PDA

View Full Version : 300 game winners



bones
01-04-2009, 10:30 PM
Today on the MLB network Hot Stove Report Harold Reynolds, Mitch Williams and Joe Magrane all said that after Randy Johnson there will be no more 300 game winners. I happen to agree that there won't be, but if there isn't going to be anymore, what is the magic number going to be to get in the Hall of Fame? And who is going to reach that number. Also what do you think? Will anybody will get to 300 ever again?

I personally think that the magic number is going to be 250. Some of the pitchers I think will get to 250 and make the hall are Johan, Zambrano, CC, Oswalt, Halladay, Webb and Peavy. I think Lackey, Beckett ,Buerhle, Hudson are only going to around 200. Pedro, Smoltz, Schilling are in the low 200's right now and all will get in the hall, based on they were very dominant for atleast a decade. Kenny Rogers is at 219 but will not make it in because he was never won any awards and was not dominant for a long period. Moyer is obviously going to get to 250 but not sure if he is going to make it to the hall because he might be the 1st to go on the ballot with the new criteria. What do you think?

MooseWithFleas
01-04-2009, 10:39 PM
Question: Why won't there be any more 300 game winners? It's not like pitchers like Johnson, Maddux, Glavine started on 3 days rest consistently. They had as many starts as pitchers have now. It only takes a very good pitcher who is consistent. CC, Halladay, Webb, Peavy, Buehrle will all have a shot. I guarentee there will be another 300 winner within the next 15 years

I Stole Home
01-04-2009, 10:43 PM
Buerhle?
C.C might none of the guys u said will

Maz60
01-04-2009, 10:48 PM
I think it was Bill James who announced in the early 1980s that there wouldnt be any more 3000 hit guys. Spent the better part of a Baseball Abstract detailing his position.

Guys need to write/talk about something, I guess.

bones
01-04-2009, 10:52 PM
You don't think buerhle will get to 250. He has 122 and he is only 30. He is also a workhorse. He has 8 straight 200 inning seasons, that is going to get him alot of decisions. That is only 12 per year until he is 40

MooseWithFleas
01-04-2009, 10:52 PM
Bill James had that one correct... Molitor, Murray, Ripken, Brett, Gwynn, Winfield, Biggio, Henderson, Palmeiro, Boggs have all gotten to 3000 hits since 1990

cowboys:nuggets
01-04-2009, 10:55 PM
Tim Lincicum will be a 300 game winner

bones
01-04-2009, 10:59 PM
I was thinking about guys like Lincecum, Cain, Price, Hamels. But it is just too early to tell with guys like that

AZMetsFan33
01-04-2009, 11:41 PM
Tim Lincicum will be a 300 game winner

After 2 seasons you are already going to declare him a 300 game winner? He's good, but your a bit premature on declaring him a 300 game winner.

Matt-the-great
01-04-2009, 11:44 PM
i do agree that the 300 game winner is a dying breed...but we cannot rule it out...

there are many guys named here who can challenge for that spot....we are talking about the good reliable guys.....Halladay, Webb, Johan, Buehrle.....there arent many workhorses now like there were....pitchers used to throw a hell of alot more innings than they do now....

here is a list of Starters / Wins / Age


Roy Halladay / 131 w / 31 yrs

Brandon Webb / 87 w / 29 yrs

Roy Oswalt / 129 w / 31 yrs

Johan Santana / 109 w / 29 yrs

Jake Peavy / 86 w / 27 yrs

Mark Buehrle / 122 w / 29 yrs

Andy Pettitte / 215 w / 36 yrs

Justin Verlander / 46 w / 25 yrs

Carlos Zambrano / 96 w / 27 yrs

Felix Hernandez / 39 w / 22 yrs

Tim Lincecum / 25 w/ 24 yrs

Cole Hamles / 38 w / 24 yrs

Scott Kazmir / 47 w / 24 yrs

Chad Billingsley / 35 w / 24 yrs


-> some interesting names there...Felix is only 22 and has 39 wins....Verlander could also pull it off if he comes back to form....Buehrle doesn't get much credit, but he has a nice wins/age line....Hamels is IMO a top 3 SP in the Mlb and is off to a great start.....Kazmir is also off to a great start....




