Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. DL from MN
Posted: January 10, 2013 at 05:28 PM (#4344526)
I assume Orioles cap?
2. Qufini
Posted: January 10, 2013 at 06:28 PM (#4344570)
I saw Mussina pitch on Opening Day in Oriole Park at Camden Yards. One of my favorite baseball memories.
3. Rob_Wood
Posted: January 10, 2013 at 07:03 PM (#4344596)
I saw Mussina pitch at Stanford many times. He was a fully-formed pitcher even in college.
Mussina won more than half of the starts he made in his career. This is difficult to do as a starter not only has to give up fewer runs than the guy he's facing, but also pitch deep enough into games to avoid no-decisions. Only Pedro Martinez won starts at a greater rate than Mussina among contemporaries. (Granted, I'm sure there are stretches of 536 starts in Johnson and Clemens careers with more than 270 wins)
Pettitte is just behind Johnson, with 244 W in 491 starts.
7. DL from MN
Posted: January 11, 2013 at 10:28 AM (#4344917)
He was a fully-formed pitcher even in college.
Looking at his minor league stats I'd say you're not joking. Started in AA and pitched 9 games his first year split between AA/AAA with an ERA of 1.46. The Orioles decided to leave him in AAA to start 1991 and he tore up the league 10-4 in 19 starts. In baseball full-time at age 22 and we can argue whether he was held back by going to college.
So, why did he drop to #20 overall in that draft? I can't argue with the top few picks (Chipper Jones, Tony Clark, Mike Lieberthal, Alex Fernandez) and it was a relatively deep draft but Mussina seems to have been overlooked a little at the time.
[5]Fortunately, bb-ref gives splits for an entire league. So I can see that as a whole in 2012, starting pitchers went 1738-1783 while relievers went 692-647. So on average, a starting pitcher won 35.8% of starts. I could get the numbers for the last 20 years, but I have to go to class right now, but you know where to look now.
According to B-R his WAR split is 45-33 O's to Yankees, so unless we find that to be way off for some reason, it's definitely an Orioles cap. B-R WAR does not appear to adjust for the shortened seasons (I just eyeballed Dave Concepcion, Mike Schmidt and Andre Dawson who all had their best years by far that season) . . . so that would push him even more towards the O's.
Dave Stieb = .425
Jack "Pitch to the Score" Morris = .476
Nolan Ryan = .413
By the way, I look at Nolan Ryan's stats every couple of months just because it is so singular and amazing...
1974. 22-16, 42 GP, 41 GS. 332.2 IP, 367 Ks, 202 BBs - both led the league. 26 complete games. 221 hits, meaning he led the league with 6.0 hits per 9 IP. Three of his complete games were extra-inning games. A fourth one, he pitched 13 innings - 19 Ks and 10 friggin' walks.
He struck out 19 guys in a game three times that season. Three other times, he struck out exactly 15 batters. He struck out double-digits seven other times, too. 14 times that year, he walked seven or more guys.
In his last 15 starts of the year, when both pitchers would, you know, start wearing down, he pitched 130.2 innings - that's an average of 8.2 innings per start in his last 15 starts. He had an ERA of 2.00 in those 15 starts.
I searched for pitchers with >1000 career innings, >80% of appearances were starts, and more than half as many wins as GS. Couldn't find a way to isolate starting wins.
Some of the highest numbers: W/GS
(starting 1900)
Mathewson .677
Babe Ruth .639
Pete Alexander .622
Eddie Plank .616
Addie Joss .615
Carl Lundgren .611
Whitey Ford was at .539. As seen above he's at .518 when it's just starting wins / starts.
How about since 1960?
Halladay is right up there with .528
Ron Guidry .526
Bob Gibson .524
Juan Marichal .532
Pedro .535
Verlander .534
Mark Mulder .508
Clemens .501
15. Ray (CTL)
Posted: January 12, 2013 at 06:07 PM (#4345762)
Mussina is a HOFer to me. Solid middle tier. Does not lower the standards of the Hall.
16. bookbook
Posted: January 14, 2013 at 05:54 PM (#4347040)
Mussina may have dropped in the draft In part for interpersonal reasons - he was enough of a jerk as an undergrad that it might have hurt him.
17. DL from MN
Posted: January 14, 2013 at 06:14 PM (#4347049)
My thoughts watching Mussina were always that the knuckle-curve must be a ##### to learn how to throw correctly or everyone in baseball would be throwing it. That was a nasty pitch. Twins v. Mussina usually meant bad news for the Twins.
