Bravo Baseball Writers!!!!!

Captain Track wrote:

At least there is one group in Baseball who have decided to draw the line on 'roids and protect the history and true records of the game..Great job voting!!!

Agreed! Once we're done with the steroid users, let's kick out all the admitted amphetamine users, like that bum Hank Aaron! And then the pitchers who doctored the ball, like Gaylord Perry! We better get rid of racist psychopaths too, so Ty Cobb is out. The Hall should be for saints only. And who better than a bunch of baseball beat writers to make those moral judgments!

I don't think this deal is valid since baseball is mostly doped up roiders. I can understand the writers protecting their turf. But it's a disservice to sports and athletes to glorify PED users.

Gary Carter 1974-1992 YEARS-19 GAMES-2296 AB-7971 RUNS-1025 HITS-2092 2B-371 3B-31 HR-324 RBI-1225 BB-848 S0-997 AVG-.262 OBP-.335 SLG-.439

Johnny Bench 1967-1983 17 2158 7658 1091 2048 381 24 389 1376 891 1278 .267 .342 .476

bill james wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

The next one may not be so long. Jamie Moyer has 267 wins right now.

Jamie Moyer is 48 years old. He will not get 33 more wins.

He might. I sure wouldn't have bet on him lasting this long. He is going to pitch this season. I wouldn't put it past him to last a couple more. It's not like he is losing velocity off his fastball any more.

Eugene the Careful Axe Weilder wrote:

Now I'm not saying we'll never see any more 300 game winners, but I do believe that until (if ever) teams return to 4-man rotations it is far less likely that a current pitcher will reach 300 wins than in the past.

All of the recent 300 game winners (Glavine, Maddux, Clemons, and Johnson) pitched entirely in the era of 5 man rotations.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Eugene the Careful Axe Weilder wrote:

Now I'm not saying we'll never see any more 300 game winners, but I do believe that until (if ever) teams return to 4-man rotations it is far less likely that a current pitcher will reach 300 wins than in the past.

All of the recent 300 game winners (Glavine, Maddux, Clemons, and Johnson) pitched entirely in the era of 5 man rotations.

People will continue to win 300 but it will continue to be fewer than in the past. Moyer will not reach 300. He would need at least 3 more years, putting him at nearly 51 years old. Further, he is not even currently signed with a team, I don't believe. He might pitch, but if he returns to the Phillies, he'll be the #5, earning even fewer starts. If he goes elsewhere, he's just not likely to win as much.

Wendell Gee wrote:

People will continue to win 300 but it will continue to be fewer than in the past. Moyer will not reach 300. He would need at least 3 more years, putting him at nearly 51 years old. Further, he is not even currently signed with a team, I don't believe. He might pitch, but if he returns to the Phillies, he'll be the #5, earning even fewer starts. If he goes elsewhere, he's just not likely to win as much.

Actually the four 300 game winners in the past decade means that statistically 300 game winners are over-represented historically in the 5 man pitching rotation era. It might be a statistical anomaly, as that is a small sample size. The previous generation of 300 game winners (Carlton, Seaver, Ryan, Sutton, Neikro) all pitched some of their career in the era of 5 man rotations as well. Just about every team switched to a five man rotation by the mid-late 70s, with only the Orioles continuing with a 4 man rotation into the 80s. Warren Spahn and Early Wynn were the last pitchers to win 300 games pitching exclusively in 4 man rotations--I guess you could count Jim Palmer, too as he pitched the vast majority of his career before the Orioles converted. Between 1924 and 1982 only 3 men won their 300th game.

