PITCHING WINS: A TICKET TO THE BASEBALL HALL OF FAME?

In the last three decades, the win statistic has been roughed up by sabermetrical analysis, advanced metrics that measure a pitcher's effectiveness by isolating the pitcher's performance from factors that are beyond his control: his team's ability to score runs and his team's fielding behind his pitching. Simply put, a "win" is a collective effort, dependent upon not just a team's pitching but upon its hitting and fielding as well. Yet it is the pitcher—specifically, the "pitcher of record," the pitcher in the game at the time his team took the lead for good—who receives sole credit for the team's win.

Initially, this was not a bad thought: The pitcher does have the single greatest influence of any player by virtue of delivering each and every pitch, the outcomes of which determine the course of the game. As a result, a pitcher's measure of greatness became how many wins he amassed.

Superficially, this seemed to be valid; Walter Johnson, one of the game's greatest pitchers, compiled 417 wins, second all-time, even though he pitched exclusively for the Washington Senators, a chronically terrible team. (The old joke ran, "Washington: First in war, first in peace—and last in the American League.") If Johnson managed to win many games for a team that lost many more games, it must prove that he was a great pitcher—succeeding in spite of his team's lack of support.

However, Johnson also lost 279 games, fourth-most all-time, proving that he was at least human. His winning percentage of .599 is certainly respectable, 120th all-time, but he still lost four games of every ten in which he was awarded a decision. In other words, Walter Johnson—first all-time in shutouts (110), fifth all-time in ERA+ (147), twelfth all-time in ERA (2.17)—was as dependent as any pitcher upon his teammates as to whether he would win or lose a game. (ERA+ is an indexed measurement of earned run average, league- and park-adjusted, with 100 indicating a league-average pitcher.)

Wins, though, became the coin of the realm for measuring a pitcher's effectiveness, and for pitchers who reached the charmed plateau of 300 career wins, they were almost automatically inducted into the Hall of Fame.

The Elite Circle: 300 Career Wins

Historically, reaching 300 career wins was a guaranteed ticket to the Hall of Fame, and for sound reason: In a century and a half of professional baseball, only 24 men have won as many as 300 games; five of those pitched exclusively in the 19th century, while two, Kid Nichols and Cy Young, straddled the 19th and 20th centuries. Of the 21 men with at least 300 victories who were or are currently eligible for the Hall, 20 have been inducted. Roger Clemens, with 354 wins, was not elected to the Hall this year, his first year of eligibility, and it is surely only his notoriety as a poster boy for performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) that kept voters from electing him.

Of the three whose eligibility is fast becoming due—Tom Glavine, Randy Johnson, and Greg Maddux—all are practically locks for the Hall. I qualify this with "practically" because I have written at length on this site about the other problem, apart from PEDs, impacting Hall of Fame voting: the logjam of qualified candidates. (Please note that PEDs have never been associated with Glavine, Johnson, or Maddux.) And while this logjam might mean that Glavine will not be a first-ballot choice—he was an excellent but not dominant pitcher—both Johnson and especially Maddux are among the finest hurlers this game has ever seen, and voting them in is a mere formality; their 300-plus wins are almost gilding the lily.

Although 300 wins has proved to be a golden ticket to the Hall, at least one 20th-century pitcher who reached this charmed circle was not an elite pitcher. (It is harder to evaluate 19th-century pitchers as the quality of play and indeed the structure of the game were markedly different from the "modern" game generally regarded to have begun in 1901.)

Early "Gus" Wynn struggled to reach 300 wins; he had 299 career wins at the end of his penultimate 1962 season (finishing with 7–15 record, a .318 winning percentage) and returned in 1963 to try to reach the charmed circle, eventually notching that 300th win in the fourth of his five starts that season; he then retired. But Wynn's career record of 300–244 (.551) and 3.54 ERA, which translated to an ERA+ of 107, is not that of an elite pitcher. He was just above league-average, which is not an insult but neither is it a Hall of Fame career. Perhaps even voters from the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) recognized this because Wynn was not elected to the Hall until his fourth year on the ballot—and at the time of his election, only 13 other men had reached as many as 300 wins.