(( of course Wins is a pretty terrible stat overall to evaluate pitchers....but if you can achive 250 Wins in today's game then you are among the elite ))

Cubs Man 5
01-04-2009, 11:46 PM
Buerhle?
C.C might none of the guys u said will

So because C.C. is a Yankee, he's going to get 300? Zambrano, who is a full 2years younger, is 8 wins shy of 100. He's 27. He's usually pretty damn durable, with an exception this year.

mark1125
01-04-2009, 11:46 PM
In an era of pitch counts and injuries that were never heard of 20 years ago, it would be tough to see anyone who is a favorite to hit 300. I won't go as far as to say it won't happen, but pitchers are babied nowadays and it will be tough.

gauth25
01-04-2009, 11:51 PM
Peavy won't get to 300. Alot of those people won't. The people I can honestly see hitting 300 are Doc, Lincecum, and maybe Webb. There's more but its hard. You can never really tell. It's so easy to get hurt these days.

bones
01-04-2009, 11:58 PM
I forgot about Verlander. As long as last year was not a fluke and he gets it together he has a shot. Kazmir and Hamels are off to good starts as well. You usually can tell what a pitcher is going to be after about 3-4 years in the majors. You can tell if he is going to be injury prone and reliable to make 35 starts. A few years ago you could easily made a case for Prior he had 42 wins at age 25 but obviously injuries took over. But most of the guys we are all talking about seem to be pretty durable

bones
01-05-2009, 12:03 AM
i do agree that the 300 game winner is a dying breed...but we cannot rule it out...

there are many guys named here who can challenge for that spot....we are talking about the good reliable guys.....Halladay, Webb, Johan, Buehrle.....there arent many workhorses now like there were....pitchers used to throw a hell of alot more innings than they do now....

here is a list of Starters / Wins / Age


Roy Halladay / 131 w / 31 yrs

Brandon Webb / 87 w / 29 yrs

Roy Oswalt / 129 w / 31 yrs

Johan Santana / 109 w / 29 yrs

Jake Peavy / 86 w / 27 yrs

Mark Buehrle / 122 w / 29 yrs

Andy Pettitte / 215 w / 36 yrs

Justin Verlander / 46 w / 25 yrs

Carlos Zambrano / 96 w / 27 yrs

Felix Hernandez / 39 w / 22 yrs

Tim Lincecum / 25 w/ 24 yrs

Cole Hamles / 38 w / 24 yrs

Scott Kazmir / 47 w / 24 yrs

Chad Billingsley / 35 w / 24 yrs


-> some interesting names there...Felix is only 22 and has 39 wins....Verlander could also pull it off if he comes back to form....Buehrle doesn't get much credit, but he has a nice wins/age line....Hamels is IMO a top 3 SP in the Mlb and is off to a great start.....Kazmir is also off to a great start....




(( of course Wins is a pretty terrible stat overall to evaluate pitchers....but if you can achive 250 Wins in today's game then you are among the elite ))

With all of these pitchers you have named what about Bonderman/59/ age25

B-Balz
01-05-2009, 12:12 AM
So because C.C. is a Yankee, he's going to get 300? Zambrano, who is a full 2years younger, is 8 wins shy of 100. He's 27. He's usually pretty damn durable, with an exception this year.

No, because if you look at CC's numbers you will realize that as of right now, he would be the safest bet out of any (non Randy Johnson type) pitcher.

He has 117 wins and is only 28 years old. He has been in the majors for 8 years averaging roughly 15 wins a season since the age of 20 and is just now entering his prime.

This may be saying much, but if he can pitch like a HOFer in his time in NY and maintain an average-above average career post-NY then he will get 300 wins, and if not come closer than anyone else not named Randy Johnson.

