Congrats to Waino

fully post-WW II in CAPS

1. BOB GIBSON 251 HOF
2. Jesse Haines 210 HOF
3. ADAM WAINWRIGHT 200

4. BOB FORSCH 163
5. Bill Sherdel 153
6. Bill Doak 144
7. Dizzy Dean 134 HOF
8. Harry Brecheen 128
9. Dave Foutz 114
10. Silver King 112

11. Bob Caruthers 108
12. Slim Sallee 106
13. Mort Cooper 105
14. LARRY JACKSON 101
14. Max Lanier 101
14. MATT MORRIS 101

17. Al Brazle 97
17. Howie Pollet 97
19. CHRIS CARPENTER 95
20. Theodore Breitenstein 94

1000+ K CLUB
1. Bob Gibson 3117

2. ADAM WAINWRIGHT 2199

3. Dizzy Dean 1095
4. Chris Carpenter 1085
5. Bob Forsch 1079

Modern pitchers with 200 wins and did not get voted into HOF (not counting pitchers like sabathia and Colon who haven't been eligible yet or active pitchers):


Roger Clemens (354)*
Tommy John (288)
Jamie Moyer (269)
Andy Petitte (256)*
Jack Quinn (247)
Dennis Martinez (245)
Frank Tanana (240)
David Wells (239)
Sam Jones (229)
Luis Tiant (229)
Hooks Daass (223)
Paul Derringer (223)
Mel Harder (223)
Tim Hudson (222)
Jerry Koosman (222)
Joe Niekro (221)
Jerry Reuss (220)
Kenny Rogers (219)
Eddie Whitehill (218)
Freddie Firzsimmons (217)
Mickey Lolich (216)
Wilbur Cooper (216)
Charlie Hough (216)
Curt Schilling (216)*
Stan Coveleski (215)
Jim Perry (215)
Rick Reuschel (214)

And there are 20 more names in the 200 win category after that. Just a lot more wins in the old days and a surprising number of guys with 200 wins who I've never heard of.

I guess the guys to me that feel like HOFrs are John, lolich, Reuschel , Lester (200), Buerhle and possibly hersisher at 204.

There's a bit of jam at 200 with Waino, Finley, Lester, Uhle and Wakefield,

I think the voters have done a surprisingly decent job deciding which 200 win pitchers deserved to get elected and which ones didn't. There's actually a lot more errors of inclusion than there are of exclusion. Looking at the list of 200 win pitchers outside the Hall and ignoring the guys who aren't eligible yet and will surely get elected (Sabathia, Verlander, Kershaw, Scherzer, Greinke) and those who are being snubbed for non statistical reasons (Clemens, Pettitte, Schilling), I think the only 200 win pitchers I'd add are Luis Tiant and Kevin Brown (and you could argue that Brown falls into the "snubbed for non statistical reasons" category).

As an Expos fan I'd love to see Dennis Martinez in, but realistically he shouldn't be - he is a Hall of the Very Good player - just below HOF status with 0 Cy's, never won more than 16 at a time when starters often got 20 - 1981 was his best shot but we all know what happened that year.

Tommy John should've been in years ago imo - how many players get a surgery named after them? Mix in the 288 wins and 61.6 bWAR and 3 20 win seasons post surgery and the 26 year ML career and I can't understand the voters not putting him in by now. I suspect too many think he was just famous for being the first to get the surgery but they rewarded 'forkball inventor' (even though he wasn't) Bruce Sutter who shouldn't have been anywhere near in the HOF by any measure in. Go figure.

Jamie Moyer is a fun one - holds the record for most HR given up (522) 3 times a top 5 for Cy but never won, twice the magic 20 wins, but sub 50 WAR (49.8) and just 3 black ink. Nowhere near a HOFer but damn if I didn't want him to last longer - at least 1 more year so he would've cracked 50 in the majors.

Yadier Molina caught Jon Lester's 200th and William Contreras caught Wainos 200th.

That's one of those very weird baseball nuggets

I think Kevin Brown definitely has the PED tag. Don't know if he gets in without it but it definitely impacts him .

Re: 2 - Coveleski might be the least-well-known 20th century HOFer, but he is in the hall.