18. baudib
Posted: January 14, 2013 at 06:57 PM (#4347070)
I remember Mussina when he was a young pitcher, he was quite a sensation, IMO. In a way, sort of like Frank Thomas, though not as impressive -- a guy who came out of college and was clearly a fully formed major leaguer. A much better pitcher than, say, Jack Morris.
19. Mike Emeigh
Posted: January 14, 2013 at 08:30 PM (#4347108)
The Retrosheet game logs are complete from 1915 on and have a fairly large number of game lines before that (although not much from Mathewson's career) so I was able to get a partial answer on this question.
The logs list 43 pitchers who have started at least 200 games and won at least 50% of their starts. Dizzy Dean ranks first in this group with 138 wins in 230 starts (an even 60%). After that it's pretty solid Hall of Famers (Alexander, Grove, Gomez, etc.) mixed in with some short-career pitchers (Urban Shocker, Remy Kremer, Johnny Allen) and some modern guys (Ron Guidry, Verlander, Halladay, Mulder, Pedro). Hal Newhouser was right at 50% (187/374).
The bottom two guys on this list who started at least 200 games in the majors, by the way, are Glendon Rusch and Jason Johnson. Johnson is the only pitcher with 200 or more starts in the majors to have won fewer than 25% of his starts (55/221).
CC Sabathia is one start under for his career (191/383). If he can put together three more solid seasons he gets into the discussion; indeed I think he's on the border now.
-- MWE
20. bookbook
Posted: January 18, 2013 at 10:18 PM (#4350411)
I was an O's fan at the time and remember vaguely Bill James using Mussina as an example of how K rates matter more than age. After Moose's sophomore campaign he stated that he would wash out of the league before any number of pitchers who were much older but had higher K rates.
"I wonder how many pitchers in baseball history have gone 48-16 over three seasons? Mussina is one of the best pitchers in baseball, but his years of effectiveness are probably limited. He's 26, but pitches more likes he's 33. He'll run out of gas within four years, when guys like Cone and Randy Johnson, who are older than he is, are still going strong."
Of course that was coming off a year where he K'd 99 in 176 innings.
His K rates were 5.3, 6.3, 4.9, 5.1 through that point (age 25). In 1993 he pitched through arm and back trouble and had a 4.46 ERA.
In the seasons following that comment, the K rate shot up - 6.4, 7.5, 8.7. It didn't drop below 7 again until he was 38 years old.
Could this have been predicted? Do pitchers who have established themselves as amongst the best in the league from age 22-25 with a barely passable K rate eventually start striking more guys out as they mature? This wasn't a one-year wonder like Fidrych - four years is a pretty solid track record.
22. Mike Emeigh
Posted: January 23, 2013 at 09:36 PM (#4353789)
Do pitchers who have established themselves as amongst the best in the league from age 22-25 with a barely passable K rate eventually start striking more guys out as they mature?
Take a look at Justin Verlander. His K rates for his first three seasons in the league were 6.0, 8.2, and 7.3; since then 10.1, 8.8, 9.0, and 9.0. OK, that's a little better than passable for the early part of his career, I guess; the league averages were 6.4, 6.6, and 6.6.
-- MWE
23. DL from MN
Posted: January 23, 2013 at 09:58 PM (#4353797)
The knuckle-curve is hard to command (or everyone would throw it). Could be the difference between having it as a "show" pitch and a "strikeout" pitch.
24. bobm
Posted: January 23, 2013 at 10:05 PM (#4353798)
I searched for pitchers with >1000 career innings, >80% of appearances were starts, and more than half as many wins as GS. Couldn't find a way to isolate starting wins.
