much as i love him, is a workhorse at this point, and you wonder how much the load is going to catch up with him at like age 35 or so. Oswalt has the stuff for it too (just like zambrano) but will he remain healthy? hes been nicked up himself. Same with Sabathia.

[NYMets523]

its not out of the question, true. im just saying its going to be damned tough. Buerhle has been having the down year and hes already lost a step on his fastball, which was already not as good as the others.
If anything that goes more in his favor. Glavine never had overpowering stuff and whatever was has diminished greatly.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

in the next 25 years doubtful. everyone of those guys you mentioned has a tough task ahead. Will they be able to stay healthy enough to last until they are over 40 years old? because thats what it is going to take.
Sure it's tough to win 300 games. We could have said the exact same thing about Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson say back in 1993. Is it so hard to believe that some of these 20-somethings have the same talent, grit, desire, and determination as Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, or Johnson?

[Ubiquitous]

I think within 5 years we will see Mike Mussina do it, after that it could be a little while. Tim Hudson has a shot at it. Oswalt, Halladay, Sabathia, Zambrano and others all have a shot within the next 15 to 20 years.

After Glavine it will be awhile and if Mussina doesn't do it it could very well be 15 years or so before we see another 300 game winner.

It isn't really harder to win 300 nowadays, it is just that we got a bad crop of pitchers there. We had a nice batch of pitchers start in the late 80's and got a nice batch at the end of the 90's start of the 2000's. But in between those two periods was kind of dreadful. The Kevin Millwood-Shawn Estes-Brad Radke generation of pitchers.

[CubNZ]

... But in between those two periods was kind of dreadful. The Kevin Millwood-Shawn Estes-Brad Radke generation of pitchers.

A certain Pedro Martinez being the shining exception... so far ahead of his peers. Some of the numbers from his prime are just amazing.

[MudvilleMike]

The more relevant question is whether we're stuck with traditional milestones or can adapt to changing conditions. 500 HRs is no longer a major accomplishment, let's change it to 600. Let's consider 250 wins the goal for modern pitchers, not 300.

[rockin500]

Sure it's tough to win 300 games. We could have said the exact same thing about Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson say back in 1993. Is it so hard to believe that some of these 20-somethings have the same talent, grit, desire, and determination as Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, or Johnson?
but the conditions are harder to reach it. Its a game of bullpens and the 6 inning outing nowadays. Not to mention only getting 30-32 starts a year so there is less of an oppurtunity to rack up consistently win. Averaging 19 wins for 16 years or averaging 16 wins for 19 years is asking a lot too.

the conditions certainly arent ripe for a 300 game winner. I just dont see it happening any time soon.

BTW, i doubt johnson can make it. what makes you think he makes 300 considering his place and what his current circumstances are

[PVNICK]

but the conditions are harder to reach it. Its a game of bullpens and the 6 inning outing nowadays. Not to mention only getting 30-32 starts a year so there is less of an oppurtunity to rack up consistently win. Averaging 19 wins for 16 years or averaging 16 wins for 19 years is asking a lot too.

the conditions certainly arent ripe for a 300 game winner. I just dont see it happening any time soon.

BTW, i doubt johnson can make it. what makes you think he makes 300 considering his place and what his current circumstances are

Last night was a perfect example. Glavine fails to get the first batter out in the seventh inning and he gets yanked leading 2-1. Certainly the Seaver, Carlton generation of pitchers would never have been pulled that early having given up only one run. I doubt the Clemens generation would have. Then because of the ridiculous situation we have of holding your Ace reliever until the ninth inning you have a combination of Aaron Heilman, Pedro Feliciano and Guillermo Mota allowing the game to be tied in the 8th. A generation ago Wagner would have come in rather than leaving the crux of the game in the hands of your second, third or fourth best pitchers available. This is the way games are manged these days and I would guess it costs the typical pitcher 2-5 decisions a year compared to the previous generation.

[digglahhh]

The more relevant question is whether we're stuck with traditional milestones or can adapt to changing conditions. 500 HRs is no longer a major accomplishment, let's change it to 600. Let's consider 250 wins the goal for modern pitchers, not 300.

I'm so sick of hearing this romanticized, media-driven, self-righteous drivel. 500 HR is a HUGE accomplishment, still. Let me know when marginal players start bearing down on 500. They just don't do it - period. Who, right now, is the worst player in the game for whom 500 HR is at least 50/50? Carlos Delgado, maybe? A guy with a 140 OPS+ over 15 seasons. So, Carlos Delgado needs to hit 600 homers to be considered in the same offensive breath as, say... Ernie Banks. That's absurd.

Non-superstars do not reach massive milestones. The dynamics of the game have shifted time and time again, dead ball, live ball, integration, expanded schedule, expansion, late 20's hitter's paradise, mid 60's pitcher's paradise, cookie cutters, band boxes, steroids... The Dave Kingman's fell short in the 80's. The Greg Vaughns fell short in the 90's. And the Richie Sexson's will fall short in the 00's.

[Ubiquitous]

A certain Pedro Martinez being the shining exception... so far ahead of his peers. Some of the numbers from his prime are just amazing.


And yet Pedro can't stay healthy, a problem for many of his peers.

[PepperMartin]

I agree that Sabathia could go for a long time and his weight shouldn't hold him back too much. Look at David Wells - I mean, maybe not now, but he is still pitching, and he did hit 15 wins twice after his 40th birthday.

Sabathia's being a lefty will help him last longer too, just like Boomer.

I agree that the way the game is micro-managed now makes it very difficult to win 300. I think that the Cubs' nightmare of Kerry Wood and Mark Prior has a lot to do with the new approach to starting pitching (although it could be argued that it pre-dated them to some extent).

But, strategy goes in cycles. I'm not an insider to baseball but I've read a couple pieces suggesting there is a growing belief among coaches and the like that this babying of young starting pitchers is leading to health problems rather than creating them.

So down the road this may lead to a return to the old ways. All it really takes is one or two brave managers who buck the trend and let their guys throw 140 pitch CG's consistently and not get burned by it; then everyone will take notice.