Just to give you an idea, Johan, arguably the best pitcher in baseball, is almost a year and a half older than CC and 'only' has 109 wins.

So to say 'just because CC is a Yankee' proves that the ignorance that you were trying to point out solely lies within yourself. :clap:

B-Balz
01-05-2009, 12:29 AM
So because C.C. is a Yankee, he's going to get 300? Zambrano, who is a full 2years younger, is 8 wins shy of 100. He's 27. He's usually pretty damn durable, with an exception this year.

...and as for Zambrano.

He is NOT 2 full years younger, hell, he's not even a full year younger.
Not to mention both made their debuts in the same year, and CC still has 21 more wins than Zambrano.

CC has been just as, if not more durable in his career.

Therefore, I am sorry, but it seems that you have made yourself look horribly by suggesting that CC's name should not be brought into this thread even by a Yankee fan, and then have the nerve to follow that up by imploring CARLOS ZAMBRANO has a better shot...
Why because he's a Cub??? :rolleyes:

MooseWithFleas
01-05-2009, 12:30 AM
Sabathia has 117 and is 28. Playing for the Yankees will make it easier for him to get wins aswell.

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 12:30 AM
Question: Why won't there be any more 300 game winners? It's not like pitchers like Johnson, Maddux, Glavine started on 3 days rest consistently. They had as many starts as pitchers have now. It only takes a very good pitcher who is consistent. CC, Halladay, Webb, Peavy, Buehrle will all have a shot. I guarentee there will be another 300 winner within the next 15 years

It's gotten a lot harder because this era of baseball is a lot more focused on offense. Even in the (hopefully) post steroids era, teams are all about the offense. Pitchers are babyed now more than ever, with less innings, less complete games, etc.

That's why, unless he opts out and goes somewhere else, CC will have a hard time getting to 300 wins because the AL East is so tough offensively.

And a lot of great pitchers have ****** offenses behind them, so that'll be tough.

So while there will always be 300 game winners, it'll be a lot tougher and I imagine 250 will be the new lock for the HOF barring them raising the mound or something.

MooseWithFleas
01-05-2009, 12:42 AM
True. Back in the late 80's the only batter to watch video was Tony Gwynn. Now every player has to watch tapes to keep up and they all just get better beats on the pitchers before even facing them

JDIsMyGod23
01-05-2009, 12:45 AM
This thread just pisses me off since I don't have the Network yet. :cry:

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 12:51 AM
To amend my above post... if Sabathia averages 18 wins for the next five seasons, which is reasonable, and averages 15 games for the 5 after that, he'll be at 282... 18 shy of 300 at the age of 38. It's not unreasonable for him to pitch two more seasons and get at least 9 wins.

Obviously this is barring awful injuries or drastic declines.

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 12:51 AM
This thread just pisses me off since I don't have the Network yet. :cry:

Lol same.

DieHardColtsfan
01-05-2009, 01:09 AM
Lets not forget Chein Ming Wang.. hes not as young as most others, but 54 Wins in last 4 seasons... who knows without his injury last year :shrug:

cegielskijastro
01-05-2009, 01:12 AM
To get 300 wins you need to pitch for 20 years, not only that you need to be awesome for 20 years... Maddux pitched for 22 seasons got 355 wins but he had at least 15 wins for how many consecutive seasons? Look at Randy Johnson he's 45 and I think this will be his 20th season and he only has 255. You have to be extremely lucky that your body doesnt break down, and you have to have the will power to play that long.

I really dont think anyone will get 300 wins for along time and if they do they'll have to start when they're really young, and be Maddux like.

MooseWithFleas
01-05-2009, 01:12 AM
are you guys talking about mlb network?

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 01:13 AM
yeah he had those two 19 wins seasons but it's a bit early. Especially because he hasn't played a real game since the whole injury thing.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 01:16 AM
True. Back in the late 80's the only batter to watch video was Tony Gwynn. Now every player has to watch tapes to keep up and they all just get better beats on the pitchers before even facing them

Presumably your team watches video, as well, so it should be even.