I think you need to use Pitching Game Finder -- Play Index Tools for the following query:
Find Players with Most Matching Games in Multiple Years (the most 10-strikeout games in the 1960's was 86 by Sandy Koufax) ... Pitcher's Role [x] Starter
This returns, for example: From 1960 to 2012, as Starter, sorted by greatest number of games in all seasons matching the selected criteria
Using this data for the top 300 pitchers from 1960-2012 by GS:
Rk by GS Player W/GS GS #Matching W L W-L%
289 Sandy Koufax 0.570 237 Ind. Games 135 60 0.692
43 Juan Marichal 0.521 457 Ind. Games 238 140 0.630
91 Roy Halladay 0.520 377 Ind. Games 196 98 0.667
141 Ron Guidry 0.517 323 Ind. Games 167 89 0.652
35 Bob Gibson 0.514 473 Ind. Games 243 165 0.596
66 Pedro Martinez 0.509 409 Ind. Games 208 97 0.682
19 Mike Mussina 0.504 536 Ind. Games 270 153 0.638
23 Jim Palmer 0.503 521 Ind. Games 262 148 0.639
6 Roger Clemens 0.501 707 Ind. Games 354 184 0.658
15 Randy Johnson 0.499 603 Ind. Games 301 166 0.645
83 CC Sabathia 0.499 383 Ind. Games 191 102 0.652
26 Andy Pettitte 0.497 491 Ind. Games 244 141 0.634
240 Jim Maloney 0.496 262 Ind. Games 130 80 0.619
69 Tim Hudson 0.486 405 Ind. Games 197 104 0.654
234 Denny McLain 0.485 264 Ind. Games 128 89 0.590
3 Greg Maddux 0.480 740 Ind. Games 355 226 0.611
11 Tom Seaver 0.479 647 Ind. Games 310 203 0.604
21 Jack Morris 0.476 527 Ind. Games 251 182 0.580
201 Johan Santana 0.475 284 Ind. Games 135 76 0.640
123 Roy Oswalt 0.475 335 Ind. Games 159 94 0.628
170 Dennis Leonard 0.474 302 Ind. Games 143 106 0.574
49 Curt Schilling 0.472 436 Ind. Games 206 134 0.606
64 Dwight Gooden 0.471 410 Ind. Games 193 111 0.635
16 Fergie Jenkins 0.468 594 Ind. Games 278 218 0.560
87 Mike Cuellar 0.467 379 Ind. Games 177 125 0.586
25. bobm
Posted: January 23, 2013 at 10:30 PM (#4353807)
Of the top 300 pitchers from 1916-1959 by GS:
Rk by GS Player W/GS GS #Matching W L W-L%
122 Dizzy Dean 0.600 230 Ind. Games 138 65 0.680
237 Eddie Cicotte 0.597 154 Ind. Games 92 50 0.648
11 Lefty Grove 0.586 457 Ind. Games 268 119 0.693
19 Pete Alexander 0.578 412 Ind. Games 238 137 0.635
182 Spud Chandler 0.576 184 Ind. Games 106 42 0.716
51 Lefty Gomez 0.572 320 Ind. Games 183 90 0.670
48 Wes Ferrell 0.560 323 Ind. Games 181 118 0.605
35 Bob Lemon 0.560 350 Ind. Games 196 118 0.624
9 Warren Spahn 0.557 476 Ind. Games 265 159 0.625
52 Carl Mays 0.552 319 Ind. Games 176 111 0.613
235 Tex Hughson 0.551 156 Ind. Games 86 51 0.628
149 Whitey Ford 0.548 208 Ind. Games 114 44 0.722
54 Urban Shocker 0.543 317 Ind. Games 172 109 0.612
13 Carl Hubbell 0.538 433 Ind. Games 233 146 0.615
33 Walter Johnson 0.538 357 Ind. Games 192 133 0.591
25 Stan Coveleski 0.535 383 Ind. Games 205 129 0.614
36 Dazzy Vance 0.533 345 Ind. Games 184 128 0.590
5 Bob Feller 0.533 484 Ind. Games 258 154 0.626
58 Allie Reynolds 0.531 309 Ind. Games 164 89 0.648
162 Hippo Vaughn 0.528 195 Ind. Games 103 73 0.585
104 Ray Kremer 0.522 247 Ind. Games 129 79 0.620
22 Herb Pennock 0.522 391 Ind. Games 204 136 0.600
86 Bob Shawkey 0.521 265 Ind. Games 138 101 0.577
57 Art Nehf 0.519 310 Ind. Games 161 101 0.615
53 Eddie Lopat 0.516 318 Ind. Games 164 109 0.601
108 Johnny Allen 0.515 241 Ind. Games 124 62 0.667
32 Tommy Bridges 0.514 362 Ind. Games 186 128 0.592
150 Jim Bagby 0.512 207 Ind. Games 106 74 0.589
37 Lon Warneke 0.510 343 Ind. Games 175 107 0.621
250 Lefty Williams 0.510 147 Ind. Games 75 41 0.647
95 Vic Raschi 0.510 255 Ind. Games 130 65 0.667
118 Mel Parnell 0.509 232 Ind. Games 118 69 0.631
65 General Crowder 0.507 292 Ind. Games 148 104 0.587
4 Ted Lyons 0.506 484 Ind. Games 245 210 0.538
18 Robin Roberts 0.504 421 Ind. Games 212 168 0.558
166 Tiny Bonham 0.503 193 Ind. Games 97 71 0.577
3 Burleigh Grimes 0.502 496 Ind. Games 249 192 0.565
76 Don Newcombe 0.502 277 Ind. Games 139 79 0.638
39 Wilbur Cooper 0.501 339 Ind. Games 170 138 0.552
29 Hal Newhouser 0.500 374 Ind. Games 187 140 0.572
26. bobm
Posted: January 23, 2013 at 10:42 PM (#4353808)
EDIT: Selected from the top 300 pitchers from 1936 to 1995 by GS:
Rk Player W/GS GS #Matching W L W-L%
8 Warren Spahn 0.538 665 Ind. Games 358 227 0.612
...
