Can’t Even One Pitcher Win 20 Games Anymore?

This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The New York Sun

This year, there may be no 20-game winners. The National League might not even produce any 17-game winners. That’s pretty sad if you consider this: With the exception of those years marked by strikes or lockouts, there’s never been a year in baseball history during which no one carried 20 games. Among those who have bothered to notice, this has led to some groaning about how pitchers used to be “real men,” how baseball — and particularly the art of missing bats — is in decline. That’s not surprising, and there’s some merit to the complaints; but it also misses an important point. The low win numbers are simply a sign that baseball is evolving, and that the quality of play is improving.

Baseball men like Orioles pitching coach Leo Mazzone, who called the dearth of 20-game winners “embarrassing” in a USA Today article published this week, tend to cite the workhorses of the 1960s and 1970s — the players who became famous as young men — as evidence that there’s been a decline in pitching quality. That’s fair as far as it goes, but it ignores that those stars developed in a unique environment.

Of the top 10 career leaders in innings pitched, five made their bones in the 1960s and 1970s. League leaders Phil Niekro, Nolan Ryan, Gaylord Perry, Don Sutton, and Steve Carlton posted their numbers at a time when ironmen like Tom Seaver and Bert Blyleven were thriving. Look at the top 20 and you’ll see it’s comprised of pitchers who developed during the incredibly pitcher-friendly 1960s or who were active during the deadball era, a time before Roger Clemens, Robin Roberts, and Warren Spahn.

Similarly, between 1924 and 1982, no more than three pitchers won their 300th game; from 1982–90, six did. One can draw one of two broad conclusions: Either the 1970s saw the greatest batch of pitching talent in baseball history, or there was something about the circumstances of the time that allowed pitchers to be more durable than they had been before or have been since. Probably, the truth is somewhere in between, but anyone who came of age when pitchers like Seaver and Ryan were riding high grew to perceive something that was very unusual as totally normal.

This isn’t to say that all baseball eras should be judged alike, nor that today’s crop of starters can be reasonably compared to another in baseball history. Measuring them against those days when “men were men” misses the point. After all, an old-timer watching Christy Mathewson and Pete Alexander pitching in the 1920s might have balked, mourning the “good old days” when men like “Old Hoss” Charley Radbourne (59 wins in 1884, 48 in 1883), John Clarkson (53 wins in 1885), and Guy Hecker (52 wins in 1884) stood on the mound.

Pitching wins are the product of the pitcher’s talent, his team’s talent, luck, and opportunity — and not necessarily in that order. By those standards, this year’s pitchers are doing just fine. Baseball Prospectus, for instance, tracks expected win/loss records, measuring pitcher performance in individual games against the probability that an average team would win that game. For instance, a pitcher who lost a game in which he pitched nine innings and gave up one run gets a lot more credit than one who wins a game in which he pitches five while giving up nine runs.

This year’s top five in the NL, by this measure, are: Brandon Webb (theoretically, he should be 17–9), Chris Carpenter (16–8), Roy Oswalt (16–8), Bronson Arroyo (16–9), and John Smoltz (16–9). Last year’s top five included three pitchers who could have been expected to reach 18 wins and another two who could have been expected to notch 17. In 2004, two (theoretical) 17-game winners and three 16-game winners rounded out the list of five; and 10 years ago Smoltz topped the rankings with an expected 19–9 season (followed by an 18-game winner, two 17-game winners, and a 16-game winner).

In those four seasons, Smoltz earned 24 — both the most theoretical and actual wins.That’s pretty much how pitching wins work. The leaders are usually among the best pitchers in the league, often the best. They’re also the ones who have the kind of bullpen and run support that allows them to win more games than they should. Pitchers today may be worse, or at least less, valuable, than they used to be, but pointing to their wins or innings totals isn’t really the way to prove it.

Still, it certainly would be embarrassing if major league baseball couldn’t cough up one 20-game winner. Would it be as embarrassing as the 1968 season, when the leagues failed to claim even one 50-game winner? I don’t know. I’ll have to sleep on it.


The New York Sun

© 2024 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use