[MLB] Randy Johnson wins #300



and fuck you flunky

i left the bar to come post about kenny powers in this thread and you already fuckin did it

jesus cunt loving christ
 
he averages around 13 wins a year approximately, so that would make him needing to win 16ish per year for the next 10 years, making him 44

so not out of the realm of possibility, but i just don't see it happening
 
he's won at least 16 games every year in which he's started at least 30. your "average" takes into account years in which he was injured or not a starter the whole year. i'm not saying that he's likely to pitch 30 games a year for the next ten years, but i also think he could have more than 10 years left in the tank. point of interest: halladay has more wins than RJ did at the same age.

if he manages to stay at least relatively healthy, he can get to 300. i think it's really premature to start with the "there will never be another 300 game winner" ... i recall many people saying that when glavine won his 300th
 
noah1212 said:
not trying to spit on randy johnson he is a great pitcher however there were several better pitchers out there. 1 game dosent make you a good pitcher. he could have been playing one of the worst batting line ups in the course of history.
Click to expand...

i just want to pinch your cheeks

you're so adorable :)
 
Mojo616 said:
he's won at least 16 games every year in which he's started at least 30. your "average" takes into account years in which he was injured or not a starter the whole year.
Click to expand...
yeah i know what you're saying, but i really don't think there is any reason to think it's more likely that he's magically going to be healthy for 10 or more years. point of interest: bodies break down a shit-ton when you're not a hgh pumping weirdo not named moyer. as history has indicated, a pitcher is more likely to run into injury filled years in their late 30s & early 40s than they are to stay healthy to the point where their stuff doesn't diminish down to where you're not able to perform at the level you need to be able to perform to achieve 300 wins. this, coupled with the fact that right or wrong, today's game puts a lot more emphasis on pitch counts & bullpen specialists, so the opportunity for a team to blow your lead once leaving the game is also an issue.
if he manages to stay at least relatively healthy, he can get to 300. i think it's really premature to start with the "there will never be another 300 game winner" ... i recall many people saying that when glavine won his 300th
Click to expand...
mostly because at the time, RJ was amidst a run of back surgeries among other bumps & bruises. no one really expected him to recover from that, especially while being in his 40s. the likelihood of recovery to the point of being able to pitch again really wasn't great.

and like i said, halladay does have a chance to get 300. because of the number of things that need to go right for him to achieve this, i think his chances are still quite slim, for all the above reasons.
 
word HK, it seems like we pretty much agree that it is unlikely but not ridiculously out of the realm of possibility. as far as halladay's health goes, i guess there are two ways to look at it... either you say that he's a hoss that's shown amazing durability over his career (especially the last several years) and is likely to stay healthy, or you can say that because of his huge IP counts, he will break down. I'm not really sure ...

also,


HelenKeller said:
this, coupled with the fact that right or wrong, today's game puts a lot more emphasis on pitch counts & bullpen specialists, so the opportunity for a team to blow your lead once leaving the game is also an issue.
Click to expand...

isnt the argument for pitch counts that it increases longevity? isn't the argument for bullpen specialists that they are good at preserving leads? i guess the drawback is that there will be games where the SP doesn't get to stay in long enough to leave with a lead, but other than that, one would think that the above would *help* pitchers get wins. whether or not this is true, I'm not sure. to be honest, I'm not a baseball history buff, so I'm not sure what effect the pitch counts and bullpens have on pitchers win totals (I'd guess that it decreases both wins and losses for the SP). I'd like to hear your take on this.
 
yeah that's one way to look at the pitch count - what i was going off of was RJ's recent comments as he looked back on his career. two of the things he mentioned specifically regarding the difficulty for him to win 300 games if his career was at his peak today rather than years past is the problem (in his eyes) of the pitch count, and the fact that at least for a time in the careers of himself, maddux & glavine, they had the fortune of playing in 4-man rotations. the 4 man rotation is a pretty obvious advantage to getting more decisions, but as for his thoughts on the notion of pitch counts in today's game, he felt like it will be a deterrent more than an advantage.

while a pitcher in theory would stay healthier longer by pitching fewer games, the amount of decisions (win or loss) you're a part of decreases simply because of the greater chance of opportunity for a bullpen to blow a lead. RJ's feeling was that there are often times when a lead may be blown by a bullpen and the thing that fucks a starting pitcher is he doesn't have the opportunity at that point to get a decision at all, so any of those times when the bullpen blows a lead and then the team actually regains the lead later, regardless of the outcome the starting pitcher doesn't get the decision. so what he is saying is certainly with the advent of this new pitch count concern, a pitcher today could pitch in 300 team wins but not as easily get 300 winning decisions on the SP's record.

he then kind of went off on pitch counts in general, talking about how the majority of young pitchers starting in the minors are held to 75 pitches which to him is ridiculous because you're not preparing the pitcher adequately for difficult situations in the majors. to him, he felt like lots of pitchers can go through a lineup two or three times without much issue, but it's that 4th time through the lineup where he felt like wins and losses are made, and MLB hitters generally are tough to fool 4 times by the same pitcher. this is also an argument for why joltin' joe's career hit streak may never be touched - dimaggio saw one pitcher a night almost exclusively compared to the hitters of today that may see 2 to 3 looks from the mound on any given night which makes life pretty damned difficult when your task is to hit a baseball.

then RJ's final thing on pitch count silliness was that a pitcher could throw 20 pitches and fuck up his arm with poor mechanics, whereas if a pitcher has good mechanics on a particular evening, he can throw 150=175 pitches and be able to throw BP the next day.

i hope you don't think i'm trying to be an argumentative twat or anything - i just love baseball and its stats and it's fascinating to me to think of EVERYTHING that goes into achieving some of baseball's greatest milestones, and there's just so many different ways to look at things :)
 
HelenKeller said:
i hope you don't think i'm trying to be an argumentative twat or anything - i just love baseball and its stats and it's fascinating to me to think of EVERYTHING that goes into achieving some of baseball's greatest milestones, and there's just so many different ways to look at things :)
Click to expand...

nope, it's pretty clear you know baseball pretty well, which is always nice to see. thanks for spelling that stuff out, it's pretty interesting stuff. i hadnt considered the four man rotation, that makes a big difference.

i'm pullin for Doc to get it though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top