There will be the exact same number of wins in the league this year as there has been every single year there has been a 30 team, 162 game schedule. So it should be just as difficult to get a win, not more difficult.

And because a pitcher is babied doesn't make him less likely to win (all he has to do is pitch 5 innings).

The only thing that can limit a pitcher's chances to win are his number of starts. Pitcher's are given a few more days off these days, but isn't this to give them more rest to help protect their arms better?

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 01:21 AM
There will be the exact same number of wins in the league this year as there has been every single year there has been a 30 team, 162 game schedule. So it should be just as difficult to get a win, not more difficult.


I disagree

Based on that, it should be just as difficult in 1920 (adjusted for number of games, of course) as it is today. Because nothing changes. It's harder to win today than it was 10 years ago. Period.



And because a pitcher is babied doesn't make him less likely to win (all he has to do is pitch 5 innings).


Also false.

Pitchers who can stay in a game longer have a better chance of getting the W, as often games are won in the 6th or 7th or 8th inning. Rarely does the score in the 5th inning stay the same.



The only thing that can limit a pitcher's chances to win are his number of starts. Pitcher's are given a few more days off these days, but isn't this to give them more rest to help protect their arms better?

Yeah but historically it's been shown they don't need it.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 01:37 AM
Based on that, it should be just as difficult in 1920 (adjusted for number of games, of course) as it is today. Because nothing changes.

Pitchers who can stay in a game longer have a better chance of getting the W, as often games are won in the 6th or 7th or 8th inning. Rarely does the score in the 5th inning stay the same.



This isn't true because the number of starts has changed dramatically.

Starters still account for 70% of a teams wins. The same as ten years ago and the same as twenty years ago. It is not harder to get a win today than it was ten years ago. Statistically, it's identical.

DJYankee
01-05-2009, 02:00 AM
So because C.C. is a Yankee, he's going to get 300? Zambrano, who is a full 2years younger, is 8 wins shy of 100. He's 27. He's usually pretty damn durable, with an exception this year.

Even before CC was a Yankee he was declare to be the only one to have a

chance at 300 is just not because he is a Yankee he decided to say. I do

believe there will not be

no more 300 pitchers because how much involvement the bullpen has got in over

the years.

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 02:03 AM
This isn't true because the number of starts has changed dramatically.

Starters still account for 70% of a teams wins. The same as ten years ago and the same as twenty years ago. It is not harder to get a win today than it was ten years ago. Statistically, it's identical.

That's an interesting stat I didn't know that thanks

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 02:05 AM
That's an interesting stat I didn't know that thanks

Here's a good article (http://seamheads.com/blog/2008/05/17/the-decline-of-20-game-winners-a-lack-of-quality-not-quantity/).

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 02:19 AM
Really intriguing article... but what explains the decline in quality starters?

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 02:28 AM
Really intriguing article... but what explains the decline in quality starters?

I think it just goes in cycles. You have a Maddux, Johnson, Martinez, Clemens, Glavine go through and then you have a vacuum when they all disappear from the sport at (basically) the same time.

Then you have a period with a lot of potentially great pitchers that get hurt, like Wood, Prior, Burnett.

Then you have a new crop come through, like Hamels, Billingsley, Felix, Lincecum, Kershaw, Cain, etc.

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 02:28 AM
I hope so:(

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 02:32 AM
The young pitchers in baseball are a lot more exciting than all the veterans that every team carries. The under 25 crowd is really strong right now.

LBCgiantsfan
01-05-2009, 04:31 AM
To get 300 wins you need to pitch for 20 years, not only that you need to be awesome for 20 years... Maddux pitched for 22 seasons got 355 wins but he had at least 15 wins for how many consecutive seasons? Look at Randy Johnson he's 45 and I think this will be his 20th season and he only has 255. You have to be extremely lucky that your body doesnt break down, and you have to have the will power to play that long.

