Comparing Buehrle and a Hall of Famer’s Hall of Famer like Maddux probably isn’t fair, but if you think these guys are actually comparable…
In his Cy Young years, Maddux went 20-11, 20-10, 16-6, and 19-2. (Percentage: .721.) He was 26 in the first of Cy Young year and 29 at the end. Buehrle’s records in the same seasons, by age? 16-8, 12-13, 10-9, 15-12. (.558.) He is now 30.
If you stick to Maddux’s best years in terms of winning, much less his real peak - I mean chopping off his first two weak years with the Cubs, and his last four years - he’s much better than .610.
There was probably a faster way to do this, but I lopped off those years of Maddux’s career and calculated a winning percentage of 65.6%. I can’t do the same thing for Buehrle because it would hurt his results. But his best single-season WP is 66.7%, which is only a little better than Maddux’s WP from 1988 to 2004, inclusive.
If you’d like me to pretend I really understand ERA+, I’ll tell you that Buehrle’s career best is 144, in 2005. Maddux topped that number in ten seasons. Buehrle’s career average figure is 123, Maddux’s average over his 11 seasons in Atlanta was 163.
Look, I understand that Buehrle isn’t as good as Maddux. But his winning percentage is nothing to sneeze at. For a more realistic contemporary comparison, we have C. C. Sabathia, who broke in at about the same time as Buehrle, and is 127-79 (.616). He has never had a 20-win season and has won more than 17 only once.
I have no idea whether Sabathia will be a Hall of Famer, but my point is, if we hold on to 20-win seasons and 300-win careers as the standard of greatness in an era of pitch counts, we’ll diminsh the accomplishments of every pitcher.
I listened to that game on the radio. It was amusing, even though they lost. Of course, that wasn’t unusual that year (they finished last in the east, 23 games back).
I like how no one even bothered to mention Field’s grand slam. That’s nothing to sneeze at either. He’s sitting around in the locker room, all lonely, and everyone slapping Buehrle on the back. He’s like, “I did OK too, right guys? Right?” Poor guy.
Yeah, but if baseball journalism is anything to go by, there are quite few members of the BBWAA who think that it’s a valuable statistic. And these are the guys who vote in the HoF election. So while it might not tell us anything much about a pitcher’s ability, it might tell us something about the likelihood of him making the Hall.
I would agree, with any pitcher that has ever pitched so far. If a pitcher comes along, a freak of nature the likes hasn’t existed before, who throws, say 110 mph, then it could be done.
There already was(maybe). Steve Dalkowski.
There is some question of how fast he was but it appears he was faster than any major leaguer. He also had serious control problems.
Games 236
IP 995
H 682
BB 1354
SO 1396
W 46
L 80
ERA 5.59
No, it really couldn’t. 110 mph is barely faster than the average major league pitcher. Figure 90 or so for the average pitcher, with 98 being somewhat common, and 102 or 103 being possible. 110 just isn’t enough of a difference to take out foul tips. Again, virtually anyone who has ever played baseball at any level with anything approaching success (I’m talking you were a starter on your little league team), could face a major league pitcher for 27 at bats and weakly foul one back.
You’d get no-hit. They’d probably even throw a perfect game against you. But I promise that given 90 or so strikes thrown at you, you’d tip one back into the mitt. And if we’re talking about a major league batter…well, I’d bet my life on it to win $100.
I’d put down $1000 straight up for any random high school baseball player vs. Mark Buerhle or any other current major leaguer.
I don’t think so either. Speed gives less margin of error for batters, but after a couple at-bats, major leaguers could adjust to 110 mph, just like they can hit 95 mph. If the hypothetical freak could put a big curve on that 100 mph pitch, and had an 85-mph change-up that looked identical to the fastball coming out of his hand, and had a pitch that broke hard the opposite direction from the fastball (and looked identical coming out) and pinpoint control, and mental toughness and (with his catcher) a good sense of how to read what batters are expecting, then he’d be a great pitcher with a chance of throwing some no-hitters and a way-outside chance of a perfect game. But still no chance of a guaranteed no-contact game unless all those other pitches are also superhuman.
Do tell. I don’t think I’ve watched a major league game this year where someone didn’t hit 95, virtually every team has someone capable of hitting 98, and Zumaya, Mark Wohlers, and Matt Anderson have all hit 103 in the past. Speed isn’t really what kills. Little leaguers who will never even sniff a big league career can hit a 70 mph fastball from 15 feet closer than major leaguers are throwing it from, and any grown man with 75 cents can show he can hit a straight fastball at 90mph in the batting cages.
I’m not saying a 110 mph pitcher wouldn’t be dominant at the major league level: if he had good control, and some movement, he would be. I’m saying that the gap between “dominant at the major league level” and “wouldn’t allow a foul tip” is so mind bogglingly enormous that it’s not even worth contemplating what it would take to bridge it. It is not within the human capability to do so. 110 mph isn’t even close to that ability level.
I’m not arguing that a no contact game is possible - I’m saying that 110 is nowhere near “barely faster” than your average MLB pitcher - it’s worlds beyond “barely”. And for starters 98 is in no way “common”. There’s a reason those who throw 100+ are relief specialists.
Well, then I think we’re in violent agreement. I take issue with “worlds beyond”, in that I don’t think it would be a transformational moment for major league baseball, or anything…he’d just likely be very, very, very good, but other than that…sure. Deduct 2 mph from my totals if you like, and remove the word “barely”, but the fact is, our theoretical 110 mph pitcher would likely top out as a “no hitter once a year” kind of guy, mixed in with Pedro 1999 performances along the way. He’s much, much closer to your average MLB pitcher than he is to being capable of throwing 81 strikes without allowing a foul ball.
Additionally - as you say, “speed isn’t really what kills”. It’s the perceived difference. The average change up is 82 mph, and the average fastball is 91 mph. Change that difference from 9 mph to 28 mph (assuming a 110 mph fastball), and that pitcher is not just dominant, he’s going to seriously contend for greatest pitcher of all time. He’s going to make Gibson and Koufax look like amateurs, and probably end up with a sub 1.50 ERA and some ridiculously low WHIP (depending on how many BBs he gives up).
