Is 300 career wins as a pitcher really a big thing?

[YOUR Hero]

Do you think it's an overblown stat?

[Loose Cannon]

No. Very few pitchers have reached that pinnacle, so it is a big deal. And it will be even more of a big deal if anybody reaches it again after Maddux. Only a couple will have a shot with the veterans like Glavine. But with all the new guys, it will be EXTREMELY tough.

Now, it might not be as big of a deal with the pitchers from the early 1900's. Except with Johnson's 400+ and Young's 510. That's just amazing even if they had so many oppurtunities to winn ball games. But then you take a guy like Eddie Plank with 300 wins exactly and it really doesn't seem like a lot considering he pitched in the 10's and 20's. Not taking anything away from Gettysburg Eddie because he was an amazing pitcher.

But for the guys that pitched in like the 60's and up, that's a pretty amazing feet to reach 300. You started having the bull pen come in and that made it harder for pitchers to win games. This is especially true for today's game. This is why with the new generation, we will probably never again see a 300 winner. Starters come out after the 5th inning a number of times.

Then you have the 5 man rotations, which limits pitchers getting 300.

So yeah, it's not an overblown stat IMO.

[YOUR Hero]

You would have to win 15 games a year for 20 years to reach 300. That is impressive, but is it great? I mean it shows longevity, but not greatness. Or do you disagree?

[Disturbed316]

Getting 300 wins in any career is pretty impressive IMO.

[Loose Cannon]

I see your point on the longevity. That's why I argue with people who say Ryan was the greatest pitchers who ever lived. Well, that's just one of the issues anyway. Ryan pitched into his late 40's even when it was clear that he wasn't helping his team. I mean you wonder why the guy holds the records for K's. Because he pitched for so god dam long.

Now, to make an argument related to 300 wins. Look at Gaylord Perry. He also pitched well into his 40's and he wound up with 314 wins. See, that's where I can agree with you that 300 is not that big a deal. Phil Niekro is another one. Pitched until he was 48 and wound up with 318 wins. Both Pitchers really didn't help there teams in the ladder part of their careers.

But look what happens when you look at Clemens. 40 years old and he has 310 wins. But the difference here is that he is still helping his team and he is arguably still one of the best pitchers in the game. See here, you have to say that reaching 300 is incredible because he is still producing positive results and helping his team. Same with Maddux. He's been consistent thoughout all his years. Same with Seaver.

So in closing I'll say this. Winning 300 is Great when:

1) You did it while pitching on a bad team throughout most of your career (Johnson)
2) You did it while still maintaining consistency throughout the years.
3) You did it while not being a negative for your team.
4) You did it while retiring before your 20th season.
5) Your Cy Young and win 511 games

Now, keep in mind the specific pitcher doesn't have to have all those things on the list.

So, keeping to that list, 300 games was a GREAT acheivement for these pitchers:

1) Young
2) W. Johnson
3) Clemens
4) Maddux
5) Grove
6) Seaver
7) Matthewson
8) Alexander


The other guys eathier pitched well beyond their good years just to get 300 or pitched in the 1800's and I'm not counting them. Kid Nicholas was a great pitcher though


***And I really shouldn't of said it's not really a big deal for the guys of the early 1900's. Because they still worked 4 man rotations. Some teams (A's) still do today. The late 1800's worked 3 man rotations. And remember, seasons were shorter back then

[ct2k]

I'd say it's a big deal, especially for anyone pitching from the mid 80's onward, in other words from when throwing 15+ complete games a year was no longer an expected thing and the middle reliever and closer roles became important. Starting pitchers over their careers since then simply don't figure in as many decisions, as opposed to being a part of maybe 32 of 35 they figure in 24 or 25...They may have a few seasons of sheer excellence and workhorse amounts of innings, but most of their career they won't, so they're winning less games most of their career, making 300 is a very big deal nowadays.

After Maddux, Tommy Glavine and maybe Randy Johnson, the next closest to making it realistically are guys like Andy Pettitte and Mike Mussina who're in their early 30's and maybe 100-120 wins away. Now Mussina has been winning between 15-19 games a year pretty much every year for the last 12 or so, that's not far from Maddux like consistency considering most years he's also pitched a fair amount of innings and had good era. In other words he's had a stellar career so far and he still has a third of the way to go. For a pitcher starting today it's gonna take someone very special like the above guys to win 300 games.

[ct2k]

It's kind of interesting, today 300 wins is becoming more of a big deal, and 500 homers if anything less of a deal, i mean A-Rod has been around since 96 and already has 400 in site for sometime early next season, that's scary! Fred McGriff is very close, guys like A-Rod, Frank Thomas, Juan Gonzalez, Gary Sheffield, Jim Thome and Carlos Delgado are all more than capable of making it to 500 and well beyond, that's not even thinking about where guys like Pujols and Todd Helton may be in a few years time, 500 is still a plateau but i'd suggest not as much as 300 wins is

[ct2k]

I think Greg just did it!

[YOUR Hero]

Maddux won #300 today. He was my topic's inspiration.

LC, your post, while decent, is very flawed in the Nolan Ryan analogy. That guy was always effective, and he was much more than a strikeout pitcher. Take a good close look at his stats, the no hitters, the one hitters, etc. He played on some very sub par teams in his time too, otherwise one can only imagine what his win total could truly have been... A lot like Schilling was in Philly early in his career.