I really dont think anyone will get 300 wins for along time and if they do they'll have to start when they're really young, and be Maddux like.

Randy has 295 wins

Forum7200
01-05-2009, 09:44 AM
Bill James had that one correct... Molitor, Murray, Ripken, Brett, Gwynn, Winfield, Biggio, Henderson, Palmeiro, Boggs have all gotten to 3000 hits since 1990

Don't forget about Jeter and Arod who are both going to hit 3,000 in the next 3 (Jeter) - 5 years (Arod)

Morgan
01-05-2009, 10:26 AM
CC will not win 300 games. He'll end up with between 220 - 240 but, he definitely won't get to 300. If we do see another 300 game winner it will be some young stud who gets 20 wins his rookie season. If the Rays didn't suck so bad for the beginning of Kazmir's career he would have a chance to get to 300 but, he won't and there isn't anyone in baseball right now that will.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 10:44 AM
CC will not win 300 games. He'll end up with between 220 - 240 but, he definitely won't get to 300. If we do see another 300 game winner it will be some young stud who gets 20 wins his rookie season. If the Rays didn't suck so bad for the beginning of Kazmir's career he would have a chance to get to 300 but, he won't and there isn't anyone in baseball right now that will.

There's no reason to say that. CC actually has approximately the same number of wins that Maddux had at his same age. I don't see anything in CC's past that would indicate that he will be as consistent as Maddux, and he had a slightly earlier start, but it's not impossible. And, barring injuries, Hamels, Lincecum and Billingsley all have the stuff to get to 300.

torontocubs
01-05-2009, 11:11 AM
The way I see it, the problem right now is not the difficulty to post 300 wins in a career, but the steady decline of a 20 win season. You can point to so many different factors, pitch counts, inning restrictions, days off, injuries, etc... but the fact is that starters simply aren't getting to the twenty win plateau nearly as often as they used to. This has a huge effect on the chances at getting to 300. Here's just some basic math that I think helps this situation ...

With the exception of a few, the average age for a starting pitcher appears to be about 22 or 23? And I would say with the exception of guys like Maddux, Glavine, Johnson etc who are trying to reach a milestone, the average career ends at around 38-39? Here are the win totals per season needed to get to 300 based on age.

20 year career - 15 wins per season every season start to finish
19 year career - 15.7 wins per season
18 year career - 16.6 wins per season
17 year career - 17.6 wins per season
16 year career - 18.75 wins per season
15 year career - 20 wins per season

I think those numbers make it a lot clearer, not a lot of guys in this era of baseball are ever going to be able to throw a 20 year career. I am aware that great seasons skew the number of wins needed in the next season, basic math like that, but those averages paint a pretty clear picture of the difficulty of attaining 300 wins. A 15 year career, a kid entering as a stud rookie out of college, say at maybe the age of 23 needs to win on average 20 games straight every season until hes 38 to reach 300, that is just an incredible average to maintain.

I personally point to the improvement of the bullpen, as well as the expansion to a Five man rotation as the main causes of the decline. Guys are not going as deep into games, and thus there are more no decisions then ever before. Guys are getting less starts that pitchers 20 years ago. Pretty simple if you ask me, if you pitch less often, with a lower chance of winning (shorter starts) than you are simply going to accumulate fewer wins.

bagwell368
01-05-2009, 11:19 AM
wins is a team stat. win % over the average of the team? Yeah, that's useful as a career measure.

forget the numbers. Schilling is a HOF, and look at the amount of his wins.

You want numbers? Give me a guy with 4000 IP and a 125 or greater ERA+ and I'll show you a slam dunk HOF.

Given the salaries a lot of guys are going to pitch until they are 44 years old. Look at Moyer. One - three guys active now will get 275...

bagwell368
01-05-2009, 11:31 AM
In the "old" 4 man rotation days lots of guys would rack up 36-40 starts per year. Now its more 32-34 - and that's for the ace, the #5 guy is lucky to get to 28 starts.