I find it hard to fathom how teams filled a 25 man roster 25 years ago, if the bullpen was used so little. I would think you'd have about 4 relievers tops, which in the NL case leaves you 8 bench spots. A couple platooners, a couple pinch hitters, a couple pinch runners, a couple defensive replacements....

[Honus Wagner Rules]

but the conditions are harder to reach it. Its a game of bullpens and the 6 inning outing nowadays. Not to mention only getting 30-32 starts a year so there is less of an oppurtunity to rack up consistently win. Averaging 19 wins for 16 years or averaging 16 wins for 19 years is asking a lot too.

the conditions certainly arent ripe for a 300 game winner. I just dont see it happening any time soon.
The conditions for pitchers have NOT changes dramatically since Clemens, Maddux, Glavine and Johnson debuted in the 1980s. These four pitched in an era entirely of five man pitching staffs and specialist relievers. Look at the careers of these guys. The majority of their seasons were mostly 30-34 starts. Clemens has a career high of 36 starts. Maddux has a career high 37. Glavine has a career high of 36. Johnson has a career high 35.

Here are the "young guns" of today:

Oswalt-35 (twice)
Sabathia-33
Beurhle- 35 (twice)
Zambrano-33 (twice)
Santana-34 (twice)
Halladay-36
Hudson-35 (twice)
Peavy-32

They are pretty much in line with the old Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson.

[PVNICK]

I looked at Seaver and Carlton. Seaver had no more than 36 starts but was allowed to complete 15-20 of them through the mid 70s and generally had 25-30 decisions until the 80s. Carltons must have been in a four man rotation because he had 2 40+ start seasons and a few of 37 or 28. Don Sutton falls in between those two but with less CG. The issue is not starts as much as decisions. If you aren't allowed to go much past the seventh inning becuase of the pitch count fetish a lot of decisions and potential wins fall by the wayside.

[Ubiquitous]

So do losses.

Seaver got a decision in 79% of his starts.

MAddux got a decision in 79% of his starts.

Carlton got a decision in 80% of his starts.

Sutton got a decision in 76% of his starts.

Clemens got a decision in 76% of his starts.

[digglahhh]

I was going to make the same point, Ubi.

If it is more likely you will get pulled in the 7th with a one run lead and your see you middle relief blow it, it is also more likely that will happen to you opponent. A lot of times, buys don't need to last nine, or even eight. They just have to last longer than the opposing pitcher, ensuring that only their team's higher quality relievers need to pitch.

Oswalt has gotten decisions in 76% of his starts

Halladay 75%

Sabathia 75%

Buerhle, about 77-78, he spent a little time as a reliever.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I really don't understand the idea that todays' young pitchers can't win 300 games? Firstly, the way starters are used today is essentially the same as during the the prime years of Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson. Secondly, several of the young pitchers today have roughly as many wins as the old guard did through their late 20s. Having 100 wins by age 30 sets up a pitcher to have shot at 300 wins. There is no guarantee of course. Catfish Hunter had 184 wins by age 30 and he fell of significantly in his 30s. But the young guys today are essentially at the same place in terms of wins as Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, Johnson. Beurhle and Sabathia can potentially have 130-140 wins by age 30. Zambrano is on the same pace as well.

[PVNICK]

I was going to make the same point, Ubi.

If it is more likely you will get pulled in the 7th with a one run lead and your see you middle relief blow it, it is also more likely that will happen to you opponent. A lot of times, buys don't need to last nine, or even eight. They just have to last longer than the opposing pitcher, ensuring that only their team's higher quality relievers need to pitch.
.

We're talking 300 winds not spiffy winnning pecrcantage so losses are irreelevat. Digglahh ?????? If you get pulled early and your pen blows a lead you lose a win opportunity. The point is that you are not going to be there more often than not irrespective of whether the other guy already got pulled.

Nice data. It depends on how you want to look at it 5 percent would be 5 decisions or 3 wins for a good starter every three years but 1 percent is 3 wins a decade which is negligible. I'd be curios to see tfuller data of % of decisions.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

All this talk about today's pitchers being pulled earlier is somewhat irrelevant. It doesn't have an effect on win totals. If it did they why does Buerhle have over 100 wins at age 28, Sabathia about to clear 100 wins at age 27, Zambrano 78 wins (and counting) at age 26, Oswalt 108 wins by age 29, Hudson 130 wins by age 32, and Santana 89 wins at age 28? Hudson didn't reach the majors until he was 24 years old and Santana didn't become a starter until he was 25 which make their win totals even more impressive. So if all supposed philosophy of pulling starters earlier will keep a young pitcher's win opportunities down then why doesn't it show up in the win totals of the 20-something pitchers?

[rockin500]

I really don't understand the idea that todays' young pitchers can't win 300 games? Firstly, the way starters are used today is essentially the same as during the the prime years of Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson. Secondly, several of the young pitchers today have roughly as many wins as the old guard did through their late 20s. Having 100 wins by age 30 sets up a pitcher to have shot at 300 wins. There is no guarantee of course. Catfish Hunter had 184 wins by age 30 and he fell of significantly in his 30s. But the young guys today are essentially at the same place in terms of wins as Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, Johnson. Beurhle and Sabathia can potentially have 130-140 wins by age 30. Zambrano is on the same pace as well.
100 wins by age 30? greg maddux was already well past 100 at that point (165 in his age 30 year). clemens was at 163 in his age 30 year. glavine was at 138 (and hes been damned hard pressed to make it to 300 as well). Legitimately, you would need 125 by age 30 to have a shot. Johnson is the outlier in this group. (seaver was 148, btw)

CC may want to get more than 30 starts a year a bit more often than he has of late.

Also, you have to factor in how long are these guys going to want to pitch? contracts and the like will certainly factor in (if they feel like theyve made enough $$).

[rockin500]

All this talk about today's pitchers being pulled earlier is somewhat irrelevant. It doesn't have an effect on win totals. If it did they why does Buerhle have over 100 wins at age 28, Sabathia about to clear 100 wins at age 27, Zambrano 78 wins (and counting) at age 26, Oswalt 108 wins by age 29, Hudson 130 wins by age 32, and Santana 89 wins at age 28? Hudson didn't reach the majors until he was 24 years old and Santana didn't become a starter until he was 25 which make their win totals even more impressive. So id all supposed philosophy of pulling starters earlier then why doesn't it show up in the win totals of the 20-something pitchers?
well, hudson has been trending downwards in most of his rate stats so its certainly a legitimate belief that he wont sniff 300, not to mention hes been banged up. so can he stay healthy enough?

