Buehrle says he won't win 300

[Gregory Pratt]

I disagree with this. Marks issue late last year was not his velocity, it was more of command of his pitches. His velocity was the same in the first part of the season where he pitched decent. His command went south and he started to leave balls up. For Mark Buerhle to be successful, he needs to pound righties in with his cutter, and then go away. The cutter keeps the right handers honest about diving over the plate to hit the change and curve. When Mark cannot command his cutter, he has a problem.

If he can keep his command, his velocity will be fine, and he will be an effective pitcher.

Bull. He said it himself. He lost velocity and wasn't in shape because of the Series and his lack of preparation for the season. If Buehrle loses 2-3 miles on his fastball and cutter, everything looks the same and he isn't who he is. He's 2006 Buehrle, second half.

[southsideirish71]

Bull. He said it himself. He lost velocity and wasn't in shape because of the Series and his lack of preparation for the season. If Buehrle loses 2-3 miles on his fastball and cutter, everything looks the same and he isn't who he is. He's 2006 Buehrle, second half.

 

Bull back. His velocity was down from ST and on.

 

So why did his velocity drop not affect the ERA's of April, May and June.

 

April ERA 2.57

May ERA 3.18

June ERA 3.89

 

The boom.

 

July ERA 11.48

 

His command was the issue. When Buerhle is on, he can throw the ball in and out. The velocity helps with the deception. But the reason that he got crushed was the fact that he was leaving the ball up over the middle of the plate. Major league hitters will crush an 85 mph fastball middle in, and an 89 mph fastball middle in. The minute the ball goes up, you are meat. Thats what happened to Mark.

 

You want 2006 2nd half Buerhle. Tell him to leave his 87-89 mph fastball up about thigh high over the middle of the plate. Thats when you will see his ERA take a jump.

Edited August 6, 2007 by southsideirish71

[Hideaway Lights]

Mark is no lock for the HOF. In fact, I think that he'll have a very tough time getting in, as he's never been a dominant pitcher (e.g., a serious Cy Young candidate). Pitchers who don't dominate at one point or another had better have a very long career and close to 300 wins for serious HOF consideration.

 

Who that has come up in the last ten years (outside of Santana) is dominant then? Buehrle is the active leader in wins for all pitchers right around his age and younger.

[WCSox]

Who that has come up in the last ten years (outside of Santana) is dominant then?

 

Look at all of the studs who have been in the league for the past 15-20 years and either have pitched at a high level recently or are still doing it now: Randy Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, Glavine, Smoltz, etc. I don't see Mark matching up to any of those guys, and let's not forget that Clemens' and Maddux's careers have overlapped significantly with Mark's as well.

 

Buehrle is the active leader in wins for all pitchers right around his age and younger.

 

That's nice, but the voting committee doesn't really care that there has been a lack of Santana-esque pitchers who began their careers in the 21st century. Plus, I don't see Mark being that much more dominant than Oswalt or Zito (despite the latter sucking this year).

 

I've always thought that Mark was on the same level as Andy Pettitte: really good, but not one of the all-time greats.

 

[Hideaway Lights]

Look at all of the studs who have been in the league for the past 15-20 years and either have pitched at a high level recently or are still doing it now: Randy Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, Glavine, Smoltz, etc. I don't see Mark matching up to any of those guys,

 

 

Doesn't Mark have almost an identical record to Glavine through his first 7 years though? I know he also said he wouldn't pitch as long as Glavine, but was Glavine always a hall-of-famer or did he just obtain it with longevity?

[WCSox]

Doesn't Mark have almost an identical record to Glavine through his first 7 years though? I know he also said he wouldn't pitch as long as Glavine, but was Glavine always a hall-of-famer or did he just obtain it with longevity?

 

Glavine has two Cy Youngs AND 300 wins. Mark has been in the Top 5 in Cy Yong voting once and has already said that he won't play long enough to be anywhere around 300 wins.

 

[Hideaway Lights]

Glavine has two Cy Youngs AND 300 wins. Mark has been in the Top 5 in Cy Yong voting once and has already said that he won't play long enough to be anywhere around 300 wins.