But if you look at RC, RJ, GM you see longer careers - so a guy that averages 16 wins a year for 19 years is more like you will see and nobody doing a 13 year career averaging 19 wins a year

Don't forget teams like the Red Sox give even healthy starters 2-3-4 starts off in Aug or Sep, not for injury but for freshness in the playoffs, and they have had a better run of health in pitchers then most teams the past 5-7 years, so look for more of this not less.

BTW, Randy Johnson has 295 wins, not 255.

bagwell368
01-05-2009, 11:43 AM
Top 5 GS for different starters

GS for Sutton: 41, 40, 38, 38, 37

GS for Randy: 35, 35, 35, 35, 34

GS for Halladay: 36, 34, 33, 32, 31 (yeah, the horse, snort)

tough to win if you don't start.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 11:44 AM
I personally point to the improvement of the bullpen, as well as the expansion to a Five man rotation as the main causes of the decline. Guys are not going as deep into games, and thus there are more no decisions then ever before. Guys are getting less starts that pitchers 20 years ago. Pretty simple if you ask me, if you pitch less often, with a lower chance of winning (shorter starts) than you are simply going to accumulate fewer wins.

Maddux, Johnson, Glavine and Clemens all played their entire careers pitching in a 5-man rotation.

And it's simply not true that there are more no decisions today than 20 years ago. Starting pitching accounts for the same identical % of wins today that it has for the past 30 years.

The only change is that starting pitching hasn't been as good.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 11:49 AM
Now its more 32-34 - and that's for the ace, the #5 guy is lucky to get to 28 starts.

I don't think that anyone is claiming that a #5 guy is going to sniff 175 wins, let alone 300.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 12:02 PM
Sidd Finch could have won 300 games easy.

bagwell368
01-05-2009, 12:12 PM
Maddux, Johnson, Glavine and Clemens all played their entire careers pitching in a 5-man rotation.

And it's simply not true that there are more no decisions today than 20 years ago. Starting pitching accounts for the same identical % of wins today that it has for the past 30 years.

The only change is that starting pitching hasn't been as good.

SP's % of wins may be the same, but more guys start today then 20 years ago - I.E. 6th and 7th SP's the Red Sox have them, other bigger budget teams are moving to them.

Considering RJ, RC, GM, PM have either just retired, or about to retire and all rank within the top 15 all time, I have trouble agreeing with you. And when we also add the best closer of all time - Mariano, and then these folks: Santana, Oswalt, Webb, Halladay, Zambrano, Schilling, Smoltz, Hudson, Mussian, Buehrle, Lowe, CC, Peavey - all of whom are in the top 75 all time in ERA+ I have to ask, what are you talking about?

30 years ago is a particular weak point to talk about starters, the starters of the past 5 years, completely wipe out the guys of 76-81. Guidry was great for a couple of years, Leonard had a great one, Palmer was wrapping up, Eck had a big year. Stone, John, McGregor? Perry, Niekro, Richard, Carleton, Seavers tail end. No better, and IMO weaker slice then the past 5.

bagwell368
01-05-2009, 12:15 PM
I don't think that anyone is claiming that a #5 guy is going to sniff 175 wins, let alone 300.

No, but if a guy starts out as a #5 for 4 years, that's some lost starts. If he gets placed on the DL more for less issues then 30 years ago. BTW, do you know what the LAD did to Koufax? In '66 when he was coming back from a sore arm they made him throw 175 pitches on a cold windy day - since if he couldn't throw that many balls he was worthless to them. You think that would ever happen today?

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 12:27 PM
CC will not win 300 games. He'll end up with between 220 - 240 but, he definitely won't get to 300. If we do see another 300 game winner it will be some young stud who gets 20 wins his rookie season. If the Rays didn't suck so bad for the beginning of Kazmir's career he would have a chance to get to 300 but, he won't and there isn't anyone in baseball right now that will.

Defend that statement.

