Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 3145
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:45 am Post subject:
If Webb wins 15 games a year every year for the next 10 years, that would give him 197 wins at age 38.
In other words, if he turns into a Greg Maddux clone until his late 30's, he still falls short of 200 wins. Voters may be reducing their dependency on wins, but not to the point where they will vot in a guy with less than 200 wins unless he has eye popping ERA, a dynamic strikeout total, and a fantastic post season resume.
Here are the top 15 active pitchers in Wins
Rank Player (age) Wins Throws
1. Roger Clemens (43) 348 R
2. Greg Maddux (40) 333 R
3. Tom Glavine* (40) 290 L
4. Randy Johnson* (42) 280 L
5. Mike Mussina (37) 239 R
6. David Wells* (43) 230 L
7. Jamie Moyer* (43) 216 L
8. Kevin Brown (41) 211 R
9. Kenny Rogers* (41) 207 L
Curt Schilling (39) 207 R
11. Pedro Martinez (34) 206 R
12. John Smoltz (39) 193 R
13. Andy Pettitte* (34) 186 L
14. Al Leiter* (40) 162 L
15. Tim Wakefield (39) 151 R
Rank Player (age) Wins Throws
1. Roger Clemens (43) 348 R
2. Greg Maddux (40) 333 R
3. Tom Glavine* (40) 290 L
4. Randy Johnson* (42) 280 L
5. Mike Mussina (37) 239 R
6. David Wells* (43) 230 L
7. Jamie Moyer* (43) 216 L
8. Kevin Brown (41) 211 R
9. Kenny Rogers* (41) 207 L
Curt Schilling (39) 207 R
11. Pedro Martinez (34) 206 R
12. John Smoltz (39) 193 R
13. Andy Pettitte* (34) 186 L
14. Al Leiter* (40) 162 L
15. Tim Wakefield (39) 151 R
On that list, the only players with fewer than 300 career wins (projected by the end of their careers... I'm giving glavine and johnson 300+ wins each) who will be in the hall are Pedro and potentially Smoltz. And maybe Schilling. Pedro is for sure, Schilling and Smoltz maybes.
As shoewiz points out, it's hard to get in the HOF. Webb probably needs 18 seasons of 15 + wins each, alongside seasons comparable to his 2006 campaign, to have a shot.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1708
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:59 am Post subject:
levski wrote:
On that list, the only players with fewer than 300 career wins (projected by the end of their careers... I'm giving glavine and johnson 300+ wins each) who will be in the hall are Pedro and potentially Smoltz. And maybe Schilling. Pedro is for sure, Schilling and Smoltz maybes.
As shoewiz points out, it's hard to get in the HOF. Webb probably needs 18 seasons of 15 + wins each, alongside seasons comparable to his 2006 campaign, to have a shot.
Before going to Boston, Schilling was more of a maybe but he's acheived so much fame recently that I just can't see him missing the cut.
Wow, didn't think there were that many CY pitchers not in the HOF. OK, so Webb will need another one of those.
If Webb can put together 16-18 wins over the next 5 yrs, then stayin the 14-16 range for 5 after that, he'd be just over 200. If maybe he can grab another CY, that'll be over 200 wins and 2 CY's, which should put him in the top-5 for his generation of pitchers when it's all said and done.
There's still a lot of work to be done, but if you have to guess 5 pitchers under 30 that are going to be in the HOF, I think a lot of people would put him on the list. Besides, we're about to see all of those top 15 active pitchers start dropping off the map, placnig the new generation front and center. When the media can't talk about RJ, Clemens, Maddux, Smoltz, etc. anymore, it's going to be Johan and BWebb.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
Last edited by dirtygary on Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
How many starting pitchers made their debut between 1984 and 1967 (Seaver)?
Technically, yes, but Ryan (only 2 games in 1966), Sutton, Palmer, Jenkins, Neikro, Hunter and Carlton all essentially had their biggest career impacts during the late 60s-through 70s era. And hey, Eckersley made his debut during that time as well (you didn't say they had to be starting pitchers throughout their entire career).
And Blyleven is a Hall of Fame pitcher too...it's just that the voters haven't recognized it yet.
You mean Bert "be home" Blyleven? Single greatest nickname ever. Even better than Sean "personal" Landetta.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
How many starting pitchers made their debut between 1984 and 1967 (Seaver)?