[PVNICK]

All this talk about today's pitchers being pulled earlier is somewhat irrelevant. It doesn't have an effect on win totals. If it did they why does Buerhle have over 100 wins at age 28, Sabathia about to clear 100 wins at age 27, Zambrano 78 wins (and counting) at age 26, Oswalt 108 wins by age 29, Hudson 130 wins by age 32, and Santana 89 wins at age 28? Hudson didn't reach the majors until he was 24 years old and Santana didn't become a starter until he was 25 which make their win totals even more impressive. So id all supposed philosophy of pulling starters earlier then why doesn't it show up in the win totals of the 20-something pitchers?

Coming into this season Beuhrle, Sabathia and Zambrano won over 16 games a grand total of twice. Admittedly Zambrano and Sabathia should double that by seasons end and there's about a half dozen 16 win seasons in there but its tough to get to 300 at that pace. To get to 300 you should be averaging 16 wins per season for a decade.

Oswalt has a pair of twenty win season to go with a 19 win season but he will be 30 at the end of the month. If he averages 17 wins a year for the next ten years he is still going to be about 20 wins short. Santana is at least on the right pace if a bit late.

I'm sure there's a guy out there maybe Chris Young, Philip Hughes or someone else who will rack up 15 wins in off years and 17 or more in the rest to get the job done. The point is that its tougher to do in the micromanaged age where most starters see the eighth inning once a month.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

100 wins by age 30? greg maddux was already well past 100 at that point (165 in his age 30 year). clemens was at 163 in his age 30 year. glavine was at 138 (and hes been damned hard pressed to make it to 300 as well). Legitimately, you would need 125 by age 30 to have a shot. Johnson is the outlier in this group. (seaver was 148, btw)

Your numbers are wrong. Maddux had 151 wins, Clemens had 146 wins ,and Glavine had 124 wins by their 30th birthdays. Plus Clemens and Maddux have significantly cleared 300 wins. I think having 100 wins at age 30 makes one a viable candidate for 300 wins. Buerhle and Oswalt have already cleared 100 wins. Sabathia will clear 100 wins this season, Santana and Zambrano next season. And all of them were will be under 30 years old when they cleared 100 wins.


Also, you have to factor in how long are these guys going to want to pitch? contracts and the like will certainly factor in (if they feel like theyve made enough $$).
I've heard this argument for years and it simply doesn't hold water. Has there ever been a player who announced his retirement at say age 36-37, and was healthy, and stated that they are retiring because they have made more than enough money? What most fans don't understand is that:

1) Great ballplayers are very competitive by nature. Baseball is in their blood. Often they will try to continue to play even when their skills are gone.

2) Financial security-All ballplayers know that they will never make the kind of money after they retire as they did as players. They know that if they are 37-38 years old, healthy, and can still play they can command $4-$5 million per year contracts easily. Look how much Clemens is getting to pitch half time for the Yankees? You don't think the money was one factor in coming back? Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson have all earned over $100 million over their careers yet they continue to pitch or try to pitch into their 40s? Why? Why didn't they retire in their mid to late 30s?

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Coming into this season Beuhrle, Sabathia and Zambrano won over 16 games a grand total of twice. Admittedly Zambrano and Sabathia should double that by seasons end and there's about a half dozen 16 win seasons in there but its tough to get to 300 at that pace. To get to 300 you should be averaging 16 wins per season for a decade.
This has less to do with micromanaging than it has to do with the fact that Buerhle, Sabathia, and Zambrano have all pitched for mostly terrible or medicore teams over their careers. It's harder to have 20 wins seasons with bad or medicore teams. But this season the Indians and Cubs are playoff contenders and it is no coincidence that both Zambrano and Sabathia likely will each have their first 20 win seasons.

Oswalt has a pair of twenty win season to go with a 19 win season but he will be 30 at the end of the month. If he averages 17 wins a year for the next ten years he is still going to be about 20 wins short. Santana is at least on the right pace if a bit late.
And Oswalt already has 108 wins. Oswalt can certainly have many more 20 win seasons in the future.

[PVNICK]

Actually ChiSox have been .500 or better every year since 2000 with three 90win seasons and a WS title. Cleveland has been in the low 90s or under .500 whiel the Cubs have been mediocre. I still don't see how anyone can dispute that it's harder to win 300 games in an era when starters are expected to go into the sixth or seventh inning versus the previous generation (Seaver, Carlton, et. al) where a complete game was a weekly rather than a seasonal event.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Actually ChiSox have been .500 or better every year since 2000 with three 90win seasons and a WS title. Cleveland has been in the low 90s or under .500 whiel the Cubs have been mediocre. I said mostly medicore or bad teams. And I stand by it. Here are the team winninh percentages/

White Sox
2001-.512
2002-.500
2003-.531
2004-.512
2005-.611
2006-.556
2007-.453

Obviously the White Sox were really good in 2005-06. The rest, mediocre at best.


Indians
2001-.562
2002-.457
2003-.420
2004-.494
2005-.574
2006-.481
2007-.566

That's four sub .500 teams Sabathia had to pitch for.

Cubs
2002-.414
2003-.543
2004-.549
2005-.488
2006-.407
2007-.533
Three sub .500 teams and two mediocre teams.


I still don't see how anyone can dispute that it's harder to win 300 games in an era when starters are expected to go into the sixth or seventh inning versus the previous generation (Seaver, Carlton, et. al) where a complete game was a weekly rather than a seasonal event.
Now you are changing the argument. We are not comparing the current generation to the 1960s-70s pitchers. We are comparing them to the Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson group. The argument I keep reading is that a pitchers today pitch less innings and have fewer complete games thus they can't win 300 games. However, Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson all pitched in that same environment and all have racked up high win totals despite pitching less innings and less complete games. It's easily disputable because even though pitchers from the Clemens era through today generally pitch fewer complete games that doesn't lessen the opportunities to win 300 games. As I've stated many times already Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson have all pitched their entire careers in the era of five man pitching staffs and specialist relievers. I have also shown that the 20-somethings of today have as many starts in general as Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johnson.