As for John, I think he'll get in eventually. They can't put in Kaat and not John, they're just too similar. Overlapped for the large majority of their careers. Nearly identical win totals. Very similar ERAs. The only difference, really, is that John is better. (bWAR thinks to the tune of 10 WAR) I, at any rate, have trouble even thinking of one without the other popping into my mind. (They're like Trammell and Whitaker in this regard.)

I think Kevin Brown definitely has the PED tag. Don't know if he gets in without it but it definitely impacts him .


Yeah, I doubt most writers are withholding their votes because of all the unearned runs he allowed.

There might also be a guy or two out there who won't vote for him for breaking his hand punching a wall in September, right before the playoffs. I think that's probably a more valid reason to not vote for him than the steroids (was he caught or just "suspicious").

Man, his K-rates are so, so bad compared to today. Startingly how different that element of the game is from only...Oh, it's been 20-30 years, nevermind.

John is a hard sell for me. He played 26 years and still only reached borderline HOF value. Guys like Cone, Hudson, and Buehrle produced comparable value in 10 fewer seasons. They were clearly more dominant pitchers...and I'm still not sold on any of their worthiness.

John's greatest HOF arguments are of course his big wins and innings pitched totals (which do indeed look very HOF-ey), but they lose some of their luster when you consider the era he played in. For whatever reason, conditions of the game allowed 1970's pitchers to throw roughly a billion innings for half a billion years (give or take). John's 288 wins look great at a glance but place him behind 6 contemporaries (Carlton, Ryan, Sutton, Niekro, Perry, Seaver) and just ahead of 3 more (Blyleven, Jenkins, Kaat). It doesn't really stand out. Ditto with innings pitched; he's 20th all time but behind 7 contemporaries and just ahead of a few more. And on a seasonal basis he wasn't a major workhorse relative to his era; he never led the league in IP and only finished in the top 5 twice and the top 10 four times. Compare to the contemporary Fergie Jenkins, for example, who's slightly behind TJ in career IP but had 7 seasons higher than John's career high.

There might also be a guy or two out there who won't vote for him for breaking his hand punching a wall in September, right before the playoffs. I think that's probably a more valid reason to not vote for him than the steroids (was he caught or just "suspicious").

He was in the Mitchell report -- he was one of the guys that Radomski named as a client (with receipts).

Re: Brown

He was an a$$hole and nobody liked him. The PED stuff is just justification.

He was in the Mitchell report -- he was one of the guys that Radomski named as a client (with receipts).


LOL, damn! That's about as caught as you can be.

William Contreras caught Wainos 200th.

While, due to yet another tear in the space-time continuum, also going 1-2 with a walk against Waino in the same game. Time travellers, how many times do we have to go over this, DO NOT CROSS YOUR OWN TIMELINE!!

You can't tell me what to do, you're not my dad!

(I'm my own dad.)

Looking at the 1996 season, did people know that Bernard Gilkey was an 8 win player that year? Is this like common knowledge? Bernard Gilkey!

#15 - I actually did know that! But only because I happened to look him up on BREF a few weeks ago.

So now that Waino got his 200th, it looks like Gerrit Cole is far and away the best bet to be the next 200 game winner, right? After him...well, it could be a loooong drought. Would you take the field that ANY other active pitcher will get there?

Gilkey was amazing that season. Sadly he was never the same after getting hit by that fly ball in Men in Black…

The 1996 Mets also had Lance Johnson putting up a career year with 7 WAR and Todd Hundley setting the catcher HR record. And they still finished 71-91.

#17: Hoo boy. I'm not sure I would. After Cole, I'd put the next best chance as Aaron Nola. He's only at 90 wins but he's "only" 30 and he's still getting 180 IP a year. He wouldn't seem a great bet to pitch into his early 40s but who knows. Next is probably Jose Berrios who is at 83 wins but is 29 and still getting about 180 innings a year. Obviously it would benefit these guys win totals to land on the Braves or Dodgers or whatever team is gonna win 1,000 over the next decade. Still, I don't imagine either of those guys is a good bet.

avg wins/start and decisions/start

2023 0.29 0.61
2022 0.30 0.62
2017 0.34 0.69
2012 0.36 0.72
2007 0.35 0.70
2002 0.35 0.71

Not huge change but still on the order of 5 fewer wins per 100 starts. (Wins/inning might be better but you'll take what you get!) Presumably good pitchers on good teams have a higher win/start rate but it's more the general trend and the good ones are still probably losing about 5 wins per 100 start. Nola is at 0.39 career, 0.37 for the last two years. At that pace, he'll need a bit under 300 mmore starts, he's at 233 now. That might seem low but he debuted with half-seasons at 22 and 23, so maybe "age 30" isn't as old as it sounds. Still, 10 years.

