300 Wins!!!

[byrdz]

Congrats Randy. You are very likely to be the last 300 game winner this sport will ever see.

I think Halladay can do it.

[Lt Melmo]

They were discussing this on PTI the other day and I don't thing it's the silliest thing ever said? Pitchers do not go 9 innings anymore, or very rarely. Pitchers leaving in the 6th, 7th, 8th inning with the lead, relying on the bullpen to keep the lead is a very good reason why their may never be another 300 game winner. Sabathia just last year lost 3 wins because the bullpen failed to hold the lead. Do that for 20 years, that's 60 wins lost! I recall in 1996 or 97, Mike Mussina lost 5 wins, because the bullpen could not hold the lead.

The thing is, guys like Maddux, Glavine, Clemens and Johnson still pitched in 96 and 97, right in the middle of this "big bullpen" era. If they can do it, why not anyone else?

-Johan Santana has to average 18.5 wins for the next 10 years until he is 40.

-CC Sabathia has to average 18 wins for the next 10 years. He only has one season over with 18 or more wins in his career.

-Roy Halladay has to average 16 wins until he is 42 years old every single season. Again, not very likely.

It would be very difficult for all three of these players to average these totals for the next 10 years.

Maybe you should read the article I linked to. Again, every 300-game winner since WWII won 300 games by pitching well for a very long time. Did I say that all of the pitchers I mentioned would hit 300? No. Chances are just as likely for plenty of other pitchers who don't have a similar reputation, if those pitchers are able to extend their careers into their 40s (guys like Buerhle). But I think there's a good chance that another 300 winner will come from this generation of pitchers.

[BaltimoreTerp]

300-game winners are rare. There are more players with 3000 hits (27) and 500 home runs (25) than 300 wins (24). If you take out anyone who didn't throw a pitch after 1900 (and in most cases the early 1890s), it becomes 19.

Between Warren Spahn in 1942 and Gaylord Perry in 1962, no pitcher debuted who would win 300 games. Go back to when Lefty Grove broke-in in 1925 and it's just Spahn and Early Wynn in 1939 in 37 years. There have been several periods with long breaks of 15-20 years and then a series of pitchers come along who win a lot of games, with a few hitting 300.

All of that said, saying that we will never see a 300-game winner again is like saying that, now that we are trying to move out of the "steroid era", once guys like Rodriguez retire we will never see another 600-home run guy.

(Random fact that is probably worthless and simply noise in the numbers: So far, starting with Ruth, every 35 years we have a numerically-increasing group of players who end up hitting 600.

1930 [example year to start]: one player: Ruth

1965: two players: Aaron and Mays

2000: three players: Bonds, Griffey and Sosa

So, if you are a slugger playing in 2035, you might be one of four guys making history :laughlol:)

[isestrex]

-Johan Santana has to average 18.5 wins for the next 10 years until he is 40.

-CC Sabathia has to average 18 wins for the next 10 years. He only has one season over with 18 or more wins in his career.

-Roy Halladay has to average 16 wins until he is 42 years old every single season. Again, not very likely.

It would be very difficult for all three of these players to average these totals for the next 10 years.

I think Santana and Halladay have a very real chance of making it. Sabathia will probably make it but there's still the very real chance of him breaking down so you can't be as confident.

I don't see why people assume Halladay CAN'T pitch well into his 40's or why Santana will hit a wall at 40 and won't win anymore games. Randy Johnson had his last 20 win season when he was 38... then went on to win 76 more games over the course of 6+ seasons. It wasn't pretty at the end but you can still rack up a lot of wins by only averaging 10 wins a year instead of 18. What's to stop Santana from averaging 16 wins until he's 40, then 10 wins until he's 44?

Trust me, we'll see some more 300 game winners. It will just take a bit.

[blid]

-Johan Santana has to average 18.5 wins for the next 10 years until he is 40.

-CC Sabathia has to average 18 wins for the next 10 years. He only has one season over with 18 or more wins in his career.

-Roy Halladay has to average 16 wins until he is 42 years old every single season. Again, not very likely.

It would be very difficult for all three of these players to average these totals for the next 10 years.

40-years-old? 42? Randy Johnson is 45... All those guys are candidates if they last into their mid to late 40s. That's what it takes these days.

Granted, that would mean we won't see another 300 game winner for at least 10+ years, which is certainly the case. And it might not be any of those guys either. But I'm sure we will see another one eventually.

Halladay is my pick.

[Goop]

Congrats to the Big Unit!

[RVAbird]

Here are some of my thoughts.

[RShack]

Here are some of my thoughts.

Very interesting.

You said one particular thing that made me want to know more:

most 300 game winners don’t break out early in their career.

That seems like the kind of surprising factoid that deserves a paragraph all by itself.

[Frobby]

It has gotten much harder, as the number of innings thrown by starters has shrunk, to win 300 games. Of the pitchers who are pitching now, I like Sabathia's chances the best.

Sabathia -- 122 wins at age 28

Halladay -- 140 wins at age 32

Santana -- 116 wins at age 30

[Mark Carver]

It has gotten much harder, as the number of innings thrown by starters has shrunk, to win 300 games. Of the pitchers who are pitching now, I like Sabathia's chances the best.

Sabathia -- 122 wins at age 28

Halladay -- 140 wins at age 32

Santana -- 116 wins at age 30

Sabathia started very early, age 20 and has already started 265 games (Randy Johnson has 597 GS). Maybe just me, but I'm expecting a major arm injury from him in the near future.

[RVAbird]

It has gotten much harder, as the number of innings thrown by starters has shrunk, to win 300 games. Of the pitchers who are pitching now, I like Sabathia's chances the best.

Sabathia -- 122 wins at age 28

Halladay -- 140 wins at age 32

Santana -- 116 wins at age 30

One of the things I was getting at in my blog post was that predicting 300 game winners by looking at who's racked up the most wins prior to 30 is kind of fruitless. Most pitchers with big win totals before 30 fizzle out, while some come out of the blue to get better in their 30s, pitch in to their 40s and win a whole lot of games late in their career. I won't go so far as to say that winning a whole bunch of games before 30 is a disadvantage, but it's not exactly a pre-requisite.

[RVAbird]

Very interesting.

You said one particular thing that made me want to know more:

That seems like the kind of surprising factoid that deserves a paragraph all by itself.

Sorry, I'm really busy right now so I don't have time to write a follow-up, but Joe Posnanski puts it pretty well. Check that article out.

300 game winners, on average, have won more games in both their 30-34 and 35-39 age ranges than they did from age 25 to 29. He discusses the pitchers who have racked up the most wins by age 25, 26, 27, 28 etc. and their chances of reaching 300 aren't great.

300 game winners, on average, win about 2/3 of their games after the age of 30.

So it's not really about who's quick out of the gate, but who stays good longest and/or gets finer with age.

[Sports Guy]

I am not sure you can say there will never be a 300 game winner again but I don't think the odds are great either.

The game has become so specialized that it is just so much more difficult.

Now, I do think Halladay has a chance if he can stay healthy and be on good teams because he finishes his games....No one else really does that anymore, especially at the level of what Doc does it.

So, who knows....but its going to be very tough for anyone to do it...much harder than it ever has been.