 

But I think we've also established that 300 wins won't be a benchmark for HOF by the time Mark retires (I'm guessing that we be around 2017). What would be the new criteria as far as wins goes? I'm guessing 250, and I think he might get there or get really close. People doubted Mark before this season and he bounced right back. Sure, the Cy Youngs are also important, but there's no reason to think he won't get one eventually. Pitchers like Mark who have established themselves as very good pitchers, when they have a 19 win season (he'll have another sometime), people seem to recognize that in the voting.

 

I don't see any reason to doubt he'll pitch a ton of innings over the next ten years and be relatively injury free, as he has almost all of his career. I also don't think the White Sox will ever succumb to a genuine rebuilding where Mark would have to suffer an atrocious record because of a bad team. The White Sox haven't had less than 80 wins this century (although they might have as few as 75-76 this season).

 

Maybe I'm just overly optimistic about Buehrle, but I don't see how any White Sox fan wouldn't be optimistic. He had two pretty bad half-seasons and the rest has been a fairy tale for White Sox fans.

[WCSox]

But I think we've also established that 300 wins won't be a benchmark for HOF by the time Mark retires (I'm guessing that we be around 2017).

 

We have?

 

What would be the new criteria as far as wins goes? I'm guessing 250, and I think he might get there or get really close.

 

I think that a very good, 250-win pitcher has a good shot of getting in right now, so I agree.

 

Sure, the Cy Youngs are also important, but there's no reason to think he won't get one eventually.

 

Maybe, although he has yet to have a 20-win season and the Sox aren't exactly a perennial playoff team. Unfortunately, wins and being competitive are a big part of the Cy Young. Randy Johnson got absolutely screwed out of the NL Cy Young in '04 because his team sucked.

 

Maybe I'm just overly optimistic about Buehrle, but I don't see how any White Sox fan wouldn't be optimistic. He had two pretty bad half-seasons and the rest has been a fairy tale for White Sox fans.

 

I'm not saying that it's impossible, but Mark has never been a dominant pitcher, he's probably not going to get to 250 career wins simply because he doesn't want to play into his late 30's/early 40's, and the Sox aren't exactly a dynasty team. I don't like his odds. Mark had a career year in '05 when they won the WS and that was probably his best shot so far... but he only won 16 games and he was over-shadowed by Contreras.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

Bull back. His velocity was down from ST and on.

 

So why did his velocity drop not affect the ERA's of April, May and June.

 

April ERA 2.57

May ERA 3.18

June ERA 3.89

 

The boom.

 

July ERA 11.48

 

His command was the issue. When Buerhle is on, he can throw the ball in and out. The velocity helps with the deception. But the reason that he got crushed was the fact that he was leaving the ball up over the middle of the plate. Major league hitters will crush an 85 mph fastball middle in, and an 89 mph fastball middle in. The minute the ball goes up, you are meat. Thats what happened to Mark.

 

You want 2006 2nd half Buerhle. Tell him to leave his 87-89 mph fastball up about thigh high over the middle of the plate. Thats when you will see his ERA take a jump.

 

People adjusted. That's why it didn't start right away, and he gradually lost a little more.

 

[Rowand44]

People have been waiting for Mark to break down or the league to catch up to him for years now. Mark's going to have a bad year every now and then but I highly doubt he's just going to completely break down and become a bad pitcher, ever. Now don't get me wrong, I don't think he has a shot in hell at getting to 300 wins(or getting in the HOF for that matter) but he'll be good until he retires.

[Milkman delivers]

The best thing for Mark Buehrle's chances at making the HOF would be for him to play a solid couple of years in New York, Boston, or some other national favorite.

[Hideaway Lights]

We have?

 

What pitcher besides Randy Johnson has a realistic shot at 300? No one, unless they play until they are 50.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Hideaway Lights

[Texsox]

But he also seems like he has so much fun playing the game too. If his body holds up, might he just keep doing it because he likes it? Think about Maddux, what else does he have to prove or to earn? He could have retired 3 years a go a guaranteed HOF with loaded bank accounts, but it sure seems like he enjoys getting his butt out on the mound.