[YOUR Hero]

It's kind of interesting, today 300 wins is becoming more of a big deal, and 500 homers if anything less of a deal, i mean A-Rod has been around since 96 and already has 400 in site for sometime early next season, that's scary! Fred McGriff is very close, guys like A-Rod, Frank Thomas, Juan Gonzalez, Gary Sheffield, Jim Thome and Carlos Delgado are all more than capable of making it to 500 and well beyond, that's not even thinking about where guys like Pujols and Todd Helton may be in a few years time, 500 is still a plateau but i'd suggest not as much as 300 wins isagreed. Not to mention the hitter friendly ball parks that exist nowadays.

[ct2k]

Indeed, whilst i still think 500 is a huge milestone...Well its gonna be trampled over by a LOT of players over the next decade. 300 wins really isn't.

[ct2k]

In reference to the Nolan Ryan point, look at Glavine this season, 4 times in the last month he has gone 6 or 7 innings and given up 3 or less runs, and he lost all those starts, another one he went 7 and gave up only 1 and he didn't get the decision! A Cards pitcher this season woulda got the win there 3-4 times out of 5. A guy can fan 300 guys in 250 innings with a 2.5 era but if the team behind him isn't fielding well or putting up any runs he's probably not gonna win more than 10 games...20 years down the line someone might look at that without looking properly and think he was a one trick pony that year.

[Loose Cannon]

Maddux won #300 today. He was my topic's inspiration.

LC, your post, while decent, is very flawed in the Nolan Ryan analogy. That guy was always effective, and he was much more than a strikeout pitcher. Take a good close look at his stats, the no hitters, the one hitters, etc. He played on some very sub par teams in his time too, otherwise one can only imagine what his win total could truly have been... A lot like Schilling was in Philly early in his career.

True. Very True. I'll admit I was a little harsh on him. I wish I could see all of his individual games in his last few seasons though just to see some certain statistics.

But, in saying that, Ryan also holds the record for walks. Also, Ryan has never won a CY Young award, something all great pitchers usually wins once. That tels you Ryan has never been the best in a single season. You can make an argument for 87 though.

As for the no hitters. Well his strikeout/per inning ratio was really high, so the chances of him getting a no hitter goes up because the defense doesn't really have to make any plays if he keeps striking out guys. Not taking anything away from the 7 NO NO's, but that's where those came from.

Also Ryan might have the worst winning % for a 300 guy at .524. Now, I haven't checked everyone else, so don't hold me to it. Yeah, he played on a couple bad teams, but Johnson played on a bad team his whole career and wound up with 400+ wins. So, playing on a bad team doesn't neccesarily mean you're going to lose a lot of games.

All in All Ryan was a great pichter. The Greatest? Not a chance in hell. TOP 10? No. But, I will say this. If I needed one pitcher to pitch in the ninth inning to get the last 3 outs, Ryan is strong canddate for that spot.

[ct2k]

Did Phil Niekro get 300? His win % wasn't great either but again, doesn't tell the whole story.

Also realise, Ryan pitched like 26 years in the majors, for any guy that's pretty amazing

[ct2k]

Bear in mind of the 666 games Walter Johnson started, he completed 531 of them, that was unheard of even by Nolan Ryan's time let alone now, that's a fair few decisions he got which Ryan may not have. Also he was playing in the dead ball era for a lot of his career how else can a guy throw for a 2.22 era and lose 25 games? He finished in 27 and sluggers by modern standards were in the minority rather than the majority, whilst today most guys can hit one out of the park if they get their pitch, back then a pitcher could go a season without giving up a homer

[Boomer]

Did Phil Niekro get 300? His win % wasn't great either but again, doesn't tell the whole story.

Also realise, Ryan pitched like 26 years in the majors, for any guy that's pretty amazing

Yah LC posted earlier. But IMO Niekro was a great pitcher. Growing up he was one of those players I always used to hear about. The Braves didn't have a ton of all-star calibur players in their first 100 years of existence. Only the obvious ones come to mind (Spahn, Murphy, Niekro, Aaron). So considering the fact that the Braves were a horrible team during his tenure in the majors, I think Niekro did an amazing job.

[ct2k]

He also had all that success as a knuckle baller, not throwing 100mph through the wall

[Loose Cannon]

Did Phil Niekro get 300? His win % wasn't great either but again, doesn't tell the whole story.

Also realise, Ryan pitched like 26 years in the majors, for any guy that's pretty amazing

If you think that's amazing, Sactchel Paige pitched into his late 50's. But again, let's not mistake lonegevity for being amazing. Willie Mays played for a long time, but it was very clear in wasn't helping his team at all by the end of his career. If you look at Ryan's numbers past 82, he only won 15 games one more time. Ryan wound up with 327 IN 27 yrs in the majors. I know he played for some not so great teams, but it is possible to win a number of games even if your team isn't that great. Steve Carlton won 27 games for his last place Phillies in 1972. It can happen.

[Supreme Olajuwon]

Hero what is your opinion about the importance of 3000 hits?

[Gonzo]

I think 300 wins a major achievement in baseball. Now a days, you'll be hard pressed to see that happening very much, if at all.

[natureboycv]

<font color=8307ff><b>Yeah 300 wins is a big deal.</font></b>