Jump to content

Randy Johnson wins #300


WCSox

Recommended Posts

not much the guy hasn't accomplished...300 wins ....outside shot at 5000 Ks....Perfect game, no hitter in both leagues, Multiple Cy Youngs, World Series champ + MVP, 20 Ks (19 twice) 20 game winner 3 times...easily the best lefthander I've ever seen....quite arguably the best pitcher of this generation...clemens and maddux the only others in the conversation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (daa84 @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 08:33 PM)
not much the guy hasn't accomplished...300 wins ....outside shot at 5000 Ks....Perfect game, no hitter in both leagues, Multiple Cy Youngs, World Series champ + MVP, 20 Ks (19 twice) 20 game winner 3 times...easily the best lefthander I've ever seen....quite arguably the best pitcher of this generation...clemens and maddux the only others in the conversation

Carlton was a better lhp. Glavine was up there too.

 

 

Don't forget about Pedro Martinez when it comes to dominance too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 08:16 PM)
Carlton was a better lhp. Glavine was up there too.

 

 

Don't forget about Pedro Martinez when it comes to dominance too.

i never really saw carlton...and id take johnson over glavine....i knew i was forgetting someone in regards to pedro....though he didnt accumulate as much as the other 3 did

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (daa84 @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 07:41 PM)
i never really saw carlton...and id take johnson over glavine....i knew i was forgetting someone in regards to pedro....though he didnt accumulate as much as the other 3 did

No, but none of them can match the 2 single seasons he put up in 99-00.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 09:50 PM)
No, but none of them can match the 2 single seasons he put up in 99-00.

Greg Maddux from 1994 and 1995 says hi. It's pretty much impossible to match Pedro's 2000 season, but I'd take Maddux from both of those years over Pedro in 1999.

 

Of course, when you're debating between a 271 and 262 ERA+ and a 243 and 291 ERA+, it's all amazing anyway and I'd be more than happy to take any of them :P

Edited by Felix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Felix @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 10:21 PM)
Greg Maddux from 1994 and 1995 says hi. It's pretty much impossible to match Pedro's 2000 season, but I'd take Maddux from both of those years over Pedro in 1999.

 

Of course, when you're debating between a 271 and 262 ERA+ and a 243 and 291 ERA+, it's all amazing anyway and I'd be more than happy to take any of them :P

 

And this came during the apex of the 'roid ERA. Making these performances even more astonishing. This is really nitpicking. But I'll go with Pedro's 99 over Maddux's '94 and '95. If only because of the ridiculous offensive numbers AL teams were putting up then. The league average for HR's and runs for AL teams in 1999 was 188 and 837. Those are staggering totals. The NL averages from '94 and '95, and any other year from that time for that matter, don't even come close.

Edited by Jordan4life
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 5, 2009 -> 12:44 AM)
And this came during the apex of the 'roid ERA. Making these performances even more astonishing. This is really nitpicking. But I'll go with Pedro's 99 over Maddux's '94 and '95. If only because of the ridiculous offensive numbers AL teams were putting up then. The league average for HR's and runs for AL teams in 1999 was 188 and 837. Those are staggering totals. The NL averages from '94 and '95, and any other year from that time for that matter, don't even come close.

ERA+ adjusts for ballpark and era, and Maddux's '94 and '95 both are better than Pedro's '99. But yeah, the fact that Pedro did what he did in the middle of the steroid era is absolutely ridiculous. Back to back years of 8+ K/BB and a low HR/9 in the middle of the juicing era is ridiculously good. I don't think they get much better than Pedro was in 2000.

Edited by Felix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Felix @ Jun 5, 2009 -> 01:17 AM)
ERA+ adjusts for ballpark and era, and Maddux's '94 and '95 both are better than Pedro's '99. But yeah, the fact that Pedro did what he did in the middle of the steroid era is absolutely ridiculous. Back to back years of 8+ K/BB and a low HR/9 in the middle of the juicing era is ridiculously good. I don't think they get much better than Pedro was in 2000.

 

I know what ERA+ is. What I was saying is that Pedro's '99 came in a much more potent offensive league than what Maddux ever had to deal with. Not at all trying to downgrade what Maddux achieved those years. But I feel pretty confident when I say Maddux's numbers aren't quite as good (he still would've been dominating) across the board facing primarily AL lineups. Especially during that particular time.

Edited by Jordan4life
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (robinventura23 @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 07:54 PM)
Congrats to him. We won't see another 300 game winner for a very long time, if ever again.

It will be a while, but it will happen again. After Early Wynn got his 300th in 1963, there wasn't another one for 19 years or so IIRC. If Jaime Moyer can get 250 with the start of a career he had, someone is going to do it. If Buerhle wanted to pitch as long as Moyer has, he'd probably get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 09:27 PM)
One wonders why the Expos ever traded him in the first place.

He was very wild, and was getting older for a prospect. He struggled initially in Seattle. The White Sox actually had a trade worked out for him in the early 90's right before he really took off. It was so close they had a jersey with his number hanging in the clubhouse. Unfortunately, it fell through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Felix @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 08:21 PM)
Greg Maddux from 1994 and 1995 says hi. It's pretty much impossible to match Pedro's 2000 season, but I'd take Maddux from both of those years over Pedro in 1999.

 

Of course, when you're debating between a 271 and 262 ERA+ and a 243 and 291 ERA+, it's all amazing anyway and I'd be more than happy to take any of them :P

 

Indeed. I'm biased, but I'd take 1993-2004 Randy over both of them. Dominance is great, but dominance over most of a decade (with the first third in a hitter's park in the AL) is pretty much the definition of a HOFer. I'm still pissed that Randy got screwed out of the '04 NL Cy Young... would've been his sixth.

Edited by WCSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jun 5, 2009 -> 12:00 PM)
Indeed. I'm biased, but I'd take 1993-2004 Randy over both of them. Dominance is great, but dominance over most of a decade (with the first third in a hitter's park in the AL) is pretty much the definition of a HOFer. I'm still pissed that Randy got screwed out of the '04 NL Cy Young... would've been his sixth.

 

Are you saying he got screwed because of what we now know about Clemens? RJ was definitely deserving that year (although a guy with 14 losses would be hard pressed to win it). But at the time it was pretty hard to argue against Roger winning it. It wasn't like the debacle that was the 2005 AL CY. Now that was a f***in' travesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 5, 2009 -> 12:13 PM)
Are you saying he got screwed because of what we now know about Clemens? RJ was definitely deserving that year (although a guy with 14 losses would be hard pressed to win it). But at the time it was pretty hard to argue against Roger winning it. It wasn't like the debacle that was the 2005 AL CY. Now that was a f***in' travesty.

 

No, even without regard to PEDs, Johnson deserved it...

 

Johnson, 2004

177 ERA+

.900 WHIP

Perfect game

 

Clemens, 2004

146 ERA+

1.16 WHIP

 

Randy got screwed because of his W/L record, which is bullcrap. Clemens got screwed for the same reason in 2005 (although I don't feel too bad for a PED user).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...