[PVNICK]

I don't know that the argument is changing I've been referencing Seaver, Carlton and Sutton all along.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I don't know that the argument is changing I've been referencing Seaver, Carlton and Sutton all along.
Oh, ok. I guess I got confused. But my argument still stands. Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, and Johson show that pitchers in five man rotations can still win 300 games. Clemens and Maddux have won signifcantly more than 300 wins.

[rockin500]

Your numbers are wrong. Maddux had 151 wins, Clemens had 146 wins ,and Glavine had 124 wins by their 30th birthdays.

i said their age 30 year. not by their 30th birthday, so no my numbers arent wrong, as they are right off of baseball reference. i should have amended my statement though, to say you should have 125 at the end of your age 30 season.

Clemens and Maddux have won signifcantly more than 300 wins. and if you noticed, maddux has been the epitome of health his entire career and has been pitching for 22 years. he won the genetic lottery pretty much.

oh, and jake plummer is one name (granted, its football and not baseball). another factor helping zambrano is his ERA in the second half. being in the mid 1's since the fight will definitely help the cause. ;)

[Honus Wagner Rules]

i said their age 30 year. not by their 30th birthday, so no my numbers arent wrong, as they are right off of baseball reference. i should have amended my statement though, to say you should have 125 at the end of your age 30 season.
Ok we'll go with that. I expect Buerhle ('09 is age 30 season), Sabathia (2011 is age 30 season), Santana ('09 is age 30 season) and Zambrano (2011 is age 30 season) to be in the 125 win range. Buerhle and Sabathia should be well past 125 wins in their age 30 seasons.


and if you noticed, maddux has been the epitome of health his entire career and has been pitching for 22 years. he won the genetic lottery pretty much.
Of course it takes general good health to win 300. It's not as if Maddux had some rare gift to stay healthy that no one else could possibly have as well.


oh, and jake plummer is one name (granted, its football and not baseball). another factor helping zambrano is his ERA in the second half. being in the mid 1's since the fight will definitely help the cause. ;)
Jake Plummer? :confused:

[Sean Casey]

Historically, 300-game winners tend to come in cycles. There were many during the pre-1900 era, and then came the Mathewsons, Alexanders, and Johnsons of the early 1900's. However, after Alexander won his 300th in 1924, Lefty Grove would be the only pitcher in the next 36 years to win 300 games (in 1941). Spahn and Wynn won their 300th in 1961 and 1963, and I'm sure at that point people were wondering if anyone else would win 300. After all, the next 300-game winner after Wynn was Gaylord Perry, who was only in his second season in 1963. Then, from 1982-1990, six pitchers won their 300th game, followed by another 13 year drought until Clemens in 2003.

Although the game has changed considerably over the years, it has not changed enough to make winning 300 games an unlikely feat. The number of 300-win pitchers who played in the early 20th century when nearly every pitcher completed his starts is roughly comparable to those who have played in the 1970's and later, when specialized relief pitching first began.

Below is a chart of the 22 300-game winners and the years that they won their 300th win:

1888 Galvin
1890 Keefe
1890 Welch
1891 Radbourn
1892 Clarkson
1900 Nichols
1901 Young
1912 Mathewson
1915 Plank
1920 Johnson
1924 Alexander
1941 Grove
1961 Spahn
1963 Wynn
1982 Perry
1983 Carlton
1985 Niekro
1985 Seaver
1986 Sutton
1990 Ryan
2003 Clemens
2004 Maddux

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Historically, 300-game winners tend to come in cycles. There were many during the pre-1900 era, and then came the Mathewsons, Alexanders, and Johnsons of the early 1900's. However, after Alexander won his 300th in 1924, Lefty Grove would be the only pitcher in the next 36 years to win 300 games (in 1941). Spahn and Wynn won their 300th in 1961 and 1963, and I'm sure at that point people were wondering if anyone else would win 300. After all, the next 300-game winner after Wynn was Gaylord Perry, who was only in his second season in 1963. Then, from 1982-1990, six pitchers won their 300th game, followed by another 13 year drought until Clemens in 2003.

Although the game has changed considerably over the years, it has not changed enough to make winning 300 games an unlikely feat. The number of 300-win pitchers who played in the early 20th century when nearly every pitcher completed his starts is roughly comparable to those who have played in the 1970's and later, when specialized relief pitching first began.

Below is a chart of the 22 300-game winners and the years that they won their 300th win:

1888 Galvin
1890 Keefe
1890 Welch
1891 Radbourn
1892 Clarkson
1900 Nichols
1901 Young
1912 Mathewson
1915 Plank
1920 Johnson
1924 Alexander
1941 Grove
1961 Spahn
1963 Wynn
1982 Perry
1983 Carlton
1985 Niekro
1985 Seaver
1986 Sutton
1990 Ryan
2003 Clemens
2004 Maddux
I think what has happened is that for a lot of us we saw six pitchers who debuted in the majors in the 1960s win 300 games in the 1980s. This may have seeded the impression in our minds that this was common historically which of course was not. Having six pitchers so closely clustered is a historical fluke. Now we have a four pitchers who debuted in the 1980s winning or about to win 300 games. Randy Johnson's recent back problems may keep him from reaching 300. And we still have Mike Mussina and his 245 wins at age 38. He's having a poor season so he may not have enough left in the tank to get those 65 wins.To bad Smoltz lost four seasons when he was closing. He could have been in the 260-270 win range right now. Depending on Johnson's back, we may have to wait at least 11-12 years after Glavine for the next 300 game winner.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

i said their age 30 year. not by their 30th birthday, so no my numbers arent wrong, as they are right off of baseball reference. i should have amended my statement though, to say you should have 125 at the end of your age 30 season.



I checked again and you said both.


100 wins by age 30? greg maddux was already well past 100 at that point (165 in his age 30 year). clemens was at 163 in his age 30 year. glavine was at 138 (and hes been damned hard pressed to make it to 300 as well). Legitimately, you would need 125 by age 30 to have a shot. Johnson is the outlier in this group. (seaver was 148, btw)

[rockin500]

Jake Plummer? :confused:

financial security. he had it when he decided he didnt want to be traded to the Buccaneers. Tiki Barber had financial security as well when he decided he didnt want to play for Tom Coughlin this past year.