42 Whitey Ford 0.518 438 Ind. Games 227 99 0.696
...
28 Bob Gibson 0.508 482 Ind. Games 245 170 0.590
...
114 Sandy Koufax 0.506 314 Ind. Games 159 85 0.652
27. bobm
Posted: January 23, 2013 at 10:47 PM (#4353812)
Is it conceivable Mussina won't make the HOF within three years of his initial eligibility? I suppose he may get the 'I never thought of him as a HOFer' deal, but it'll be ridiculous if he has to wait a dozen years to make it.
29. DL from MN
Posted: January 24, 2013 at 09:54 AM (#4353937)
It is conceivable Mussina doesn't make the HOF within 30 years of his initial eligibility. It's all screwed up right now.
30. Loren F.
Posted: January 24, 2013 at 10:53 AM (#4354001)
I have felt for a long time that Mussina's biggest risk is becoming the Blyleven of his generation. He was the third or fourth best pitcher in the league on a consistent basis (except in 2001, when he was the best), but was never seen as "the best" and he wasn't great enough at one skill (strikeouts, innings, etc.) to stand out that way. With no All-Star appearances after 1999, Moose sort of got lost in the shuffle and had a relatively low profile given his talent. He's really a poster boy for someone likely to be under-appreciated.
31. theorioleway
Posted: January 26, 2013 at 12:35 PM (#4355494)
Good point Loren about Mussina's lack of a skill/stat that made him stand out, although I always thought one of the reasons savvy baseball fans were so upset about how long it took Blyleven was that even if you wanted to look at basic things like innings or strikeouts, Blyleven did very well in those categories (and of course, much better than Morris). Besides Schilling (whose only had one shot), there hasn't been a pitcher of Mussina's value in post-1893 MLB baseball that hasn't made it into the Hall of Fame. Maybe a better comparison is as a superior Reuschel--someone without a lot of black ink but who is very valuable?
Maybe a better comparison is as a superior Reuschel--someone without a lot of black ink but who is very valuable?
Reuschel's value is still very much a matter for debate - his rating as a kind of shockingly valuable pitcher depends on giving him a ton of credit for pitching in front of bad defenses. Reuschel's simple runs allowed numbers are not meaningfully better than Jerry Koosman's. And then on top of that Reuschel got poor run support from his offense, so he was barely above a .500 pitcher.
Mike Mussina has some very clear stats to make him stand out, and he should be elected reasonably easily. As all this W/GS stuff has shown, Mussina has great W/L numbers. He won 270 games and lost 153. He's +117 for his career. That's an elect-me number right there - compare to just +37 for Blyleven. Barring full ballot catastrophe, I'd guess it takes 3-5 years to clear out the even greater pitchers (minus Clemens), and then Mussina goes in relatively easily.
33. theorioleway
Posted: January 26, 2013 at 02:41 PM (#4355581)
Maybe a better Bunning--who had to get in via the Veterans Committee? Also, at this point I'm not sure how you don't prep for full ballot catastrophe the way the voters are going.
Bunning, like Blyleven, was +40 in W-L. Nothing close to Mussina.
If there's a full ballot catastrophe, players notably greater than Mussina will be kept out, and Mussina's snub won't have anything to do with his being underrated by the writers.
35. Dingbat_Charlie
Posted: February 20, 2013 at 04:44 PM (#4372936)
The favorite player of my adult life. I remember watching his stellar debut, and the home run Frank Thomas hit to spoil it. It was great to see him retire on a high note.
