Guthrie's Peers

[DrungoHazewood]

I think I touched on this in a thread a while back, but it's interesting to see the list of pitchers who have career ERA+s right around the same as Jeremy Guthrie. He's at 105, and I limited my search to guys who were mainly starters and had an ERA+ between 103-107:

Mark Mulder
Dave McNally
Herb Pennock (HOF)
Bob Welch
Jack Morris
Catfish Hunter (HOF)
Pete Vuckovich
Denny Neagle
Jamie Moyer
Dennis Martinez
Johnny Podres
Bruce Hurst
Early Wynn (HOF)
Kevin Millwood
Rube Marquard (HOF)
Mickey Lolich
Vinegar Bend Mizell
Camilo Pascual
Frank Tanana
Bobo Newsome
Matt Garza
Zane Smith

What do all of those guys have in common? They all have a better winning percentage than Guthrie. Dave McNally went 184-119 with basically the same league-adjusted ERA as Guthrie, who is currently 42-61. Four other guys made it to the Hall with similar rate stats.

Actually, Cherokee Fischer, a guy from the 1870s who threw underhanded and allowed like six unearned runs a game, is the only pitcher in history with an ERA+ near Guthrie's with a worse W/L record.

That's what pitching for the Orioles in the 2000s will do to you.

[O-The-Memories]

Heck of a list of pitchers on that list. Good job Jeremy, and hopefully you get traded to a contender.

[Frobby]

I love Guthrie, and he's been very unlucky over the years with both run support and bullpen support.

But I have to add, he also has a touch of what I call "Alydar syndrome." For those too young to remember, Alydar was a great racehorse who finished 2nd in all three Triple Crown races in 1977. He just never had quite enough to get past Affirmed, who beat him all three races, by a smaller amount each time (the Belmont was by a nose).

Some pitchers just have a knack that when they get a lead, they bear down and never give it up. Guthrie has never had that knack. And that's part of the reason why he is 42-61, whereas Rodrigo Lopez, who played on equally bad teams and had an ERA+ of 94 for us, was 60-58.

To be clear -- I'm not putting it all on Guthrie. Just a bit of it.

[El Gordo]

I love Guthrie, and he's been very unlucky over the years with both run support and bullpen support.

But I have to add, he also has a touch of what I call "Alydar syndrome." For those too young to remember, Alydar was a great racehorse who finished 2nd in all three Triple Crown races in 1977. He just never had quite enough to get past Affirmed, who beat him all three races, by a smaller amount each time (the Belmont was by a nose).

Some pitchers just have a knack that when they get a lead, they bear down and never give it up. Guthrie has never had that knack. And that's part of the reason why he is 42-61, whereas Rodrigo Lopez, who played on equally bad teams and had an ERA+ of 94 for us, was 60-58.

To be clear -- I'm not putting it all on Guthrie. Just a bit of it.Guts is so used to pitching from behind, that that's his comfort zone. When you give him a lead, he likes to give it back so he can stay comfortable. I think if he pitched for the Yankees he would get enough leads that he'd be able to adjust.:laughlol:

[Moose Milligan]

I really like Guthrie a lot and wouldn't mind keeping him.

However, part of me hopes he gets traded to a contender so he can feel what its like to play for a winner. He deserves something good.

[JERSEYORIOLE]

I really like Guthrie a lot and wouldn't mind keeping him.

However, part of me hopes he gets traded to a contender so he can feel what its like to play for a winner. He deserves something good.

I love Guts. I go back and forth on dealing him. If the deal is a home run, you have to do it, no questions asked. But if it's a marginal deal. Id let Guthrie make the call. Sit him down and ask him. " Guts, you want to go play for the Reds and make a run at playing in the playoffs?" I wonder if that has ever been done. If a player has been asked. Of course this would be players without no trade clauses.

[Don Quixote]

I love Guthrie, and he's been very unlucky over the years with both run support and bullpen support.

But I have to add, he also has a touch of what I call "Alydar syndrome." For those too young to remember, Alydar was a great racehorse who finished 2nd in all three Triple Crown races in 1977. He just never had quite enough to get past Affirmed, who beat him all three races, by a smaller amount each time (the Belmont was by a nose).