 

About what I was thinking. He still looks like he genuinely loves the game. About the time he's thinking retirement will be when his daughter is about a teenager and probably won't want him around anyways

[WCSox]

What pitcher besides Randy Johnson has a realistic shot at 300? No one, unless they play until they are 50.

 

What are you talking about? Clemens, Maddux, and Glavine all did it within the past couple of years. With continuing innovation/emphasis in conditioning, nutrition, and supplements (legal and otherwise), why is it such a stretch to believe that 300 victories will be attainable down the line? Perhaps not by Mark, Santana, Oswalt, or Zito, but there will be others.

 

I agree that 300 wins shouldn't be a requirement for the HOF. But, geez, you make it sound like it's going to be impossible in the future.

Edited August 7, 2007 by WCSox

[Hideaway Lights]

75.4% of Glavine's starts, 76.2% of Clemen's starts and a whopping 78.2% of Maddux's starts were decisions. In their primes, the number was even more ridiculous. From 1986-1992, Clemens made 237 starts and 84% of them were decisions. You will never see numbers like that again over a 7 year span. Maddux has an 82% decision/start ratio from 1988-1993.

 

In the last several years, it seems as though middle relief and closers have taken away a lot of decisions, particularly with Buehrle and Oswalt the last two seasons. 71% of Oswalt's starts the last two seasons have been decisions, and since 2004 Buehrle has only 74% decisions. Oswalt has especially been screwed by a lot of tie games.

 

Santana and Zito - their decision ratio is higher - I think both are around 75% for their career. That's quite a far cry from the decision ratios the three active 300 game winners had in their primes. There's no question that if Santana pitches long enough he'll probably get there, but that would be into his 40s. He's 28 now, and not even at 100 wins yet! He'd have to win 20 games a year for the next ten seasons - and then he'd STILL be short!

 

The game has changed over the past few years. Middle relievers are getting more and more decisions, blown saves are seemingly at an all-time high, and the league leader in complete games usually has 6 or 7. Clemens, Maddux and Glavine - in the late 80s and early 90s they would have 8,9 or 10 complete games a year (especially Clemens and Maddux mid 90s - not so much Glavine).

 

The only reason Clemens, Maddux and Glavine got there was longevity and health. All had to pitch 19 or more seasons to get there. Maddux had an incredible run in the early nineties of making like 200 straight starts - and in some years those starts were in the high 30s. From like 1988 to 1993 it's 35,37,34,36,35,35....just an insane amount of starts. Pitchers usually top out at 33 a year these days.

[WCSox]

75.4% of Glavine's starts, 76.2% of Clemen's starts and a whopping 78.2% of Maddux's starts were decisions. In their primes, the number was even more ridiculous. From 1986-1992, Clemens made 237 starts and 84% of them were decisions. You will never see numbers like that again over a 7 year span. Maddux has an 82% decision/start ratio from 1988-1993.

 

That sounds more like opinion than fact.

 

In the last several years, it seems as though middle relief and closers have taken away a lot of decisions

 

Middle relief and closers also add years onto the arms of starters.

 

If you want to believe that nobody will get to 300 wins again, be my guest. Somebody will likely prove you wrong within the next 20 years.

 

[southsider2k5]

I disagree with this. Marks issue late last year was not his velocity, it was more of command of his pitches. His velocity was the same in the first part of the season where he pitched decent. His command went south and he started to leave balls up. For Mark Buerhle to be successful, he needs to pound righties in with his cutter, and then go away. The cutter keeps the right handers honest about diving over the plate to hit the change and curve. When Mark cannot command his cutter, he has a problem.

If he can keep his command, his velocity will be fine, and he will be an effective pitcher.

 

Velocity was a big problem for him last year because the gap between his fastball and change up dimished to the point where hitters could sit in between then and still hit both of them.

 

[Hideaway Lights]

That sounds more like opinion than fact.

Middle relief and closers also add years onto the arms of starters.

 

If you want to believe that nobody will get to 300 wins again, be my guest. Somebody will likely prove you wrong within the next 20 years.

 

There might be one statistical outlier in the next 20 years, sure.