Yet the scarcity of 300 wins retains its cachet—even more so as it appears that it could be a very long time before another pitcher reaches 300 wins. The nature of pitching has changed dramatically since the 1980s: Rarely does the starting pitcher pitch the entire game, as had been the custom since the beginning of professional baseball. Now the starter pitches the team into the middle innings, at which point a series of relief pitchers takes over, certainly if the starter was struggling but also if the starter was not. This means a greater possibility that the starter will not finish the game as the pitcher of record—should the opposing team tie or surpass his team, he would not be in line to receive the win. (Conversely, though, should his team be losing when he is taken out, and his team comes back to tie or surpass the opposing team, he would not get the loss.)

Not only, then, are there fewer opportunities for a starting pitcher to earn a win, but the rule of awarding the win to the pitcher of record, which is simply the pitcher in the game for the team that held or had taken the lead for the remainder of the game, meant that the "win" could go to a pitcher who had pitched only to a few batters, for perhaps an inning or two. Did that pitcher really "win" that game? Or was that pitcher merely the "pitcher of record" when his team scored runs that put them in the lead for good? This underscores the collective effort behind the win, and how inaccurate it is to attribute the win (or loss) solely to one player, the pitcher of record.

This had been a major consideration in the re-evaluation of the win as a critical determinant of a pitcher's overall effectiveness. Yet change comes with inertia—the win has always been the way pitching effectiveness has been evaluated, and change to that way of thinking engenders resistance to that change. Thus, wins are still regarded as a critical evaluation factor, with expectations adjusted accordingly: If it is harder for a pitcher to reach 300 wins, then 250 wins, or even 200 wins, becomes "the new 300." Pitchers reaching those adjusted milestones get the same consideration for the Hall that pitchers who had reached 300 wins had received.

The Changing Perception of the Win

Or do they? Wins might remain a legacy consideration of effectiveness, but understanding of their importance, their primacy, is changing.

In 2011, San Francisco Giants pitcher Tim Lincecum posted a losing record: 13 wins but 14 losses. Yet "the Freak" finished sixth in National League Cy Young voting. Why? Because it was the quality of his pitching, not the eventual outcome expressed in wins or losses, that marked him as an effective pitcher. Of Lincecum's 33 starts in 2011, 23 of them, or 70 percent, were "quality starts," starts in which he pitched at least six innings and gave up three or fewer earned runs. Indeed, the right-hander's ERA was 2.74, fifth-best in the NL that season; that translated into an impressive ERA+ of 127. However, the Giants gave him run support that season of 2.8 runs per game, 2.7 runs in the innings in which Lincecum actually pitched; the league average was 4.5 runs per game. Lincecum posted seven "tough losses," losses in which he pitched a quality start but lost anyway. What's the takeaway? Lincecum did his job—he pitched well but his team could not support him offensively. Had those seven tough losses been wins, Lincecum is a 20-game winner, the traditional single-season benchmark of pitching excellence.

Even more instructive is the case of Felix Hernandez. In 2010, "King Felix" won the American League Cy Young Award with the Seattle Mariners despite a middling win-loss record of 13–12. But qualitatively the right-hander posted a 2.27 ERA, a sterling 174 ERA+, and 7.12 wins above replacement (WAR; Baseball Reference version); Hernandez's ERA and WAR led the League while his ERA+ was second. Like Lincecum, Hernandez had to deal with an anemic offense: His Mariners produced 3.1 runs in support of him—the League average was 4.6—while he endured 8 tough losses although an outstanding 30 of his 34 starts were quality starts. (It is possible, though, that Hernandez's 2010 Cy Young was partly compensation for his runner-up status the previous year when Zack Greinke won the award; in 2009, Hernandez posted a record of 19–5 (.792) with a 2.49 ERA typical of a more "traditional" Cy Young winner.)