I provided a clear way how CC could get to 300. Why can't he?

bagwell368
01-05-2009, 12:40 PM
Defend that statement.

I provided a clear way how CC could get to 300. Why can't he?

Well assuming health, I could see CC winning an average of 22 games for 4 years, followed by 5 years at an average of 16. That's a total of 88+80 = 168 + 117 that he has now = 295 at age 38; subtract 20 wins for some DL time and that's still 275 at 38. I wouldn't bet against him, and being on the Yanks in that Stadium is going to jack up his wins, and perhaps cut down some on his pitch count as well.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 12:50 PM
SP's % of wins may be the same, but more guys start today then 20 years ago - I.E. 6th and 7th SP's the Red Sox have them, other bigger budget teams are moving to them.

Considering RJ, RC, GM, PM have either just retired, or about to retire and all rank within the top 15 all time, I have trouble agreeing with you. And when we also add the best closer of all time - Mariano, and then these folks: Santana, Oswalt, Webb, Halladay, Zambrano, Schilling, Smoltz, Hudson, Mussian, Buehrle, Lowe, CC, Peavey - all of whom are in the top 75 all time in ERA+ I have to ask, what are you talking about?

30 years ago is a particular weak point to talk about starters, the starters of the past 5 years, completely wipe out the guys of 76-81. Guidry was great for a couple of years, Leonard had a great one, Palmer was wrapping up, Eck had a big year. Stone, John, McGregor? Perry, Niekro, Richard, Carleton, Seavers tail end. No better, and IMO weaker slice then the past 5.

All I was saying about the period twenty years ago is that both eras have the same % of wins coming from starters, so no increase in no decisions.

And I bet if you compare the back of the rotations today to those 20 years ago, the guys pitching today would suffer by comparison. Pick just about any team in baseball and there are probably numerous guys that shouldn't be on a MLB roster.

Tragedy
01-05-2009, 12:56 PM
I don't think it's as cut and dry as "There will never be a 300 game winner again." It's absolutely possible, no doubt about it.

I'll say this: After Randy Johnson, going forward, there will be VERY few, IF ANY 300 game winners. I look at the guys who are "close" (and by close, I mean, MORE than 100 away), and I'm not entirely confident that anyone from that class can do it.

But then we've got to look to the youth - Guys like Hamels and Lincecum. Could they do it? I have my doubts and personally don't see it happening, but who knows, right? All we can do is look into the immediate (5-8 year) future and see that there is very few chances of a 300 game winner. But in 15 years with some of these very young players? Who knows?

buckeye
01-05-2009, 07:01 PM
Unless you assume they will average close to 20 wins for 10 years post 30 there aren't too many chance here. You probably need about 150 by age 30 to have a shot. Most being college players now means they dont hit the bigs until about 24 or 25. Kazmir, Lincecum, Hammels are on the way to that number but its still a big stretch. Kazmir and Lincecum are both peanuts which usually means a shorter carreer ala Pedro. That leaves Hammels and he has 6 years before 30 so he has to average 19 over that term to get to get to 150. Then all he has to do is average 15 per year for another 10. Yes it is possible but unlikely.

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 08:13 PM
Unless you assume they will average close to 20 wins for 10 years post 30 there aren't too many chance here. You probably need about 150 by age 30 to have a shot.

Would you agree Sabathia has a good chance if he stays healthy?

Maz60
01-05-2009, 08:22 PM
Yanks, for example, have been winning regularly since '96 and in all that time theyve had just five 20 Win seasons, Pettitte the only guy to do it twice (Wang 19 twice). So assuming CC is just gonna start cranking em out is a bit far fetched.

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 08:25 PM
Yanks, for example, have been winning regularly since '96 and in all that time theyve had just five 20 Win seasons, Pettitte the only guy to do it twice (Wang 19 twice). So assuming CC is just gonna start cranking em out is a bit far fetched.

CC is a better pitcher than Wang or Pettitte in his prime. His biggest obstacle could be the way his second neck threatens to jump out of his jersey and swallow his face. If he gets any bigger his arms are going to be sticking straight out.

