How did they fail? One run in 3 innings?

Read the headline again.

It's bigger news that the Pads actually won a game.

It's a good thing the writer's will have a good 15 years to consider the importance of such an arbitrary milestone as 350 wins when they fill out their ballots.

It's a good thing the writer's will have a good 15 years to consider the importance of such an arbitrary milestone as 350 wins when they fill out their ballots.

There is no way they'll take more than one year for Maddux. Unless you meant that Maddux is going to pitch for another 10 years.

-- MWE

350 maybe arbitrary in that 349 is just as good, but 350 wins is most certainly a milestone. If it takes Maddux 10 years to get into the hall, well then, the hall will meaning a whole lot of nothing to a lot of people.

All that talk about Glavine being the last 300 game winner was silly. On the other hand, Maddux as the last 350 game winner...

I'm quite sure #4 was a joke...

Most wins 1987-1997:



Most wins 1998-2008:


It reminds me of the Rickey Henderson entry in the NBJHBA.

And Maddux is still within striking distance of Warren Spahn's 363, the highest win total of the lively-ball era. Mathewson & Alexander's NL record of 373 might be out of reach.

You know, it's not ENTIRELY out of the question he could win 400.

400 wins is possible if he's willing to pitch until he's 46. He may well not.

By the time Maddux becomes eligible for the Hall, "Wins" will have been thoroughly exposed as a team-driven statistic that is virtually worthless in measuring individual value, filed along with batting average as archane.

Maddux has never been the MVP of his league and has only finished in the top 10 twice. He is on pace to finish the season with 1,000 career walks and has an outside chance at reaching the milestone of 350 home runs allowed. That's 1,350 batters that his team had absolutely no chance to defend against -- about 850 more than Carl Pavano, for crying out loud. Add on top of this that no Hall of Famer has fewer career saves, and I think it's plain to see that Maddux's Hall of Fame case is shaky at best.

By the time Maddux becomes eligible for the Hall, "Wins" will have been thoroughly exposed as a team-driven statistic that is virtually worthless in measuring individual value, filed along with batting average as archane.

Virtually worthless?

C'mon. It's ridiculous to say that.

Over a 25 years career, a lot of the noise in a won-loss record gets drowned out by actual performance.

EDIT: Never mind. You're being facetious.

Don't forget, Maddux has struck out 3299 of 19,824 batters that he has faced--that's over 15%! As Crash Davis said, strikeouts are fascist.

So a HOF vote for Maddux is vote for Hitler. A Hitler with a career OPS+ of 6. That's not a HOF-worthy individual.

When you ride with Greg Maddux, you ride with Hitler.

I wonder if the fact that he has only been slighty above average for so many years at the tale end of his career will hurt him? Obviously he's going in with 95%+, but it might convince a few idiots not to vote on the grounds that he doesn't "deserve" unanimity.

Maddux wasn't getting 100% of the vote anyway. For reasons which continue to elude me, no one is ever going to get 100%, which means somewhere there are idiots who won't vote for Maddux, Pedro, Manny, A-Rod, etc.

Maddux wasn't getting 100% of the vote anyway. For reasons which continue to elude me, no one is ever going to get 100%, which means somewhere there are idiots who won't vote for Maddux, Pedro, Manny, A-Rod, etc.

The HoF is baseball's highest honor. I have no problem that nobody ever gets in unanimously.

Before the steroids stuff happened to Roger, I thought he had a chance at 100%. Back when his rep was just "maybe the greatest pitcher ever" and "incredibly fierce competitor" without any of the media relations issues which have dogged Bonds.

For a while, it looked like Maddux might hang 'em up before Clemens did. Now, unless Clemens does another half-season cameo, he will be on the Hall ballot at least a year, maybe two or three, before Maddux. The way Clemens is treated by voters will be interesting. If enough voters refuse to vote for Clemens in his first year or two, which I think is unlikely but possible, he and Maddux will be on the ballot together. Clemens has been regarded by most observers as the superior pitcher of the two over their careers. However, Maddux is now four short of Clemens's win total and will very likely pass him to stay, and if the two of them were on the same ballot, I'd bet on Maddux receiving more votes.

For reasons which continue to elude me, no one is ever going to get 100%

It's half racism, half everything-was-better-in-MY-day-ism.

I liked the ESPN headline, "Maddux Joins Elite with 350th Win." Because, you know, 349 wins just ain't elite.

Maddux has never been the MVP of his league and has only finished in the top 10 twice. He is on pace to finish the season with 1,000 career walks and has an outside chance at reaching the milestone of 350 home runs allowed. That's 1,350 batters that his team had absolutely no chance to defend against -- about 850 more than Carl Pavano, for crying out loud. Add on top of this that no Hall of Famer has fewer career saves, and I think it's plain to see that Maddux's Hall of Fame case is shaky at best.

Balderdash. Greg Maddux has won more Gold Gloves than any player in baseball history. More than Brooks; more than Ozzie. That, friends, is a no-questions-asked Hall of Famer.

Justin, he's being facetious.

I'm pretty sure kevin, that any post beginning with "balderdash" is itself being facetious.