[rockin500]

I checked again and you said both.
yeah my bad, i was just going by age 30 year by fever. thats what i really meant.

Really though, i would like nothing more than to see Z man win 300. i just dont think it will happen, as he would likely suffer some crazy kerry wood injury if he sticks with the cubs long term. ;)

[Gee Walker]

I've heard this argument for years and it simply doesn't hold water. Has there ever been a player who announced his retirement at say age 36-37, and was healthy, and stated that they are retiring because they have made more than enough money?

I can think of exactly one: Tom Henke. That's more or less exactly what he said when he retired, age 37 and healthy. His last year with the Cardinals - who he signed with so that he could pitch in his home state - he got 36 saves and had a 1.82 ERA.

Sorry for the digression. I guess this is the exception that proves the rule.

[Ubiquitous]

The Henke case is a bit complicated. Henke originally planned to retire after the 1994 season. He was having a bad year and he had a bad back. Not a fun problem to have, not an enjoyable season for him. He announced his retirement and then the strike hit. At the time he said even if they settle he probably won't come back. But as it turns out he started thinking about coming back because by announcing his retirement and actually following through with it Henke would walk away from a 1 million dollar option or a 4 million dollar contract should Texas pickup his contract. After his season with the Cards he basically said he was done and he really didn't know what it would take to get him back.

Funny enough Henke said he would only play with the Cardinals but that he wanted to play for a contender and he didn't think the Cards were a contender. So he stayed home and the Cards ended up taking the division.


Personally I think the back injury was the key thing that led to his retirement. I don't think it ever really went away. In 1996 Henke was actually going to try to comeback midseason but his back was hurting so he stayed away.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

yeah my bad, i was just going by age 30 year by fever. thats what i really meant.

Really though, i would like nothing more than to see Z man win 300. i just dont think it will happen, as he would likely suffer some crazy kerry wood injury if he sticks with the cubs long term. ;)
The Z Man seems to be much more durable than Wood. He hasn't broken down yet and he survived the Dusty Baker years. :) I haven't been following him this year. Do you think he's been overworked this season?

[Ubiquitous]

Hardly.

Zambrano had a problem early on with his arm slot but for whatever reason once again as soon as the weather turned he was back. He hasn't thrown a ton of pitches in his starts and Lou isn't shy about pulling him if the Cubs are way out in front.

[bryanac625]

Tom Glavine's first year was 1987. If he is the last 300-win pitcher, amazing that pitching has changed that much in 20 years.

[rockin500]

The Z Man seems to be much more durable than Wood. He hasn't broken down yet and he survived the Dusty Baker years. :) I haven't been following him this year. Do you think he's been overworked this season?
actually, no. its just a case of all the bad luck thats gone on. he usually gets around 110 pitches or so before lou decides to pull him. He did have a 128 and a 130 pitch set of outings this year. But Ubiquitous is right that Lou has pulled him earlier than dusty likely would have in most cases.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

OK, here is the list of pitchers with the most wins by age 30 (post World War II). This means these are their win totals they had on the day they turned 30. The list may not exhaustive.

184 Hunter
170 Drysdale
157 Gooden
156 Blyleven
152 Maddux*
152 Palmer
152 Blue
146 Seaver*
144 Clemens*
144 Marichal
141 Jenkins
139 Sutton*
138 Koufax
134 Eckersly
133 Carlton*
132 Pedro
130 Sam McDowell
128 Kaat
124 Glavine
122 Ryan*
121 Saberhagen
118 Mussina
116 Pettite
114 Lolich
113 M. Hampton
111 Morris
110 Stieb
110 Reuss
109 Osteen
108 Oswalt (30 on 08/29/07)
105 Buehrle (30 on 03/23/09)
105 Hooton
104 W. Ford
102 Radke
100 Welch

*300 game winners

So it seems a fast start is no guarantee of 300 wins. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Phil Niekro had just 31 wins on his 30th birthday! :crazy

[digglahhh]

We're talking 300 winds not spiffy winnning pecrcantage so losses are irreelevat. Digglahh ?????? If you get pulled early and your pen blows a lead you lose a win opportunity. The point is that you are not going to be there more often than not irrespective of whether the other guy already got pulled.

Nice data. It depends on how you want to look at it 5 percent would be 5 decisions or 3 wins for a good starter every three years but 1 percent is 3 wins a decade which is negligible. I'd be curios to see tfuller data of % of decisions.

You missed my point. My point is that outlasting your opponent increases the likelihood of wins. You will certainly lose wins to your bullpen coughing up leads, but the opposing team pulls their pitchers early too. So, guys could benefit from opposing teams bringing in middle relievers who cough up the game for the other team.

You give up 3 over 6, so does your opponent, he gets pinch hit for in the top of the 7th, and your team then scores two off the weak middle relief core.

Bullpens blow some games, for every loss, there is a win. Are you the victim of your pen blowing it for you, or are you the benefactor of your opponent's pen blowing it for them?...

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Her is the list of the number of wins of post World War II 300 game winners at age 30 in ascending order:


31 Phil Neikro
74 Gaylord Perry
83 Early Wynn
86 Warren Spahn (estimate)
122 Nolan Ryan
124 Tom Glavine
133 Steve Carlton
139 Don Sutton
144 Roger Clemens
146 Tom Seaver
152 Greg Maddux

[SamtheBravesFan]

Glavine has done it now. :) Congratulations to him for really stamping his ticket to the Hall of Fame.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

So now depending on Randy Johnson's back and if Mike Mussina rebounds we may have to wait until about 2019 for the next 300 game winner.

[NYMets523]

Mussina isn't winning 300. He's never won 20 games in a season. I don't think Johnson will make it unless they use him in relief.

300 will come again. With the value of young pitchers being so high, pitchers being developed more, and health care improving, it's not out of the question. The generation will probably be the very young guys like Tim Lincecum.

[geezer]

Im interested how long will Mussina last, I dont think he will reach 300, but 275 its a possibility.