I don't know if Moyer will make it or not, I would bet against him but of course I would have bet against a soft tossing junk baller lasting more than another year or two when he was 38.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Actually the four 300 game winners in the past decade means that statistically 300 game winners are over-represented historically in the 5 man pitching rotation era. It might be a statistical anomaly, as that is a small sample size. The previous generation of 300 game winners (Carlton, Seaver, Ryan, Sutton, Neikro) all pitched some of their career in the era of 5 man rotations as well. Just about every team switched to a five man rotation by the mid-late 70s, with only the Orioles continuing with a 4 man rotation into the 80s. Warren Spahn and Early Wynn were the last pitchers to win 300 games pitching exclusively in 4 man rotations--I guess you could count Jim Palmer, too as he pitched the vast majority of his career before the Orioles converted. Between 1924 and 1982 only 3 men won their 300th game.

The rarity of 300 game winners before 1982 is interesting and there are many reasons (money, worse injury prevention, etc.).

Here are the top 20 in games won by active pitchers:

1. Jamie Moyer (47) 267 L

2. Andy Pettitte (38) 240 L

3. Tim Wakefield (43) 193 R

4. Roy Halladay (33) 169 R

5. Livan Hernandez (35) 166 R

6. Tim Hudson (34) 165 R

7. Kevin Millwood (35) 159 R

8. Derek Lowe (37) 157 R

CC Sabathia (29) 157 L

10. Javier Vazquez (34) 152 R

11. Roy Oswalt (32) 150 R

12. Mark Buehrle (31) 148 L

Mike Hampton (37) 148 L

14. Barry Zito (32) 142 L

15. Jeff Suppan (35) 138 R

16. Chris Carpenter (35) 133 R

Freddy Garcia (35) 133 R

Johan Santana (31) 133 L

19. Jon Garland (30) 131 R

20. Chan Ho Park (37) 124 R

Realistically, who has a chance?

Moyer outside, Pettitte extreme outside (if he continues to pitch, which I doubt).

Maybe Halladay if he has Clemens type endurance.

Sabathia is a possibility. I'd be shocked to see anyone else on that list make it. Predicting for guys w/ fewer than 120 wins is pretty tough!

I'd say that if 2 of those guys make it, it would be impressive.

Mark Buehrle will get 300 if he pitches long enough (into his early 40s)- he is unlikely to see much drop off as he ages.

Also, the only two people who would shock me if they turned out to use steroids are Frank Thomas (who was adamantly in favor of testing in the early 90s) and Griffey. Both those guys are first ballot hall of famers in my opinion.

Wendell Gee wrote:

The rarity of 300 game winners before 1982 is interesting and there are many reasons (money, worse injury prevention, etc.).

It is interesting. Unknowable but interesting to wonder if Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale, Whitey Ford, Robin Roberts, Lefty Grove, Juan Marichal, and Sandy Koufax might have won 300 games if they pitched in a 5 man rotation. May have kept them healthier. 300 wins is a massive feat historically, especially if you don't look at the guys who pitched in the 1800s (I don't think you can--Charles Old Hoss Radbourn won 309 games in 11 years pitching in a 2 man rotation. He pitched underhanded, I don't think it is the same game).

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Wendell Gee wrote:

The rarity of 300 game winners before 1982 is interesting and there are many reasons (money, worse injury prevention, etc.).

It is interesting. Unknowable but interesting to wonder if Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale, Whitey Ford, Robin Roberts, Lefty Grove, Juan Marichal, and Sandy Koufax might have won 300 games if they pitched in a 5 man rotation. May have kept them healthier. 300 wins is a massive feat historically, especially if you don't look at the guys who pitched in the 1800s (I don't think you can--Charles Old Hoss Radbourn won 309 games in 11 years pitching in a 2 man rotation. He pitched underhanded, I don't think it is the same game).

In some ways, it's not fair to consider pre-1920 when Babe Ruth revolutionized hitting, but certainly pre-1900 is a different sport.