Mussina won more than half of the starts he made in his career. This is difficult to do as a starter not only has to give up fewer runs than the guy he's facing, but also pitch deep enough into games to avoid no-decisions.
Since 1901 79 pitchers have between 3000 and 4000 innings pitched
Those 79 pitchers averaged 8.77 innings per decision
Mussina is 7th with a decision every 8.42 innings, Petitte is 1st with one every 8.09 IP, numbers 2 through 6 are guys who pitched 60-80 years ago. Petitte BTW won .499 of his starts.
As a comparison, Palmer and Smoltz had a decision every 9.4 innings.
Palmer had nearly an inning more per start than Mussina- so it's not really a matter of Moose pitching deeper into games
37. karlmagnus
Posted: February 21, 2013 at 05:01 PM (#4373592)
Parisian Bob Caruthers, 310GS, 218 wins 0.703 has to be close to the all-time leader with 200 wins, no? Not even on the damn Veterans ballot. (Spalding is 252/325, .775, presumably #1.)
Hell, he should be in just for the damn nickname. I assume he wasn't actually from Paris; then the nickname would suck.
According to Wikipedia, he wasn't:
He led the league in wins (40), ERA (2.07), shutouts (6) and winning percentage (.755) in 1885, and was 30-14 for the 1886 champions after a lengthy contract dispute which he conducted from Paris, earning him his nickname.
40. Ray (CTL)
Posted: February 21, 2013 at 05:22 PM (#4373606)
Isn't the key to getting decisions not only pitching deep into games but also having a team that can score a lot of runs?
Isn't the key to getting decisions not only pitching deep into games but also having a team that can score a lot of runs?
Or can't score any.
42. OCF
Posted: February 21, 2013 at 05:49 PM (#4373625)
I've been doing RA+ equivalent records since I joined the HoM project, and one of the columns of my spreadsheet computes exactly what you've been talking about: innings per decision. What has struck me is how stable that number is over time, even as everything else changes. I've got somewhere between 180 and 190 pitchers of potential HoM interest worked up (some have multiple lines and I'm too lazy right now to separate them out), and the average innings/decision is around 8.8 - which pretty much just what Johnny reported with a different sample. But what I'm saying is that there really is no trend in that number over time.
Relief pitchers screw things up. Closers get very few decisions, and pre-closer era relief aces got many decisions. Johnny reported Smoltz at 9.4 (actually 9.44) but that's distorted by his years as a closer. Separate things, and Smoltz had 20.38 in his closer years and 9.00 in his starter years. I just sorted my database by this number and got that 20.38 as the extreme on one end, with the next number being 12.66 for Wilhelm. And who are the names at the other end, with very low innings/decision? Marshall, Fingers, Eckersley's relief-only years, Hiller, Gossage, Lee Smith, Stu Miller.
OK, take the relief pitchers out. What (among the pitchers I've worked up) do I have as the highest and lowest innings/decision?
Maglie 9.52
Tudor 9.51
Palmer 9.40 (so Palmer really is quite extreme)
Ford 9.27
Reynolds 8.27
Seaver 9.26
Here's the order of some very prominent names:
[Mussina 8.43]
Ryan 8.50
Walter Johnson 8.50 (Notably affected by relief work)
Mathewson 8.52
Maddux 8.61
Spahn 8.62
Plank 8.65
Mordecai Brown 8.65
Glavine 8.70
Hubbell 8.82
Martinez 8.86
Randy Johnson 8.87
McGinnity 8.89
Cy Young 8.90
Alexander 8.93
Grove 8.94
Feller 8.93
Nichols 8.95
Rusie 9.08
Carlton 9.10
Sutton 9.11
Marichal 9.11
Clemens 9.14
Gibson 9.14
Perry 9.24
Seaver 9.26
Ford 9.27
Palmer 9.40
OK, looking at that I do see one timeline signature - the "innings hero" pitchers of the late 60's through the 70's, the same era that produced many 300-game winners, tended to pitch a lot of innings per decision. (But not Ryan, and not Wilbur Wood.)
(As a response to karlmagnus: The only pre-1893 pitchers I have on this list are the early careers of Young, Nichols, Rusie, and Griffith, all of whom continued to pitch from 60'6". I simply don't want to apply these methods to the prior era.)
I'll add that when I've done RA+ equivalent records, I've based the total in innings, not decisions. I've arbitrarily granted 9.0 innings per decision, which shorts the decision totals slightly on average, since the average is about 8.8. So with Mussina, I'll give him significantly fewer virtual decisions than his actual number of decisions. That cuts his bulk total down some, but doesn't change his virtual winning percentages.
