The 500 HR Club

[Hungary Jack]

May well induct 4 new members in 2007:

Frank Thomas (487)
Jim Thome (472)
Manny (470)
A-Rod (464)

Gary Sheffield (455) has an outside shot to make it 5, though I doubt spacious Comerica will allow this to happen in 2007.

To my knowledge, this (4 new members in one season) has never happened before.

[JL21]

The inevitable follow-up question.... does the recent influx of 500 HR club members diminish the accomlishment?

And the next question.... does Gary Sheffield have a shot at the Hall of Fame? His HOF monitor numbers:

Black Ink: Batting - 4 (401) (Average HOFer ? 27)
Gray Ink: Batting - 118 (164) (Average HOFer ? 144)
HOF Standards: Batting - 57.7 (37) (Average HOFer ? 50)
HOF Monitor: Batting - 132.0 (98) (Likely HOFer > 100)

Black Ink is bad but the rest are right in line. I bet he won't just because he's angered so many voters in the press. Kind of a Jim Rice: The Next Generation.

[Popeye_Card]

Plus Biggio will likely get 3000 hits. Bonds has a really outside shot (needs 159). Glavine will likely get 300 wins, and Randy Johnson needs 20. Randy Johnson will likely pass Clemens for #2 on the all-time K list if Clemens doesn't pitch until June or later (Johnson is 60 behind).

Remember when we were all told just a couple of years ago that Maddux and Clemens might be the last 300 game winners? Well, Mike Mussina might get there too (37 years old, needs 61 wins). So they're trying to tell me that in the future, we'll never see pitchers as good as Glavine and Mussina?

--P--

[JohtoVillage]

So they're trying to tell me that in the future, we'll never see pitchers as good as Glavine and Mussina?

No, but I think the idea was that pitchers are pitching less innings, making less starts, and getting injured more often. So there will certainly be more pitchers, but the circumstances have changed.

[Popeye_Card]

So they're trying to tell me that in the future, we'll never see pitchers as good as Glavine and Mussina?

No, but I think the idea was that pitchers are pitching less innings, making less starts, and getting injured more often. So there will certainly be more pitchers, but the circumstances have changed.

Have they really changed that much since Glavine and Mussina started their careers? ('87 and '91, respectively) Obviously there's a difference since Warren Spahn or Steve Carlton pitched, but I don't think much has changed since the 90's, when these two put up the bulk of their wins.

Sure, it's going to be rare. Only 20 retired pitchers won 300+ games in the entire history of baseball before Clemens then Maddux joined the club. That's ~2 every decade. Now there's probably going to be 4 reach that mark in the 00's, despite the structure of rotations now. So we're saying that the past 20 years have been one of the best ages of pitching in baseball history, and it'll never happen again?

--P--

[JohtoVillage]

So we're saying that the past 20 years have been one of the best ages of pitching in baseball history, and it'll never happen again?

No, I think it will happen again. I just think that the trends for home runs and wins are certainly going in opposite directions (we will see more members of the 500 home run club and less members of the 300 win club). I mean Barry Zito could be the next Maddux (in terms of dependability). If Zito continues to win 15 games a year with a 4 era does he deserve the hall of fame over a guy like Halladay or Carpenter? (both of whom who bloomed late) What if they both Win 200 games with a couple Cy Youngs a piece, and Zito finishes his career with 300 wins and a career 4 era? (obviously Carpenter's career era is 4.09 compared to Zito's 3.55, but those numbers are obviously going down in Carp's case and up in Zito's case). But Zito is younger than Carp, obviously. I guess the point is, 300 wins for a pitcher is going to become so difficult. But also, it's going to be a lot luck. For the most part, Zito has had good run support, which allows him to get wins. He also has been very durable, which is a good trait, but it's really not worth much if you aren't a good pitcher (for instance, Zito was not a good pitcher in 04).


I am not saying it won't happen again, but I think it will be very rare. With that said, it takes more than luck to get to 300 wins (obviously). But what if Carpenter only makes it to 200 with two cy youngs and a dominant eight year stretch or so? Same for Halladay? Just because they were late bloomers should they be excluded from the hall of fame and Zito let in just because he was more durable? (I am not saying you were implying that, just a question)

[Popeye_Card]

I am not saying it won't happen again, but I think it will be very rare. With that said, it takes more than luck to get to 300 wins (obviously). But what if Carpenter only makes it to 200 with two cy youngs and a dominant eight year stretch or so? Same for Halladay? Just because they were late bloomers should they be excluded from the hall of fame and Zito let in just because he was more durable? (I am not saying you were implying that, just a question)

Well, Bob Gibson "only" won 251 games. Koufax won 165. Dizzy Dean won 150. All with the advantage of 4 man rotations (though Dean only had 154 game seasons). Not only are these guys Hall of Famers, but in the cases of Gibson and Koufax, they're considered among the very best pitchers of all time.

So 300 wins are a nice stat, but it's not a all-defining measure. I don't think anyone would argue that Glavine was better than Koufax, even though he might win twice as many games.

All I'm saying is that some sports writers/commentators were insinuating that we'll never again see another 300 game winner. I find that to be a rather odd claim.

--P--