But while 300 wins might still project its charm as advanced analyses now evaluate pitchers on a more qualitative basis, win totals below that storied plateau have not always been such a definitive measure of a pitcher's Hall of Fame worth. Indeed, within the range of 200 to 299 wins, Hall voting has been hit-or-miss. This combined with qualitative analyses could have an impact—both positively and negatively—on prospective pitching candidates for the Hall of Fame, even if 250 wins, or even 200 wins, might be regarded as "the new 300."

Wins and the Hall of Fame: The Quantitative Approach

If 300 wins is a near-automatic ticket to Cooperstown, then the range of wins between 200 and 299 is a crapshoot. Certainly this range of wins has produced more than 30 Hall of Fame pitchers—some who might not be deserving of the honor—but as we will see, the win totals for pitchers in this range can be deceptive. This can be deceptive as to inflate a pitcher's worth, or deceptive as to disguise a pitcher's worth. It will take qualitative analysis to strip away the deceptive allure—or lack thereof—of a given pitcher's win total. Wins cannot tell the story alone.

The following table lists, in descending order, the 49 pitchers of the 20th and 21st centuries who have between 200 and 299 wins and who are not already in the Hall of Fame. I have omitted pitchers who pitched exclusively in the 19th century; as noted above, they played a nascent game that does not correlate to the modern game of baseball. (Statistics for still-active pitchers are current through August 4, 2013.)

Non-Hall of Fame Pitchers Ranked by Wins, in Descending Order
Pitcher	Years	Wins	Losses	Pct.	ERA	ERA+	ERA–	bWAR	fWAR
John, Tommy	1963-1989	288	231	0.555	3.34	111	90	62.3	75.2
Kaat, Jim	1959-1983	283	237	0.544	3.45	108	93	45.3	69.4
Mussina, Mike	1991-2008	270	153	0.638	3.68	123	82	82.7	82.3
Moyer, Jamie	1986-2012	269	209	0.563	4.25	103	97	50.2	47.5
Morris, Jack	1977-1994	254	186	0.577	3.90	105	95	43.8	52.7
Pettitte, Andy	1995-	252	150	0.627	3.87	116	86	58.9	66.8
Quinn, Jack	1909-1933	247	218	0.531	3.29	114	89	59.0	63.7
Martinez, Dennis	1976-1998	245	193	0.559	3.70	106	95	49.5	45.7
Powell, Jack	1897-1912	245	254	0.491	2.97	106	96	56.0	46.3
Tanana, Frank	1973-1993	240	236	0.504	3.66	106	94	57.5	55.8
Wells, David	1987-2007	239	157	0.604	4.13	108	93	53.5	58.0
Tiant, Luis	1964-1982	229	172	0.571	3.30	114	87	66.1	54.0
Jones, Sad Sam	1914-1935	229	217	0.513	3.84	104	97	40.4	46.0
Mullin, George	1902-1915	228	196	0.538	2.82	101	99	34.3	38.0
Dauss, Hooks	1912-1926	223	182	0.551	3.30	102	98	35.2	39.9
Harder, Mel	1928-1947	223	186	0.545	3.80	113	90	47.9	54.5
Derringer, Paul	1931-1945	223	212	0.513	3.46	108	93	39.0	60.7
Koosman, Jerry	1967-1985	222	209	0.515	3.36	110	91	57.1	66.0
Niekro, Joe	1967-1988	221	204	0.520	3.59	98	102	28.7	26.9
Reuss, Jerry	1969-1990	220	191	0.535	3.64	100	100	33.1	52.0
Martinez, Pedro	1992-2009	219	100	0.687	2.93	154	67	86.0	86.8
Rogers, Kenny	1989-2008	219	156	0.584	4.27	107	93	51.1	47.2
Whitehill, Earl	1923-1939	218	185	0.541	4.36	100	99	36.3	49.2
Fitzsimmons, Freddie	1925-1943	217	146	0.598	3.51	112	90	33.5	32.0
Lolich, Mickey	1963-1979	217	191	0.532	3.44	104	98	48.8	61.5
Schilling, Curt	1988-2007	216	146	0.597	3.46	127	80	80.7	83.5
Cooper, Wilbur	1912-1926	216	178	0.548	2.89	116	86	49.0	46.9
Hough, Charlie	1970-1994	216	216	0.500	3.75	106	95	39.6	24.5
Perry, Jim	1959-1975	215	174	0.553	3.45	106	94	38.7	32.2
Reuschel, Rick	1972-1991	214	191	0.528	3.37	114	88	68.2	69.4
Smoltz, John	1988-2009	213	155	0.579	3.33	125	81	66.5	78.4
Brown, Kevin	1986-2005	211	144	0.594	3.28	127	78	68.5	73.8
Welch, Bob	1978-1994	211	146	0.591	3.47	106	94	43.5	36.1
Pierce, Billy	1945-1964	211	169	0.555	3.27	119	84	53.1	54.7
Newsome, Bobo	1929-1953	211	222	0.487	3.98	107	95	51.7	62.2
Cicotte, Eddie	1905-1920	209	148	0.585	2.38	123	82	56.9	49.2
Blue, Vida	1969-1986	209	161	0.565	3.27	108	92	45.0	45.3
Pappas, Milt	1957-1973	209	164	0.560	3.40	110	92	46.8	46.3
Mays, Carl	1915-1929	208	126	0.623	2.92	119	83	42.5	39.4
Hershiser, Orel	1983-2000	204	150	0.576	3.48	112	89	51.7	45.2
Orth, Al	1895-1909	204	189	0.519	3.37	100	101	44.1	43.8
Burdette, Lew	1950-1967	203	144	0.585	3.66	99	101	25.8	31.1
Halladay, Roy	1998-	201	104	0.659	3.37	131	76	65.5	67.9
Hudson, Tim	1999-	205	111	0.649	3.44	124	80	55.5	47.8
Root, Charlie	1923-1941	201	160	0.557	3.59	111	90	38.0	36.4
Sabathia, CC	2001-	200	112	0.641	3.57	122	82	54.0	60.5
Uhle, George	1919-1936	200	166	0.546	3.99	106	94	44.4	49.2
Finley, Chuck	1986-2002	200	173	0.536	3.85	115	86	58.5	56.7
Wakefield, Tim	1992-2011	200	180	0.526	4.41	105	95	34.5	38.9