That said, I have Mussina with an RA+ equivalent record of 236-147. That's outstanding, and makes him in my eyes a "frontlog" candidate for the HoM, someone to be elected as soon as the space is available.
Isn't the key to getting decisions not only pitching deep into games but also having a team that can score a lot of runs?
plus lack of lead changes after leaving-
if your team has a really good set-up/closer combo and tends to use sub replacement level slop when behind, then your starters may get more decisions
Moose averaged a decision every 8 IP with the Yankees, so did Petitte
Wang was at 8.25...
44. Chris Cobb
Posted: February 21, 2013 at 08:54 PM (#4373687)
Interesting list, OCF!
OK, looking at that I do see one timeline signature - the "innings hero" pitchers of the late 60's through the 70's, the same era that produced many 300-game winners, tended to pitch a lot of innings per decision. (But not Ryan, and not Wilbur Wood.)
Both of whom were relief pitchers before they became innings heroes. That's not really the whole story in Ryan's case, although it is probably a contributing factor. But Wood was a reliever for seven years before he switched to starting.
45. bookbook
Posted: March 12, 2013 at 01:54 AM (#4386728)
1) Mussina is, to me, an obvious HOFer.
2) the winning percentage on games he's started has little to do with it.
Look, the man chose to sign with the Yankees AFTER they won a gazillion rings in four years. He went to a team with a phenomenal offense and Mariano Rivera to close out his wins. Sure, he voluntarily chose to pitch in front of Jeter and Bernie, so credit for some guts, there.
Will anyone argue that the difference between Mussina's GS/W and Felix's has anything more than a glancing relation to the talent and tenacity of the starting pitchers involved? (It's actually a bit damning that Pettite, a clear HOVG guy, put up a very similar number pitching for the same team for many of the same years, now that I think about it.) It's a fun and interesting stat, but not really a HOF case.
46. Rants Mulliniks
Posted: March 12, 2013 at 08:36 AM (#4386769)
I think the BBWAA voters will elect Maddux. He won 270 games, and 20 in his last season, so I can see a lot of them saying that he could have won 300 easily if he'd wanted to.
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. DL from MN Posted: January 10, 2013 at 05:28 PM (#4344526)Percentage of starts won (relief wins removed):
Martinez: .509
Mussina: .504
Clemens: .501
Johnson: .499
Maddux: .480
Schilling: .472
Glavine: .447
Brown: .441
Smoltz: .435
Looking at his minor league stats I'd say you're not joking. Started in AA and pitched 9 games his first year split between AA/AAA with an ERA of 1.46. The Orioles decided to leave him in AAA to start 1991 and he tore up the league 10-4 in 19 starts. In baseball full-time at age 22 and we can argue whether he was held back by going to college.
So, why did he drop to #20 overall in that draft? I can't argue with the top few picks (Chipper Jones, Tony Clark, Mike Lieberthal, Alex Fernandez) and it was a relatively deep draft but Mussina seems to have been overlooked a little at the time.
According to B-R his WAR split is 45-33 O's to Yankees, so unless we find that to be way off for some reason, it's definitely an Orioles cap. B-R WAR does not appear to adjust for the shortened seasons (I just eyeballed Dave Concepcion, Mike Schmidt and Andre Dawson who all had their best years by far that season) . . . so that would push him even more towards the O's.
Why don't you guys send an email to his agent and ask his preference? Mussina seems like the kind of cerebral guy who would appreciate the HoM.
Some writer might pick up on it and you could get some nice publicity.
Felix Hernandez .412
Jose Lima .345
Adam Eaton .343
Brian Moehler .321
Josh Fogg .320
Jason Johnson .249
Whitey Ford .518
Burleigh Grimes .502
Jimmy Ring .371
Joe Oeschger .349
Hugh Mulcahy .290
John Van Benschoten .052
Jack "Pitch to the Score" Morris = .476
Nolan Ryan = .413
By the way, I look at Nolan Ryan's stats every couple of months just because it is so singular and amazing...
1974. 22-16, 42 GP, 41 GS. 332.2 IP, 367 Ks, 202 BBs - both led the league. 26 complete games. 221 hits, meaning he led the league with 6.0 hits per 9 IP. Three of his complete games were extra-inning games. A fourth one, he pitched 13 innings - 19 Ks and 10 friggin' walks.