Maz60
01-05-2009, 08:31 PM
CC is a better pitcher than Wang or Pettitte in his prime. His biggest obstacle could be the way his second neck threatens to jump out of his jersey and swallow his face. If he gets any bigger his arms are going to be sticking straight out.

Look, I love CC, I have him on my fantasy team (which should be alarming news to you Yankee fans), but we all know that Wins are very much a team stat and being a fine pitcher doesnt take away from how difficult it is to win 20 even on a good team.

blenderboy5
01-05-2009, 08:35 PM
Yanks, for example, have been winning regularly since '96 and in all that time theyve had just five 20 Win seasons, Pettitte the only guy to do it twice (Wang 19 twice). So assuming CC is just gonna start cranking em out is a bit far fetched.

You might not have read my previous post.

If Sabathia averages 18 wins for the next five seasons, which is reasonable, and averages 15 games for the 5 after that, he'll be at 282... 18 shy of 300 at the age of 38. It's not unreasonable for him to pitch two more seasons and get at least 9 wins.

The above scenario doesn't require him to have a lot of 20 win seasons, or any really.

So no one's assuming he'll win 20 games every year as a yankee

leiasgoldbikini
01-05-2009, 08:36 PM
Look, I love CC, I have him on my fantasy team (which should be alarming news to you Yankee fans), but we all know that Wins are very much a team stat and being a fine pitcher doesnt take away from how difficult it is to win 20 even on a good team.

My guess is that he has several 20 win seasons with the Yankees. That's still a long way from 300. His lack of consistency will probably keep him from 300, assuming all other things go well (health, longevity). But he still has an outside shot. I'd give him a 15% chance.

con_artist
01-05-2009, 08:41 PM
I think it can still be done, no one aside from RJ is close but guys like Doc and Oswalt still have 10+ quality seasons left and they both have around 130 wins each.

Maz60
01-05-2009, 08:42 PM
Well assuming health, I could see CC winning an average of 22 games for 4 years

Sorry, Blender, but this is actually the guy I was responding to. Next time Ill be more specific :)

bones
01-05-2009, 08:44 PM
Health would definatly be my biggest concern for CC doing it. He isn't exactly the model of fitness. But maybe being a big horse will keep him in the lineup. Who knows. But if he ends up getting bigger and looking like David Wells he won't even come close. He'll be topping out about 230

blenderboy5
01-06-2009, 02:56 AM
Sorry, Blender, but this is actually the guy I was responding to. Next time Ill be more specific :)

Yeah that guy might be a bit of a homer lol.

Few pitchers have 4 seasons in a row of 22+ wins.

ciaban
01-06-2009, 05:50 AM
OK first of all it will happen again the real question that is brought up by watching Johnson is will any one ever reach 5000K's or 4000K's(Johnson is 211 short)? The truly great pitchers will reach 300 and I dont think Johan is getting enough love either he has consistently been the best pitcher in the bigs for 5 years now. Also, Barry Zito should be in this, his last two years were not very good but he was lights out after the all-star break, and here is a stat for you in games were pablo sandaval catches zito went on average 8 innings and allowed no more than 1 run. I think a pitcher in a friendly park with 109 wins and 0 history of injury in nine years as a starter deserves some respect he will be the Moyer of his generation.

Matt-the-great
01-06-2009, 06:12 AM
^^^ wow, havent seen Zito love in a looonggg time...

that is an interesting stat about pitching to Sandoval...i hope Zito bounces back....it is rough to see a former Cy winner go down so drastically...

also, he does alot for Charity, i think he is a good guy.

greddy91
01-06-2009, 06:46 AM
My opinion:

Any rookie that began/begins play in the AL West (particularly with the Angels) after 2000 with a good k/bb ratio should be considered a potential to surpass it.

Ervin Santana - would be a good one to watch.

Just remember it's 15 - 20 Win seasons or 20 - 15 Win seasons.