Guest Anglesault Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Its pretty cool that the AL East is now officially a 4 team race again Wouldn't go that far. Three team, yes. Four team? Not quite. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest treble charged Report post Posted June 2, 2003 They're trying it now since they have the first 3 Mondays in June off, so they'll still be able to have some of their guys get enough rest. I like it, personally, since I'd rather have Halladay or Lidle go more often then have someone like Doug Davis or Tanyon Strurtze out there once a week. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest phoenixrising Report post Posted June 2, 2003 On the thought of 300 being the magic number for the HoF: Bert Blylevin (sp?) had something like 287 wins for a lot of shitty teams and still isn't in the Hall. One thing about Blyleven, John and Kaat is that while they have impressive win totals, part of those totals is the result of 20+ years in the bigs. Kaat and John both pitched for 25 years, and Blyleven pitched around 20. Blyleven also only had one 20 win season in his career. So he's got great numbers, but you could argue that's because he pitched for so long. The comment he made didn't help any...remember these are the same voters who never have unanimously voted a player in...Orlando Cepeda got busted for drugs after he retired and it took him over 20 years to make the Hall. Why is Kaat not in the Hall? Sure he played 25 years, but he did put up impressive totals in the prime of his career, and he won something like 16 consecutive Gold Gloves. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted June 2, 2003 I think Blyleven pissed off voters when he said something in an interview a few years ago to the effect of "If they aren't going to induct me this year, just leave me off the goddamn ballot. I don't care anymore." Blyleven wasn't always the most cordial guy with the media. But I think eventually he'll make it either late by the writers, or the veterans committee. A comparison of Roger Clemens with Zito, Mulder, Hudson. Keep in mind this includes what the 3 pitchers are on pace to win this year. Roger Clemens 4 yrs 60 wins 5 yrs 78 wins Tim Hudson 5 yrs 76 wins Mark Mulder 4 yrs 73 wins Barry Zito 4 yrs 65 wins Roger Clemens 12 yrs 182 wins Pedro Martinez 12 yrs 164 wins Obviously you can't determine what will happen with 4 mentioned pitchers. But it's interesting to compare their win totals with Clemens. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MarvinisaLunatic Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Its pretty cool that the AL East is now officially a 4 team race again Wouldn't go that far. Three team, yes. Four team? Not quite. The Orioles are only 4 1/2 games behind the Yankees. 4 1/2 games out of first, and they are in 4th place. I think the AL East is definitely a 4 team race..for now..Probably won't stay that way, but for now it is.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted June 2, 2003 One great tool baseball-reference.com has is that it compares a player's stats with others at his age.... Most similar to Mark Mulder @ 24: Andy Pettitte Most similar to Barry Zito @ 24: Dave Ferriss (Ferriss went 46-16 in his first two seasons with the Red So in '45-'46 before falling off the table. I would guess he suffered an injury.) Most similar to Tim Hudson @ 26: Freddy Garcia For comparison's sake, Roger Clemens at 24 was most similar to.....Jim Palmer. And Vern, when discussing career patterns, you have to go with age. Years played skewers your results. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MaxPower27 Report post Posted June 2, 2003 al, do you think any of Oakland's big 3 will get to 300? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted June 2, 2003 I doubt it, simply because the odds of any pitcher making 300 are slim. heck, Bob Gibson didn't make it. Robin Roberts won 20 games 6 times before he turned 30, and he fell short. The other problem is that pitcher's careers are minefields, littered with arm injuries. Its impossible to tell if a pitcher will last. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest the pinjockey Report post Posted June 2, 2003 I think Mulder may have a shot at making it. The way he has been pitching CGs (I think he has 5 or 6 already?) he may be the long haul type pitcher. Now I don't see many A's games so I don't know if he has the type of rubber arm that can throw a lot or if they are just overusing him. But if he is capable of throwing a CG anytime he goes out there without risk of injury he may have what it takes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MaxPower27 Report post Posted June 2, 2003 I doubt it, simply because the odds of any pitcher making 300 are slim. heck, Bob Gibson didn't make it. Robin Roberts won 20 games 6 times before he turned 30, and he fell short. The other problem is that pitcher's careers are minefields, littered with arm injuries. Its impossible to tell if a pitcher will last. So far, Mulder and Zito have been relatively injury free. Hudson has had some problems I think, but the two lefties are solid players. Think Oakland will ever win another WS? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Al, I understand what your saying. Those 3 pitchers are relatively the same age that Clemens was. Zito 25, Hudson 27, and Mulder 26. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Think Oakland will ever win another WS? Absolutely. If they don't within a few years, it won't be through lack of talent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MarvinisaLunatic Report post Posted June 2, 2003 I dont think any pitchers after Maddux will win 300. Asking a pitcher to win 40% of the games they start (15 wins in 35 or so starts) every year over a 20 year career now would be like trying to pull teeth from an alligator. Not going to be easy. Pitchers rarely go past the 7th inning any more and often the bullpens will blow several games for pitchers over a season (as evidenced by todays game where the Yanks bullpen couldn't hold a 1 run lead..).. Now, it can be said that pitchers might be able to pitch more than 20 years given the conditioning that they have now, but there have also been way more injuries to pitchers as of late that are going to put a dent into how long pitchers can start. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted June 2, 2003 I don't think injuries have increased. Rather, we see more pitchers suffer injuries that come back because of modern medical techniques. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MaxPower27 Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Zito's 25, and at 53 wins Mulder is going to be 26 in August and has 57 Hudson is going to be 28 in July and has 68 wins I think at least one of them is going to do it, personally Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted June 2, 2003 The scary thing is Rich Harden could be better than those 3. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MarvinisaLunatic Report post Posted June 2, 2003 I don't think injuries have increased. Rather, we see more pitchers suffer injuries that come back because of modern medical techniques. yes, but take into consideration that every start that a pitcher misses because of an injury will make it harder to win 15 games in that season. If a pitcher misses 3 starts (about what a pitcher would miss going on the 15 Day DL) that would leave them with 30 starts, and meaning that they'd have to win 50% of their starts to get 15 that year, probably impossible. Sure they could win more than 15 in another year, but lets not forget that winning 20 games is not easy to do, so theres not much room for error in that respect. I think that when this generation of pitchers retires in 10-15 years, the standard will probably be around 250-275 wins for the HOF. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted June 2, 2003 What I meant is look at a pitcher like Dizzy Dean. He got injured, and that was his career. No Tommoy John surgery. No comeback. The main factor nowadays is the amount of decisions the pitcher gets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MarvinisaLunatic Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Mike Mussina is 111 short of 300. As much as I hate to say this (Moose being the big sellout that he is and whatnot..) he probably has a chance at 300. He would need to go 7 more years avg. 16 wins a season to do it... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DrTom Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Mussina is not a sellout. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted June 2, 2003 Mark Prior. Great stuff, and great mechanics. Going out on a limb... yes. But Prior will win 300. That's how good I think he"ll be after less than 2 years. He learned at a young age how to pitch with less strain on your arm. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BobbyWhioux Report post Posted June 2, 2003 An interesting question about the 300 debate: People are bringing up how few people these days are contenders, and mentioning guys like Byleven and Katt who just missed... When did the 5 man rotation become the general rule in the bigs? [i seem to remember in the 80's 4 man rotations still existing...] I'd be interested to see how that has increased the difficulty of winning 300 games in a career (not enough starts...sort of like how it has made a 30 win season all but mathmatically impossible) and how those pitchers who played in the days of the 4 man rotation or at least played part of their career in that era fared in the quest for 300? [162 game season / 4 man rotation = 40-41 starts per pitcher, assuming health.] [162 game season / 5 man rotation = 32-33 starts per pitcher, assuming health.] (your "top two" pitchers would get those extra starts in games 161 and 162) If a pitcher wins 20 games a year for 15 years (sign that guy!!!) that's 300. in 15 years, a 4 man rotation pitcher gets 120 more starts than a guy pitching those same 15 years in a 5 man rotation. My basic point is maybe 300 win careers are, like 30 win seasons, a thing of the past thanks to the 5 man rotation? I'd be interested to see how many years Clemens and Maddux got in during the 4 man rotation days, and thus how many more starts they got when they were young and strong, starts that, say, Pedro and Mulder and Zito won't ever get because of the 5 man rotation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted June 3, 2003 My basic point is maybe 300 win careers are, like 30 win seasons, a thing of the past thanks to the 5 man rotation? I'd be interested to see how many years Clemens and Maddux got in during the 4 man rotation days, and thus how many more starts they got when they were young and strong, starts that, say, Pedro and Mulder and Zito won't ever get because of the 5 man rotation. Insignificant. I don't think Clemens and Maddux ever pitched a 4 man rotation, and if they did, they got no more than 5-10 extra starts. And they lost them during the strike anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BobbyWhioux Report post Posted June 4, 2003 My basic point is maybe 300 win careers are, like 30 win seasons, a thing of the past thanks to the 5 man rotation? I'd be interested to see how many years Clemens and Maddux got in during the 4 man rotation days, and thus how many more starts they got when they were young and strong, starts that, say, Pedro and Mulder and Zito won't ever get because of the 5 man rotation. Insignificant. I don't think Clemens and Maddux ever pitched a 4 man rotation, and if they did, they got no more than 5-10 extra starts. And they lost them during the strike anyway. Eh, the '94 strike. Good point... forgot about that little eyesore on the game's history. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