He struck out 19 guys in a game three times that season. Three other times, he struck out exactly 15 batters. He struck out double-digits seven other times, too. 14 times that year, he walked seven or more guys.
In his last 15 starts of the year, when both pitchers would, you know, start wearing down, he pitched 130.2 innings - that's an average of 8.2 innings per start in his last 15 starts. He had an ERA of 2.00 in those 15 starts.
Amazing.
Some of the highest numbers: W/GS
(starting 1900)
Mathewson .677
Babe Ruth .639
Pete Alexander .622
Eddie Plank .616
Addie Joss .615
Carl Lundgren .611
Whitey Ford was at .539. As seen above he's at .518 when it's just starting wins / starts.
How about since 1960?
Halladay is right up there with .528
Ron Guidry .526
Bob Gibson .524
Juan Marichal .532
Pedro .535
Verlander .534
Mark Mulder .508
Clemens .501
The logs list 43 pitchers who have started at least 200 games and won at least 50% of their starts. Dizzy Dean ranks first in this group with 138 wins in 230 starts (an even 60%). After that it's pretty solid Hall of Famers (Alexander, Grove, Gomez, etc.) mixed in with some short-career pitchers (Urban Shocker, Remy Kremer, Johnny Allen) and some modern guys (Ron Guidry, Verlander, Halladay, Mulder, Pedro). Hal Newhouser was right at 50% (187/374).
The bottom two guys on this list who started at least 200 games in the majors, by the way, are Glendon Rusch and Jason Johnson. Johnson is the only pitcher with 200 or more starts in the majors to have won fewer than 25% of his starts (55/221).
CC Sabathia is one start under for his career (191/383). If he can put together three more solid seasons he gets into the discussion; indeed I think he's on the border now.
-- MWE
"I wonder how many pitchers in baseball history have gone 48-16 over three seasons? Mussina is one of the best pitchers in baseball, but his years of effectiveness are probably limited. He's 26, but pitches more likes he's 33. He'll run out of gas within four years, when guys like Cone and Randy Johnson, who are older than he is, are still going strong."
Of course that was coming off a year where he K'd 99 in 176 innings.
His K rates were 5.3, 6.3, 4.9, 5.1 through that point (age 25). In 1993 he pitched through arm and back trouble and had a 4.46 ERA.
In the seasons following that comment, the K rate shot up - 6.4, 7.5, 8.7. It didn't drop below 7 again until he was 38 years old.
Could this have been predicted? Do pitchers who have established themselves as amongst the best in the league from age 22-25 with a barely passable K rate eventually start striking more guys out as they mature? This wasn't a one-year wonder like Fidrych - four years is a pretty solid track record.
Take a look at Justin Verlander. His K rates for his first three seasons in the league were 6.0, 8.2, and 7.3; since then 10.1, 8.8, 9.0, and 9.0. OK, that's a little better than passable for the early part of his career, I guess; the league averages were 6.4, 6.6, and 6.6.
-- MWE
I think you need to use Pitching Game Finder -- Play Index Tools for the following query:
This returns, for example: From 1960 to 2012, as Starter, sorted by greatest number of games in all seasons matching the selected criteria
Using this data for the top 300 pitchers from 1960-2012 by GS:
Mike Mussina has some very clear stats to make him stand out, and he should be elected reasonably easily. As all this W/GS stuff has shown, Mussina has great W/L numbers. He won 270 games and lost 153. He's +117 for his career. That's an elect-me number right there - compare to just +37 for Blyleven. Barring full ballot catastrophe, I'd guess it takes 3-5 years to clear out the even greater pitchers (minus Clemens), and then Mussina goes in relatively easily.
If there's a full ballot catastrophe, players notably greater than Mussina will be kept out, and Mussina's snub won't have anything to do with his being underrated by the writers.
Since 1901 79 pitchers have between 3000 and 4000 innings pitched
Those 79 pitchers averaged 8.77 innings per decision
Mussina is 7th with a decision every 8.42 innings, Petitte is 1st with one every 8.09 IP, numbers 2 through 6 are guys who pitched 60-80 years ago. Petitte BTW won .499 of his starts.
As a comparison, Palmer and Smoltz had a decision every 9.4 innings.
Palmer had nearly an inning more per start than Mussina- so it's not really a matter of Moose pitching deeper into games
Hell, he should be in just for the damn nickname. I assume he wasn't actually from Paris; then the nickname would suck.