Technically, yes, but Ryan (only 2 games in 1966), Sutton, Palmer, Jenkins, Neikro, Hunter and Carlton all essentially had their biggest career impacts during the late 60s-through 70s era. And hey, Eckersley made his debut during that time as well (you didn't say they had to be starting pitchers throughout their entire career).
And Blyleven is a Hall of Fame pitcher too...it's just that the voters haven't recognized it yet.
Of course they did! In order to have a HOF career as a pitcher you've got to pitch forat least a decade and a half up to two decades. That doesn't change the fact that there isn't a linear pattern of HOF pitchers that show up in the majors. Even if you include Bly, it only jumps to 1970 and Eck would have never gotten in as just a starting pitcher.
So for at least 14 years, we did not see a HOF pitcher make his debut, but we saw plenty of them pitch. Well Webb (and his peers) made their debuts while several HOF pitchers were pitching, that has nothing to do with anyone from their generation making the HOF eventually.
Someone famous once said "Baseball statistics are the accomplishments of ballplayers in combination with their circumstances."
Seeing Randy on TV last night, so happy and relaxed and full of hopes and dreams for the coming season, I think unless something unforeseen happens, Randy will have an awesome year.
Sorry, shoe, I'm casting a vote for you to call Levski daddy.
By the way, is there a formula that can automatically calculate how to turn the ERA's and Wins in AL to the equivalents in NL? I'm sure had Randy been in the NL last year, even with his bad back, his ERA would have been lower.
_________________
In JB we trust and in RJ we believe.
Rj sounded a lot better than any of the medical reports have shown. If he's serious about not being able to bend over, etc., he could prove all of us realists wrong. And being wrong never have felt so good.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1554
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:49 pm Post subject:
patlawman wrote:
If Levski becomes Shoewizard's daddy, as his brother in law would that make him my Daddy by marriage ? This is getting way too familial for me.
last season i tried to get shoewizard to pay my rent in return for me acting as a quasi-son to him (long story, he would have paid rent, i would have been his loving son, and i think i would have had to quit smoking, too?). but if lev becomes shoe's daddy, he would have been my grandpa.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
last season i tried to get shoewizard to pay my rent in return for me acting as a quasi-son to him (long story, he would have paid rent, i would have been his loving son, and i think i would have had to quit smoking, too?). but if lev becomes shoe's daddy, he would have been my grandpa.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2337
Location: Gold Canyon
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:22 pm Post subject:
David Bracher says levski is shoewizard's daddy...
David Bracher of Chandler wrote:
I'm disappointed to see so many fans reacting negatively to the Diamondbacks reacquiring Randy Johnson.
I had the pleasure, indeed honor, of seeing Johnson pitch in person on at least three occasions (including Game 2 of the World Series) and I saw him countless other times on TV. His incredible pitching never failed to amaze me and I can't wait to see him again for, hopefully, the next two or three years.
While it's a shame that the D-Backs couldn't keep Luis Gonzalez, I'd take an aging RJ, one of the best pitchers in history, over an aging Gonzo. The D-Backs needed pitching and I believe they will get more from Johnson than they would from almost any other pitcher on the market this off-season.
Many statistical predictions even estimate his ERA this season at around 3.50. So, good luck RJ, and good luck D-Backs!
You tell 'em, David. I 2nd all of your sentiments except for the "or three years" part. Randy has said several times since signing on that 2008 is it for him. He won't come back to pitch in 2009 even if he's short of 300 wins.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1783
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:17 am Post subject:
TAP wrote:
You tell 'em, David. I 2nd all of your sentiments except for the "or three years" part. Randy has said several times since signing on that 2008 is it for him. He won't come back to pitch in 2009 even if he's short of 300 wins.
Oh, I dunno about that... Can you see him getting to 295-298 by the end of '08, and not thinking, "I've got enough to get a few more...?"
But, here's hoping he's at about 298 at the end of '07!
_________________
Is It Next Season Yet?
I don't know why the guy is calling a retirement press conference 2 yrs before. Isn't that a decision he should make after the '08 season?