Some pitchers just have a knack that when they get a lead, they bear down and never give it up. Guthrie has never had that knack. And that's part of the reason why he is 42-61, whereas Rodrigo Lopez, who played on equally bad teams and had an ERA+ of 94 for us, was 60-58.

To be clear -- I'm not putting it all on Guthrie. Just a bit of it.

It was 1978 (Seattle Slew won the 1977 Triple Crown), but that's an interesting point. If he could keep it in the park more I think that would do much to help that. Even so, it sure seems like Guthrie's had harder luck, though, than Lopez did, and had worse teams backing him, though obviously I couldn't definitively say. His in-division/out-of-division W-L split is obscene, too - 13-33 versus the AL East and 29-28 versus the rest of baseball. I'd like to see ERA, FIP, etc. for in-division/out-of-division comparison as well. So many times, though, he just gets screwed over. It's sad.

As far as the OP, very interesting list. Some names definitely jump.

[DrungoHazewood]

Doing a little different search, it's clear that Guthrie isn't the unluckiest major league pitcher of all time. He only has the 13th-worst Win% of all time among starters with a 100 ERA+ or better (mainly as a starter, min 50 decisions).

My top candidate for unluckiest of all time is a guy named Ned Garvin, who pitched around the turn of the last century. He had a career ERA+ of 125. To put that in perspective, Mike Mussina's career mark was 123. But Garvin ended up with a winning percentage of .374, going 58-97. In 1900 Garvin had an ERA+ of 150, or 50% better than average, and his record was 10-18. In 1904 he outdid himself, with a 1.72 ERA, a 159 ERA+, and a 5-16 record. In '01, pitching for the Orioles' distant cousins the original Brewers, he had an ERA better than league average and went 8-20.

In more recent years, Masato Yoshii went 32-47 with an ERA better than league average.

At least Guthrie can be assured he won't set any marks for single season bad luck. In 1913 a guy named Frank Allen went 4-18 with an ERA+ of 116, and in 1933 Paul Derringer went 7-27 with an ERA+ of 103 (real ERA of 3.30).

[SilverRocket]

If you include partial relievers, Anthony Young (of the 27-game losing streak) actually had a better-than-average ERA in the year he went 1-16.

[Frobby]

If you include partial relievers, Anthony Young (of the 27-game losing streak) actually had a better-than-average ERA in the year he went 1-16.

When I was a lad, Darold Knowles, a reliever for the lowly Senators, went 2-14 with an ERA of 2.04 (ERA+ of 174). Top that, I say!

[DrungoHazewood]

Another interesting tidbit. I mentioned that Guthrie and Dave McNally had almost the same context-adjusted ERA. Well, McNally and Mike Cuellar are tied for the 1954-present lead in 20 win seasons with an ERA+ under 120, with three. Dave Stewart, Steve Carlton, and Warren Spahn have also done this.

Pud Galvin holds the all time record with eight, but that far back in time it's kind of meaningless when 50% or more of all runs were unearned, and with one-man rotations a guy could win 20 and still be 15 games under .500. In '80 Galvin went 20-35, ERA of 2.71, but had an RA of 5.51.

[DrungoHazewood]

When I was a lad, Darold Knowles, a reliever for the lowly Senators, went 2-14 with an ERA of 2.04 (ERA+ of 174). Top that, I say!

Untoppable! There are four guys in history who went 2-14, and Knowles is the only one with an ERA better than league average.

The only other pitcher to have exaxtly seven times as many losses as wins was an Oriole. In '54 Don Larsen went 3-21 with a 4.37 (ERA+ of 82).

In 1873 a guy named Hugh Campbell, pitching for the Resolutes in the old National Association, went 2-18 with a 2.95. But that's not at all the same thing... In 165 innings he allowed 251 hits, 231 runs (54 earned), had 8 walks, and 7 strikeouts.

[DrungoHazewood]

When I was a lad, Darold Knowles, a reliever for the lowly Senators, went 2-14 with an ERA of 2.04 (ERA+ of 174). Top that, I say!

Knowles never allowed more than 2 earned runs in any game that year. He had three losses and an additional blown save in games where he didn't allow an earned run.

[Don Quixote]

Incredible stuff...those three World Series rings he earned not long after probably consoled him quite nicely, though.