ERA+: Career ERA, league- and park-adjusted, as calculated by Baseball Reference. Positively indexed to 100, with a 100 ERA+ indicating a league-average pitcher, and values above 100 indicating the degrees better a pitcher is than a league-average pitcher.

ERA-: Career ERA, league- and park-adjusted, as calculated by FanGraphs. Negatively indexed to 100, with a 100 ERA- indicating a league-average pitcher, and values below 100 indicating the degrees better a pitcher is than a league-average pitcher.

bWAR: Career Wins Above Replacement as calculated by Baseball Reference.

fWAR: Career Wins Above Replacement as calculated by FanGraphs.

Based on this list, if 250 wins are the mark of a Hall of Famer, then Tommy John and Jim Kaat should have been inducted years ago; currently eligible Jack Morris, who traditionalists claim is being snubbed each year he is not elected, really should have been elected already; recently retired Mike Mussina and Jamie Moyer should be shoo-ins when they become eligible; and Andy Pettitte, who reached 250 wins on June 8 of this year, is only adding to his Hall of Fame résumé with each win he notches before he retires.

For wins between 200 and 249, it might be harder (and not necessarily Mel) to determine who is a Hall of Fame pitcher, assuming, of course, that neat plateaus such as 300, 250, and 200 can segregate candidates into easily evaluated groups of candidates.