1. Cy Young+ 511 R (267 BEFORE 1900)

2. Walter Johnson+ 417 R (ERA BEFORE 1920 UNDER 2.00, AFTER 1920 OVER 3.00, WINS PLUMMETED TOO)

3. Pete Alexander+ 373 R (SERIOUSLY, SAME AS JOHNSON)

Christy Mathewson+ 373 R (AGAIN)

5. Pud Galvin+ 365 R (PUD? REALLY? HE WENT 46-29 ONE YEAR. AWESOME)

7. Kid Nichols+ 361 R (ANOTHER PRE-1900 MOSTLY)

10. Tim Keefe+ 342 R (AGAIN. DID WIN 40 TWICE)

12. John Clarkson+ 328 R (AGAIN. 53 WINS ONE YEAR)

13. Eddie Plank+ 326 L (ALL PRE-1920)

19. Old Hoss Radbourn+ 309 R (PITCHED 11 YEARS!! HAD OVER 100 WINS A TWO-YEAR STRETCH)

20. Mickey Welch+ 307 R (OUTSIDE OF HIS 44 WIN YEAR, HE WASN'T THAT GREAT. MOSTLY PRE-1890)

Of these guys, I think it's fair to say that Young, Johnson, Alexander and Mathewson could win 300 any time.

In some ways, Warren Spahn's 363 wins is the most amazing. Especially in his era.

Obviously another reason for the rarity of 300-game winners in the near future is going to be the early hook that starters got nowadays. The result is a lot of "no decisions."

not kilgore wrote:

Gary Carter 1974-1992 YEARS-19 GAMES-2296 AB-7971 RUNS-1025 HITS-2092 2B-371 3B-31 HR-324 RBI-1225 BB-848 S0-997 AVG-.262 OBP-.335 SLG-.439

Johnny Bench 1967-1983 17 2158 7658 1091 2048 381 24 389 1376 891 1278 .267 .342 .476

Of course Bench was better than Carter. Johnny Bench was the best catcher of all time. I'm not sure that Bench's stats disqualify Carter from being the best catcher of "his time." Sure, their careers overlapped for a few years, but Bench's best years were over by the 80s, when Carter's best years were just beginning.

In other words, Bench was obviously the best catcher of his time, the 70s, but Carter was the best catcher of his time, the 80s.

Yeah, I've never heard anyone claim Carter was better than Bench. Doesn't mean they shouldn't both be in the Hall.

Wendell Gee wrote:

In some ways, Warren Spahn's 363 wins is the most amazing. Especially in his era.

Very true. I would put Maddux's 355 up there, too.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

The next one may not be so long. Jamie Moyer has 267 wins right now.

Jamie Moyer will never win 300. He's already about 45 years old and he wasn't worth a damn this season.

No need to rate Maddux higher than Clemens. He ended up with about one more career win but with about 80 more losses. Yeah, I know, Clemens did steroids. Whatever.

I think you all are forgetting something. Steriods were not against the rules until very recently. Most of the guys you are ralleying against did nothing against the rules of the game. Why are you trying to see them punished?

The fault belongs 100% on MLB not the players for PED use prior to them making it against the rules. Their osterich routine during the 90's and early 2000's is what has make a mockery of the game. Not some guys playing by the rules as they existed.

If I was Mark M. I would have told Congress that yes I took steriods under the guidance of a doctor but it wasn't against the rules so fault MLB if you don't like it.

Noone is holding MLB accountable for the problem but rather the players who did nothing against the rules.

Sally Say Something wrote:

I think you all are forgetting something. Steriods were not against the rules until very recently. Most of the guys you are ralleying against did nothing against the rules of the game. Why are you trying to see them punished?

The fault belongs 100% on MLB not the players for PED use prior to them making it against the rules. Their osterich routine during the 90's and early 2000's is what has make a mockery of the game. Not some guys playing by the rules as they existed.

If I was Mark M. I would have told Congress that yes I took steriods under the guidance of a doctor but it wasn't against the rules so fault MLB if you don't like it.

Noone is holding MLB accountable for the problem but rather the players who did nothing against the rules.

I agree with you. McGwire has somehow become the fall guy for the steroid era because he did such a poor job of managing the media. In the meantime, MLB and management is never called into question. What about La Russa? Of course he knew nothing, right? He never even suspected his star player might be taking PEDs. The players are taking all of the blame.