greg775 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 3, 2011 -> 04:21 AM) I think James is one of the first to really point out the silliness of the win totals, to be honest. I love James so I'd like to read that. But what starting pitchers are going to get in the Hall of Fame without a TON of victories. It's still the reason guys get in the Hall who pitch. You think they are gonna put guys in with 150 wins just cause they have good peripherals? Edited June 3, 2011 by greg775 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 11:54 PM) I love James so I'd like to read that. But what starting pitchers are going to get in the Hall of Fame without a TON of victories. It's still the reason guys get in the Hall who pitch. You think they are gonna put guys in with 150 wins just cause they have good peripherals? That is certainly something that is going to have to be re-evaluated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 Konerko - 37 Dunn - 26 Humber - 15 Sox wins - 86 Also, I think Danks ends up with a winning record. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 Cool predictions, but some need to lay off the kool-aid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 10:21 PM) I think James is one of the first to really point out the silliness of the win totals, to be honest. Over the long haul though win totals are pretty meaningful. I mean you may have a year or two in a long career where you have low win totals despite great numbers or high win totals despite bad numbers. But everything tends to regress toward the mean. The best pitchers end up with the most wins. I would be willing to bet if you looked at the top 10 pitchers in wins from 2000-2009, they would be the so-called top 10 or 15 pitchers in baseball during that stretch. Edited June 3, 2011 by maggsmaggs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 3, 2011 -> 06:57 AM) That is certainly something that is going to have to be re-evaluated. I agree with Maggs. Look at the guys who won 300 games. Sabermetricians who look at the peripherals and don't care about wins will have a tough time convincing the Hall of Fame some pitcher with 120 wins yet good numbers in all those other categories deserves to get in. What's going to happen with the Hall of Fame will be no modern pitchers will get in cause nobody will be sniffing 300 wins anymore. I guess some dominant closers will get in. Edited June 3, 2011 by greg775 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 3, 2011 -> 12:54 AM) I love James so I'd like to read that. But what starting pitchers are going to get in the Hall of Fame without a TON of victories. It's still the reason guys get in the Hall who pitch. You think they are gonna put guys in with 150 wins just cause they have good peripherals? Unless there is a Sandy Koufax type situation (165 Ws), you aren't gonna see a starter make the HOF with 150 wins. Most HOF pitchers have so many victories because they were that good for that long of a period of time. No HOF-caliber pitcher will pitch for 15 years and only win 10 games per season. The wins pile up eventually if you are that good. Felix only had 13 wins last year, but the year before with a similar team he won 19. I will say that ins aren't the best judge of a pitcher's overall career, and the 300 W benchmark needs to be lowered. HOF pitchers will have a ton of victories, because they will have pitched a ton of games and the wins will happen if you are that good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 With the 5 starter and 175 inning era it's impossible, to win 300 a pitcher would have to a rookie when he's 21 and AVERAGE 15 wins per season and pitch till he's 42 just to win 300. I think 250 - 240 wins is a nice plateau for hall consideration, another thing is how long you pitched to get there, cause if you pitch 25 seasons at 10 wins per you shouldn't be hall material Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 QUOTE (JoshPR @ Jun 3, 2011 -> 01:30 PM) With the 5 starter and 175 inning era it's impossible, to win 300 a pitcher would have to a rookie when he's 21 and AVERAGE 15 wins per season and pitch till he's 42 just to win 300. I think 250 - 240 wins is a nice plateau for hall consideration, another thing is how long you pitched to get there, cause if you pitch 25 seasons at 10 wins per you shouldn't be hall material I sense some anti-Jamie Moyer sentiment! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 3, 2011 -> 01:33 PM) I sense some anti-Jamie Moyer sentiment! Moyer did have two 20-win seasons during the 2000s, which is pretty darn impressive. That being said, he is that rare exception where his win totals belies his actual pitching prowess. I don't think he deserves a spot in the HOF. If it took Blyleven so damn long, Moyer should have no chance. Edited June 3, 2011 by maggsmaggs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm676 Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 Dunn will strikeout 210 times this year. Rios will show up in his pajamas, because he's too lazy to change into his uniform. Danks will end up with 10 wins and 16 losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jun 3, 2011 -> 02:42 PM) Moyer did have two 20-win seasons during the 2000s, which is pretty darn impressive. That being said, he is that rare exception where his win totals belies his actual pitching prowess. I don't think he deserves a spot in the HOF. If it took Blyleven so damn long, Moyer should have no chance. My point exactly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.