Pitching for Altanta, Charlie Morton has won 40% of his starts the last 2-3 years. Based on that sample (n=2), a good pitcher gains back those 5 wins per 100 that the average pitcher has lost then being on a top team might add another 5 wins. Still a 40% win rate only reduces the starts Nola needs to 275 or 9 full seasons.

The chances that both Nola and Berrios will eventually miss a season due to injury and be done by 36 are probably higher than the chance that either will make it to 200 wins.

Now, Spencer Strider is up to 29 wins in 49 starts and 13 relief. Kershaw is at 50% career so Strider can match that. Obviously at 50% he'd need just 400 starts. That still took Kershaw 14.5 seasons but he's averaged only 22 starts per year over the last 8 seasons. Strider could get there at age 36. But Justin Steele is only around 40% and got started too late to have much chance (you never know). Are there any super-young studs on good teams?

I played ball with Gilkey. He was better than me

Brown has so many things working against him, you can't just isolate one thing. Without the steroids, he still ain't making it (at least not through the writers).

A) His best seasons he was overlooked in Cy voting for Braves pitchers with lesser years (1996 Smoltz, 1998 Glavine). Give him two Cys and he's a much more attractive candidate.

B) He jumped around, but was at his best with less glamorous franchises and was perceived as a disappointment in the big markets (LA unfairly, NY justifiably).

C) He was pitching in the shadow of historically great starters (Clemens, Maddux, Unit, Pedro, etc., and wasn't seen as on par with his one-rung down peers Smoltz, Moose, Schilling)

D) He was historically unpleasant.

I think Cole has a pretty good chance - he gives me Verlander vibes. I see no one else on the horizon who has a chance. Walt's list is pretty spare. Strausburg could have been a guy. Bumgarner. Injuries just take out so many guys.

Cardinals broadcasters said tonight that Waino is the only pitcher to win his 200th 1-0. Also they said he won 100th against Cincy 1-0 and Molina hit a HR for the only run.

Favorite Toy gives Cole a 68% shot (sounds reasonable to me).

As a Jays fan I had to check - Berrios a 14% shot at 200 (highest win total for a sub 30 guy at 83), Gausman a 2% shot (was surprised he has a losing record lifetime), then wins get into the 70s lifetime, next highest win total for a guy under 30 is Germán Márquez at 65 (just 2 wins this year at age 28 and 9 last year so no shot).

In fact, no one in the top 100 wins active is under 27 years of age. Yikes. And it just takes 43 wins to make that list.

Spencer Strider at 24 though has a 17% shot thanks to 17 wins so far this year, just 29 lifetime. He is with a good team which is a big asset. If he gets 15 wins next year that jumps the odds to 32%. Lets hope.

Edit: wrong thread

Max Fried probably started too late and has missed too many starts to be a serious threat a 200, but he's got a slim chance IMO.

Urias is the youngest in the top 100 with 60 wins.

Wainwright last night on MLB Network confirmed that he is skipping his weekend start in SD and isn't sure if he'll pitch at home on the final weekend.

he grinned after saying maybe he'd DH - Waino had 10 HR, 73 RBI, and a .193 AVG in 742 career AB, not too shabby.

one talking head suggested he pitch the 9th and close out with a K using his "Uncle Charley" curveball, a la the Beltran AB to end the 2006 NLCS.

Dan Plesac, who pitched in 18 seasons, said on the air that it was vital to him that he close his career the way he opened it - with a K. he did that for the Phillies in 2003, with a 2.70 ERA in 58 G. said he turned down an invite to spring training in 2004 (he would have turned age 42 in spring training).