[Ubiquitous]

I think the last few years doomed Mussina's chances at 300.

[cbenson5]

I'm so sick of hearing this romanticized, media-driven, self-righteous drivel. 500 HR is a HUGE accomplishment, still. Let me know when marginal players start bearing down on 500. They just don't do it - period. Who, right now, is the worst player in the game for whom 500 HR is at least 50/50? Carlos Delgado, maybe? A guy with a 140 OPS+ over 15 seasons. So, Carlos Delgado needs to hit 600 homers to be considered in the same offensive breath as, say... Ernie Banks. That's absurd.

Non-superstars do not reach massive milestones. The dynamics of the game have shifted time and time again, dead ball, live ball, integration, expanded schedule, expansion, late 20's hitter's paradise, mid 60's pitcher's paradise, cookie cutters, band boxes, steroids... The Dave Kingman's fell short in the 80's. The Greg Vaughns fell short in the 90's. And the Richie Sexson's will fall short in the 00's.

I agree with you that only great players have reached milestones such as 500 home runs to this point. I believe that 500 home runs is still a magical number for that reason. Unfortunately, this might not always remain the case. Andruw Jones currently has 363 home runs, and he is only 30. His career OPS+ is 116. He is far from a great hitter. I like Andruw, but his inclusion in the 500 home run club will IMO diminish the magic of that number. He will likely see many less fastballs once he leaves the Braves (and no longer has Chipper hitting in front of him), but the odds of him hitting 500 are greater than 50 %.

Charles

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I think the last few years doomed Mussina's chances at 300.
I think I have to agree. He needs one more great season to get back on track. The 2007 season is not that season.

[SamtheBravesFan]

I agree with you that only great players have reached milestones such as 500 home runs to this point. I believe that 500 home runs is still a magical number for that reason. Unfortunately, this might not always remain the case. Andruw Jones currently has 363 home runs, and he is only 30. His career OPS+ is 116. He is far from a great hitter. I like Andruw, but his inclusion in the 500 home run club will IMO diminish the magic of that number. He will likely see many less fastballs once he leaves the Braves (and no longer has Chipper hitting in front of him), but the odds of him hitting 500 are greater than 50 %.

Charles

Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say that Andruw Jones is going to drag down the magic 500 home runs all by himself. The fact is that the current Andruw Jones is very, very, very streaky, and that makes him a subpar player. He can do better than that. The question is, will he? I think he will, but the Braves won't miss his streakiness that much. Jones will get 500 home runs and the baseball world won't be any worse for it.

[cbenson5]

Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say that Andruw Jones is going to drag down the magic 500 home runs all by himself. The fact is that the current Andruw Jones is very, very, very streaky, and that makes him a subpar player. He can do better than that. The question is, will he? I think he will, but the Braves won't miss his streakiness that much. Jones will get 500 home runs and the baseball world won't be any worse for it.

Hey Sam,

I have to disagree with you. I believe the magic of 500 home runs, 3000 hits, and 300 wins is not in the particular number. I believe that there is magic attached to those numbers because only genuine greats have achieved them. IMO, the worst hitter in the 500 HR club is Ernie Banks. He is a genuine great and deserving Hall of Famer. I don't believe Andruw will destroy the 500 HR club single-handedly, but I do believe the magic will be diminished somewhat. I would feel the same way if Garret Anderson or Johnny Damon were to join the 3000 hit club, but they will almost certainly fall short.


Charles

[SamtheBravesFan]

Hey Sam,

I have to disagree with you. I believe the magic of 500 home runs, 3000 hits, and 300 wins is not in the particular number. I believe that there is magic attached to those numbers because only genuine greats have achieved them. IMO, the worst hitter in the 500 HR club is Ernie Banks. He is a genuine great and deserving Hall of Famer. I don't believe Andruw will destroy the 500 HR club single-handedly, but I do believe the magic will be diminished somewhat. I would feel the same way if Garret Anderson or Johnny Damon were to join the 3000 hit club, but they will almost certainly fall short.


Charles

Rafael Palmiero isn't exactly a genuine great and he got both 500 homers and 3,000 hits.

We only think Andruw Jones isn't great because we've seen him play for 10 years and know his limitations all too well. Quite frankly, so does everyone else who looks at him. Jayson Stark even went as far as to call him the most overrated center fielder of all time.

But what does that matter? Jones isn't one of the all-time great players of the game and never will be. We all know that. Only Scott Boras will claim he is. But if Jones gets 500 home runs, he gets 500 home runs and deserves the recognition that goes with it because that's something that he does well.

[NYMets523]

But if Jones gets 500 home runs, he gets 500 home runs and deserves the recognition that goes with it because that's something that he does well.

That and striking out.

[sflnyc]

I Doubt it although I will never say never. I voted in another thread that I don't think Mussina will reach 300 wins. If some of the youngsters today pitch into their early 40's they'll have a shot.

My thought is become the game has become so specialized (pitch counts, mandatory bullpen involvement) that the chances of a great pitcher reaching 300 wins is a reach. With 5-man rotations instead of 4, statistically there are less games to start per year, that's simple math.

Basically the best (and highest paid pitchers) on any staff are the starters. The second set of pitchers are the closers. And the worst pitchers (and the lowest paid) are the middle relief. So your best pitcher pitches a good game through the 6th inning and if he is not pitching a no-hitter, by current baseball law must be taken out due to some stupid pitch count. The ball is handed over to the one of the worst pitchers on the staff to hold the lead until the 9th. Many times of course, the middle relief blows the lead and the starter gets a no decision. Does this mean that if the starter was left in, he wouldn't have tired? No. But the mandatory taking the starter out (and thus the game out of his hands) when he still throwing well, over a season and time, will result in blown leads and sure wins for the pitcher.

Now, a lot of the players who have high career statistical batting and pitching totals got to those numbers because they played into their 40’s. I come across people who say that the stats of the players today who play until they are 44-45 are padded because they kept on playing. That is complete rubbish. I consider what players are doing today in their 40's no different than when players of the past. Too many jaded memories of fans today thinking that all the old timers retired in their late 30’s or something, I guess.

[SamtheBravesFan]

That and striking out.