I just think the 100% thing is stupid, either someone is a Hall of Famer or they aren't. If a writer thinks Greg Maddux is a Hall of Famer (and I can't see how you wouldn't, although I suppose these days there are the "Everyone was on the juice!!!!" people) then you vote for him. Not voting for him because you don't want him to get 100% is a pretty dishonest use of your ballot.

So a HOF vote for Maddux is vote for Hitler. A Hitler with a career OPS+ of 6. That's not a HOF-worthy individual.

And the similarity ends here: balks. Greg Maddux, 27. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I think Hitler only had, like, 4.

Who's being facetious? Throw in this character issue with urinating on teammates in the shower and I think you have to admit the evidence is really mounting up against him.

On edit: Greg Maddux has won more Gold Gloves than any player in baseball history. Everyone knows the process of awarding Gold Gloves is a sketchy, possibly corrupt system. I heard they even give them to Derek Jeter.

It sounds like the Padres bullpen has been bolstered by acquiring Bryan Corey from the Red Sox for a PTBNL/ $ considerations.

Are you kidding? This is clear, irrefutable proof that Greg Maddux is the greatest defensive wizard that's ever played baseball. 17 Gold Gloves!!!

Before the steroids stuff happened to Roger, I thought he had a chance at 100%. Back when his rep was just "maybe the greatest pitcher ever" and "incredibly fierce competitor

Thank God those days are over.

Clemens has been regarded by most observers as the superior pitcher of the two over their careers. However, Maddux is now four short of Clemens's win total and will very likely pass him to stay, and if the two of them were on the same ballot, I'd bet on Maddux receiving more votes.

Has he really always been regarded as superior? I remember up until Clemens "Historic" stint with Toronto that Maddux was getting more "recognition" due to his ridiculously low ERA's in 1994-1995. Bill James even talked about this in his Historical Baseball abstract, but he felt Clemens was "better" despite what his friend thought.

I think Maddux was viewed as better until after Clemens' years in Toronto at which point a debate raged. After Maddux started declining and Clemens started winning ringz, the debate tipped toward Clemens. Now, with Maddux still going and Clemens tainted by PEDs, I think Maddux is pushing back ahead. Just on performance - no other issues - I think Clemens is slightly ahead, as much as it pains me to say it. I think vintage Maddux is much more fun to watch but that is just opinion.

I'm not sure I get why folks are so caught up in "last 350 game winner". It's like "last 700 HR guy". Only 3 players to debut after 1911 have won 350 games and 2/3 of them debuted in the 1980s. If anything, it looks like it's getting easier to win 350 games than at any point since the deadball era. Basically, 350 wins is going to be really, really rare and it shouldn't surprise any of us if we don't see another in our lifetimes. But my guess is there will be another, some day.

Could the Pads move Maddux to a contender? (they look done to me). Surely there are some teams that could use a reliable league average ERA who can be counted on for 6 or 7 innings per outing. If he had a bullpen and a better offense, he could pass Spahn. If he ends his career in San Diego, he may well not.

EDIT: I guess I'm wondering if Maddux has a no trade. I would think the Mets and Phillies would be obvious teams that could use his services. With his salary, I doubt they'd give much in the way of prospects, but it would save the Padres some money that will basically be flushed otherwise. Even the Braves could use him. That would be cool - one more division title for the Big Three. Okay, I'll pinch myself.

Maddux wants to stay in the NL, and he prefers the West Coast.
I would think the Braves have the best shot of the eastern teams, for sentimental reasons.
Or Cubs?

I wonder if the fact that he has only been slighty above average for so many years at the tale end of his career will hurt him?
Is that the part of his career when the old sportswriters tell us all the good stories from the early part of the player's career? Like when he stupped Doris Day. </ducks>

Cubs would be good. Yeah, I know he likes the west coast. I'm just rooting for him to at least catch Spahn (and would love to see him set the NL mark, so I'd like him to stay in the NL, too). For that, he needs to move I think. I mean, family, lifestyle, etc. are all great, but he should do it for me. :)

Cubs wouldn't be bad, either. He isn't going to be an ace, but he looks like a good bet for 3 good starts out of 4, which, sad as it may be, is valuable these days.

EDIT: by good start, I just mean decent. A start that should win for a good offense, but not a dominant start. Hell, I'm just making stuff up, really. Off for coffee.

The bottom lines of their careers are so similar that I think one is free to use subjectivity when choosing Maddux or Clemens as the better pitcher. And while I know the importance of strikeouts and believe they are a better way to insure success than "pitching to contact" or whatever, I will still choose Maddux's intellectual approach over the relative meatheadedness of Clemens.

Basically, any time two activities lead to the same result, I will prefer the one that uses more brains than brawn. So Maddux gets my vote.

bump

So, Mets, Phillies and Cubs fans - would you like to see Maddux on your team this summer?

better the marquis thats for damn sure

Phillies' fans would want Maddux in a heartbeat. An Eaton demotion would be the obvious choice but even if Gillick let Omar Minaya pick from amongst Moyer, Kendrick or Eaton for demotion, it would be a net gain. The Phils show no inclination for taking on salary though.

Okay, two more wins Mr. Maddog. Pretty please?