According to Wikipedia, he wasn't:
He led the league in wins (40), ERA (2.07), shutouts (6) and winning percentage (.755) in 1885, and was 30-14 for the 1886 champions after a lengthy contract dispute which he conducted from Paris, earning him his nickname.
Or can't score any.
Relief pitchers screw things up. Closers get very few decisions, and pre-closer era relief aces got many decisions. Johnny reported Smoltz at 9.4 (actually 9.44) but that's distorted by his years as a closer. Separate things, and Smoltz had 20.38 in his closer years and 9.00 in his starter years. I just sorted my database by this number and got that 20.38 as the extreme on one end, with the next number being 12.66 for Wilhelm. And who are the names at the other end, with very low innings/decision? Marshall, Fingers, Eckersley's relief-only years, Hiller, Gossage, Lee Smith, Stu Miller.
OK, take the relief pitchers out. What (among the pitchers I've worked up) do I have as the highest and lowest innings/decision?
On one end:
Curt Davis 8.04
Wes Ferrell 8.17
Trout 8.26
Joe Wood 8.30
Harder 8.38
Derringer 8.38
Newhouser 8.38
Wilbur Wood 8.39
Wynn 8.39
Dauss 8.39
On the other end:
Maglie 9.52
Tudor 9.51
Palmer 9.40 (so Palmer really is quite extreme)
Ford 9.27
Reynolds 8.27
Seaver 9.26
Here's the order of some very prominent names:
[Mussina 8.43]
Ryan 8.50
Walter Johnson 8.50 (Notably affected by relief work)
Mathewson 8.52
Maddux 8.61
Spahn 8.62
Plank 8.65
Mordecai Brown 8.65
Glavine 8.70
Hubbell 8.82
Martinez 8.86
Randy Johnson 8.87
McGinnity 8.89
Cy Young 8.90
Alexander 8.93
Grove 8.94
Feller 8.93
Nichols 8.95
Rusie 9.08
Carlton 9.10
Sutton 9.11
Marichal 9.11
Clemens 9.14
Gibson 9.14
Perry 9.24
Seaver 9.26
Ford 9.27
Palmer 9.40
OK, looking at that I do see one timeline signature - the "innings hero" pitchers of the late 60's through the 70's, the same era that produced many 300-game winners, tended to pitch a lot of innings per decision. (But not Ryan, and not Wilbur Wood.)
(As a response to karlmagnus: The only pre-1893 pitchers I have on this list are the early careers of Young, Nichols, Rusie, and Griffith, all of whom continued to pitch from 60'6". I simply don't want to apply these methods to the prior era.)
I'll add that when I've done RA+ equivalent records, I've based the total in innings, not decisions. I've arbitrarily granted 9.0 innings per decision, which shorts the decision totals slightly on average, since the average is about 8.8. So with Mussina, I'll give him significantly fewer virtual decisions than his actual number of decisions. That cuts his bulk total down some, but doesn't change his virtual winning percentages.
That said, I have Mussina with an RA+ equivalent record of 236-147. That's outstanding, and makes him in my eyes a "frontlog" candidate for the HoM, someone to be elected as soon as the space is available.
plus lack of lead changes after leaving-
if your team has a really good set-up/closer combo and tends to use sub replacement level slop when behind, then your starters may get more decisions
Moose averaged a decision every 8 IP with the Yankees, so did Petitte
Wang was at 8.25...
OK, looking at that I do see one timeline signature - the "innings hero" pitchers of the late 60's through the 70's, the same era that produced many 300-game winners, tended to pitch a lot of innings per decision. (But not Ryan, and not Wilbur Wood.)
Both of whom were relief pitchers before they became innings heroes. That's not really the whole story in Ryan's case, although it is probably a contributing factor. But Wood was a reliever for seven years before he switched to starting.
2) the winning percentage on games he's started has little to do with it.
Look, the man chose to sign with the Yankees AFTER they won a gazillion rings in four years. He went to a team with a phenomenal offense and Mariano Rivera to close out his wins. Sure, he voluntarily chose to pitch in front of Jeter and Bernie, so credit for some guts, there.
Will anyone argue that the difference between Mussina's GS/W and Felix's has anything more than a glancing relation to the talent and tenacity of the starting pitchers involved? (It's actually a bit damning that Pettite, a clear HOVG guy, put up a very similar number pitching for the same team for many of the same years, now that I think about it.) It's a fun and interesting stat, but not really a HOF case.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main