*laughs* That too.

[EdmondsFan#1]

Mark Buehrle has a shot if he stays healthy and pitches into his 40's.

[Rocket Fan Man]

I don't think 300 "W" For Mike Mussina is out of his reach.
If he plays till hes 42 yrs averaging 13 wins that would give him 52 more on top of whatever he ends up with at the end of this season. Hes at 245 and the Yankees have found thier offense so he might win 1/2 of his 10 starts left or more. That would put him at 250 or more by the end of this season.
My piont is, if things go well for Mussina maybe he would only need to average 12 wins the next four years.

Randy Johnson, sorry to say hes done.
Randy will turn 45 in about 3 weeks Sept 10
By the time 08 season starts he will be 45 1/2
I'm very sure he will not win 16 games next year. If anything Randy Jouhson
will come back next year and get rock't or hurt during the middle of the season.


ps: I really do think Clemens deserved the CY Young in 1988
14CG & 8sho with 291K with 264ip and 9.92 K/9
Bo Sox offense let him down that year.

[Rocket Fan Man]

I do think a couple guys have a shoot at 300 wins. I myself like Santana's
chances out of the list of potentials. But a better way of going about this I think is to look at the numbers when these pitchers are 35-36 yers old. Like Mike Mussina or Pedro Martinez, Mussina has a very good realistic shot
at 300 as stated above. Perdo Will not reach the golden number of 300.
He turn 36 in Oct with 206 wins he would have to average 13 wins for the next 8 years to give him +104 "Crawling" to reach 300 at the age of 44 years old.
That's not going to happen knowing Pedro's history on the DL.

ps: I think either in 1974 or 1975 teams changed to a 5 man rotation.

pss: I did want to add pitching in the National League increases the chance to get 300 "ALOT"

[NYMets523]

I don't think 300 "W" For Mike Mussina is out of his reach.
If he plays till hes 42 yrs averaging 13 wins that would give him 52 more on top of whatever he ends up with at the end of this season. Hes at 245 and the Yankees have found thier offense so he might win 1/2 of his 10 starts left or more. That would put him at 250 or more by the end of this season.
My piont is, if things go well for Mussina maybe he would only need to average 12 wins the next four years.

I doubt it. He's sucked this year and is a waste of a major league roster spot nowadays. The Yankees are done with him after next year and no team will want a washed up 40 year old which he will be after 2008.

[Rocket Fan Man]

If he goes to the National League he can get 12 wins the next for years.
I do think alot of teams would jump at Mussina he would be a great #4 or 5
spot pitcher in the National League.

Born: Dec 8, 1968 Mussina is 38 right now.

[Rocket Fan Man]

No Coincidence

Anybody know how many or who are the pitchers that have won 300 games in the American League only.:lookitup

Sorry I ment to say more then 300 wins

[NYMets523]

If he goes to the National League he can get 12 wins the next for years.
I do think alot of teams would jump at Mussina he would be a great #4 or 5
spot pitcher in the National League.

Born: Dec 8, 1968 Mussina is 38 right now.

What NL team would want him?

[Rocket Fan Man]

What NL team would want him?

If your a Mets fan you should know better than anyone just because your not pitching at 100% for 1/2 a season or even a whole year you dont right off
a Vet like Mussina.

Look at Tommy Glavine's numbers the first year and for that matter the second
year he played for your Met's.....
2003 he went 9W 14L in 2004 he went 11W 14L and did pitch 33 games with a 4.52 ERA
Say what ever you want about Mussina but he will end this season with a better record then thos two years so I wouldent right him off so fast.

My piont is pitching is all about adjustments and Mussina is a smart Vet just like Tommy and he will make the adjustment needed.

[#1WhiteSoxFan]

Santana is going to do it

[NYMets523]

If your a Mets fan you should know better than anyone just because your not pitching at 100% for 1/2 a season or even a whole year you dont right off
a Vet like Mussina.

Look at Tommy Glavine's numbers the first year and for that matter the second
year he played for your Met's.....
2003 he went 9W 14L in 2004 he went 11W 14L and did pitch 33 games with a 4.52 ERA
Say what ever you want about Mussina but he will end this season with a better record then thos two years so I wouldent right him off so fast.

My piont is pitching is all about adjustments and Mussina is a smart Vet just like Tommy and he will make the adjustment needed.

Mussina is younger than Glavine so it's not a fair comparison. Glavine's 1st half numbers are bad mostly because he got bombed by the Tigers and Yankees in 2 games.

The thing with Mussina is he was never a great pitcher like Glavine, Clemens, Maddux, etc. He would have to go to the NL to do it, but what team would want a 40 year old just so he could accomplish a personal goal? He's a career AL pitcher so there is no NL team that he would want him to come back and get it with them.

[Rocket Fan Man]

I said the first and second season Tommy Glavine pitched for the Mets 03 & 04
Glavine was at the same age as Mussina is right now. Good pitchers like Glavine make adjustment. Mussina has and will have at the end of this season a better "season" record then Glavine did at the same age of 38 in 03 & 04

[bobfeller]

No Coincidence

Anybody know how many or who are the pitchers that have won 300 games in the American League only.:lookitup

Cy Young
Eddie Plank
Walter Johnson
Lefty Grove
Early Wynn
Roger Clemens

[STLCards2]

If your a Mets fan you should know better than anyone just because your not pitching at 100% for 1/2 a season or even a whole year you dont right off
a Vet like Mussina.

Look at Tommy Glavine's numbers the first year and for that matter the second
year he played for your Met's.....
2003 he went 9W 14L in 2004 he went 11W 14L and did pitch 33 games with a 4.52 ERA
Say what ever you want about Mussina but he will end this season with a better record then thos two years so I wouldent right him off so fast.

My piont is pitching is all about adjustments and Mussina is a smart Vet just like Tommy and he will make the adjustment needed.

Glavine had an ERA of around 3.5 his second year with the Mets with a league average of around 4.2 (or abour 20% better than the league). Glavine also threw 210+ innings in 2004, two areas in which Mussina won't even touch this year.

[Rocket Fan Man]

Why is this so hard for you to understand???