As much as I initially thought RJ would come back to get the 300, I don't think he will anymore. Primarily because if he's still under 300 after 2 more yrs, he's probably sucked ass for two years and doesn't want to play anymore.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
I don't know why the guy is calling a retirement press conference 2 yrs before. Isn't that a decision he should make after the '08 season?
As much as I initially thought RJ would come back to get the 300, I don't think he will anymore. Primarily because if he's still under 300 after 2 more yrs, he's probably sucked ass for two years and doesn't want to play anymore.
I don't think he'd come back solely to get 300, but if he gets another 30-40 wins over the next two seasons and returns to his '04 form after fixing his back problems, I could see him sticking around because he feels like he still has something left in the tank and wants to continue to play.
I would imagine that he'd want to retire with everything he's accomplished, but this is the same guy who wanted to keep pitching after he was told than he would need regular cortizone injections into his knee because all of the fluid was gone, and the same guy who wants to come back now after his second major back surgery...so who knows what a couple good years in AZ could do to him.
It's pointless to speculate though because so much can happen just between now and Spring Training, let alone 2 years from now.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2337
Location: Gold Canyon
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:14 pm Post subject:
Nice little article from last week's NY Times:
Alan Schwarz wrote:
The quip has become a chorus.
In debating whether Barry Zito will earn his $126 million for seven years from the San Francisco Giants after posting a combined 3.85 earned-run average with Oakland the last two seasons, many observers say, "But he is going to the National League."
Roger Clemens is considering a return to the New York Yankees or the Boston Red Sox after steamrolling opponents in Houston for three seasons, and warnings sound, "But he'll be moving back to the American League."
Randy Johnson gets himself traded from the Yankees back to the Arizona Diamondbacks, and everyone expects his ERA (5.00 last season) to plummet: "He'll be much better back in the National League."
For all its status as the senior circuit, the National League has become a shelter of sorts for pitchers, a safe haven from AL lineups that tend to pelt them with three-run homers and force early showers. Pitching in the AL — with its designated hitter and stronger No. 9 batters — makes moving to the NL feel liberating.
Teams and fans have long understood a pitcher can see his ERA fluctuate by half a run merely by switching leagues, as if stepping up to or down from a high curb. But evidence suggests, less visibly, a pitcher's relative effectiveness — his performance compared with that of his league peers — is affected as well.
From 2000 through 2005, 57 starting pitchers (those with at least 20 starts that season) switched leagues the next year — 29 to the NL from the AL and 28 in the other direction. Their statistics moved with them: Combined ERAs for the new National Leaguers decreased to 3.94 from 4.79, or 0.85 of a run, while their counterparts' increased to 4.64 from 3.94, a move of 0.70.
ERA is shaped by more than a pitcher's talent: His league, home-ballpark dimensions and other factors can greatly distort an ERA and its interpretation.
A statistic called ERA-Plus, presented on baseball-reference.com, adjusts for these influences and yields a pitcher's percentage, either above or below a league's average. For example, Zito's 3.83 ERA last season in Oakland — a good pitchers' environment — translates to a figure of 116, or 16 percent better than the AL average.
Theoretically, a pitcher's ERA-Plus should not be affected much by a change in leagues. But switching circuits still seems to make a substantial difference in how a pitcher performs.
Of the 29 pitchers moving to the NL from the AL, their ERA-Plus figures increased to 110 (10 percent above league average) from 97 (just below average). This smaller shift than in ERA is nonetheless more significant: It indicates that starters of equal caliber are more successful in the less suffocating National League.
Pitchers found moving to the AL from the NL correspondingly unpleasant — the ERA-Plus scores of the 28 pitchers decreased to 100 from 113, or to absolute average from healthily above. It seems moving to the AL is such a challenge that pitchers, at least temporarily, regress.
In Zito's case, should his ERA-Plus increase to 131 from last year's 116 — the same 13 percent jump that his league-hopping predecessors enjoyed — that and the effects of San Francisco's roomy AT&T Park could drop his ERA from 3.83 to a considerably more impressive 3.30.
So, according to this article, "Combined ERAs for the new National Leaguers decreased to 3.94 from 4.79, or 0.85 of a run," and that doesn't account for the additional increase in quality one might expect to see from a recovered back injury. It'll be interesting to see how Randy fares -- the stars appear to be in favorable alignment.
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