Look at Glavins stats in 2003 when he was 38 years old just like Mussina is right now
ERA- 4.52 9W-14L 183ip not to impresive but he made "adjustments"

I think im making a fair comparison and Musinna pitches in the American League. The out are a little harder to come by along with a lower ERA

[bryanac625]

Wow, the game has changed remarkably in 26 years. That's how long I have been a fan. Since I started watching baseball, 9 pitchers (39% of the 300-win club) have reached the 300-win plateau. Maddux was the most recent (2004). I think what changed things is the increased wealth of teams (more money to sign more pitchers) and the emphasis on pitch counts.

The interesting thing is that if you look at the 26 years before I started to watch the game (1954-1980, years noted for pitchers going the distance), there were only TWO pitchers to join the 300-win club during that time period.

[improbus]

It seems pretty simple to me. Be a great pitcher on a team that wins 15 straight division titles, move to another good team late in your career, and never get hurt. Pretty easy formula to follow, huh?

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Wow, the game has changed remarkably in 26 years. That's how long I have been a fan. Since I started watching baseball, 9 pitchers (39% of the 300-win club) have reached the 300-win plateau. Maddux was the most recent (2004). I think what changed things is the increased wealth of teams (more money to sign more pitchers) and the emphasis on pitch counts.

The interesting thing is that if you look at the 26 years before I started to watch the game (1954-1980, years noted for pitchers going the distance), there were only TWO pitchers to join the 300-win club during that time period.
The six pitchers than reached 300 wins in the 1980s (Perry, Seaver, Carlton, Sutton, Neikro, and Ryan) all began their careers in the 1960s, within your 1954-1980 time frame.

[bryanac625]

The six pitchers than reached 300 wins in the 1980s (Perry, Seaver, Carlton, Sutton, Neikro, and Ryan) all began their careers in the 1960s, within your 1954-1980 time frame.

That's true, but my point was based on how many people won their 300th game from 1954-1980. Consider some of the big names of that era (pardon the pun) who didn't get 300 wins. I'm sure this group pitched many complete games:

Robin Roberts HOF
Jim Bunning HOF
Don Drysdale HOF
Bob Gibson HOF
Whitey Ford HOF
Bob Lemon HOF
Lew Burdette
Sandy Koufax HOF
Jim Kaat
Juan Marichal HOF
Mike Cuellar
Dave McNally
Ferguson Jenkins HOF
Mel Stottlemyre
Vida Blue
Catfish Hunter HOF

A lot of people joined the 300-win club early on in the game, then there was a long drought, then a whole bunch joined over the last 25 years.

[NYMets523]

I heard during a Met game that starters are actually getting more decisions relative to the number of their starts because the middle relief, specifically set up men and closers, are much better today than they were years ago.

[STLCards2]

Why is this so hard for you to understand???

Look at Glavins stats in 2003 when he was 38 years old just like Mussina is right now
ERA- 4.52 9W-14L 183ip not to impresive but he made "adjustments"

I think im making a fair comparison and Musinna pitches in the American League. The out are a little harder to come by along with a lower ERA

I fully understand your point: Glavine was old and unproductive at the same age Mussina is unproductive now. Since both were 38 and unproductive- and Glavine ended up winning 300 games, Mussina (who had a similar number of wins at a similar age) can too. We all understand that.

However, you made the statement... "Look at Tommy Glavine's numbers the first year and for that matter the second year he played for your Met's..."

This implies you are comparing Mussina's current difficult season with Glavine's first and second seasons with the Mets. I made the true statement that Glavine was in fact very good in 2004, posting an ERA 20% better than the league while finishing in the top 10 in IP. I made no statements regarding how I think this data will effect Mussina's chances to win 300 games.

The way you edited your post-

"2003 he went 9W 14L in 2004 he went 11W 14L and did pitch 33 games with a 4.52 ERA"-

made it sound like Glavine's ERA from 2003 and 2004 was 4.50 with only 33 games started over those two years. In fact, his ERA spanning those two seasons was 4.05. That is 7% better than league average over those two seasons. If you want to mention 2004, you need to cummulate his stats instead of just mentioning 2003.

However, I tend to agree that Mussina has a shot. He was very good last year, and I am sure he will go to a team with a good offense.

By the way: It is harder to get outs in the AL, but rememer, it is harder for the opposing team's starter to get outs too. Therefore even though "Mussina" might give up more runs than "Glavine" for example, the AL pitchers will get more run support as well. Since wins are largely a function of runs allowed and runs scored behind you, it averages out. Look at ERA+, which shows ERA vs. league. The higher run environment of the AL is factored in. For example, Mussina has an ERA+ of 124 with 3,300 IP. Glavine has an 120 ERA+ with 4,300 IP.

[STLCards2]

It seems pretty simple to me. Be a great pitcher on a team that wins 15 straight division titles, move to another good team late in your career, and never get hurt. Pretty easy formula to follow, huh?

It wasn't quite than simple. :nod: Remember, 1/3 of the teams Glavine pitched on were around .500 or under. (1987-1990, 2003-2005)

[Los Bravos]

It wasn't quite than simple. :nod: Remember, 1/3 of the teams Glavine pitched on were around .500 or under. (1987-1990, 2003-2005)As usual, STLC2 is The Man With The Facts :lookitup

I've always liked Mussina. He's got the intelligence and the proper demeanor to maximize his skills. I used to say that he'd be a good fit on the Braves staff. I didn't give that honorific out lightly. There are a ton of top notch pitchers I wouldn't have wanted on that team. Mike was one who I would have welcomed.

I hope he takes a run at 300 and makes it, myself.

[Seattle1]

I think Randy Johnson makes it next year.

Oh well, so it took him until 2009 instead of 2008. The important thing is that he made it.

:twocents:

[Seattle1]

I don't think Johnson will make it unless they use him in relief.

He made it!


:happy:

[Seattle1]

The Unit has dropped to a very low probability of making it. Asking a 44 year old with back problems to win 16 games is a bit much.

He did it!

:happy:

[Seattle1]

Doesn't anyone want to comment about the misplaced skepticism from two years ago about TBU reaching 300 wins?


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[NYMets523]

Misplaced? Johnson, who had been suffering from injuries and pitching poorly before, just had back surgery that season.