But wins alone cannot tell the entire story. Bert Blyleven, who was eventually elected to the Hall in his penultimate year on the ballot, has 287 career wins, just one less than Tommy John, with both less than 15 wins shy of 300. (Perhaps 300 is a harsh mistress: 19th-century pitcher Bobby Mathews finished just three wins shy of 300 and has yet to be inducted by any Veterans Committee.) It took a concerted sabermetric campaign to convince voters that Blyleven is a qualified Hall of Famer—and unlike many on this list, he has two traditional rankings that place him among the elite: Blyleven is fifth in career strikeouts with 3701, and ninth in career shutouts with 60. This is after a career pitching for a lot of mediocre teams (although he did win two World Series, in 1979 with the Pittsburgh Pirates and in 1987 with the Minnesota Twins).

So what problems did voters have with Blyleven? Would they have voted him in had he somehow won 13 more games to get him to the vaunted 300? Considering that Blyleven had 99 career "tough losses" (losses in which he lost despite having a quality start of six innings or more with three or fewer earned runs) against 35 career "cheap wins" (wins in which he pitched fewer than six innings or gave up more than three earned runs, yet still won the game), he certainly had those 13 wins scattered across his playing career—had his teammates helped to contribute to that potential win. Blyleven also had 47 career "wins lost," meaning that he was in line for a win at the time he left a game, but his bullpen lost that lead. (It should be noted that he also had 58 career "losses saved," or games in which he stood to lose when he left, but his team later tied or took the lead, although this would not affect the number of additional wins he might have earned.)

This points out the problem of using wins as a critical determinant of Hall of Fame worthiness: A win is the product of a collective effort, and much of that effort is out of the hands of the pitcher. His team needs to score more runs than he and his fielders give up (and even a pitcher hitting in a lineup is still only one of nine hitters who can potentially create runs). Both Robin Roberts (286 wins) and Ferguson Jenkins (284 wins) were elected to the Hall as players with qualitative statistics comparable to Blyleven's, although you have to wonder whether Gus Wynn would have been elected had he not made it to that neat, if arbitrary, 300-win plateau. (I don't think he should have been elected in any case, but that is another issue.)

No, wins alone cannot tell the story of worthiness for the Hall of Fame. There are too many factors beyond a pitcher's control that determine whether he wins, loses, or gets a no-decision. What is needed is a qualitative approach to the pitcher's performance, to which we turn now.

Wins and the Hall of Fame: The Qualitative Approach

The following table presents those 49 20th- and 21st-century pitchers with between 200 and 299 wins who are not in the Hall of Fame ranked by the Baseball Reference version of Wins Above Replacement (WAR). (Statistics for still-active pitchers are current through August 4, 2013.)

Non-Hall of Fame Pitchers Ranked by bWAR, in Descending Order
Pitcher	Years	Wins	Losses	Pct.	ERA	ERA+	ERA–	bWAR	fWAR
Martinez, Pedro	1992-2009	219	100	0.687	2.93	154	67	86.0	86.8
Mussina, Mike	1991-2008	270	153	0.638	3.68	123	82	82.7	82.3
Schilling, Curt	1988-2007	216	146	0.597	3.46	127	80	80.7	83.5
Brown, Kevin	1986-2005	211	144	0.594	3.28	127	78	68.5	73.8
Reuschel, Rick	1972-1991	214	191	0.528	3.37	114	88	68.2	69.4
Smoltz, John	1988-2009	213	155	0.579	3.33	125	81	66.5	78.4
Tiant, Luis	1964-1982	229	172	0.571	3.30	114	87	66.1	54.0
Halladay, Roy	1998-	201	104	0.659	3.37	131	76	65.5	67.9
John, Tommy	1963-1989	288	231	0.555	3.34	111	90	62.3	75.2
Quinn, Jack	1909-1933	247	218	0.531	3.29	114	89	59.0	63.7
Pettitte, Andy	1995-	252	150	0.627	3.87	116	86	58.9	66.8
Finley, Chuck	1986-2002	200	173	0.536	3.85	115	86	58.5	56.7
Tanana, Frank	1973-1993	240	236	0.504	3.66	106	94	57.5	55.8
Koosman, Jerry	1967-1985	222	209	0.515	3.36	110	91	57.1	66.0
Cicotte, Eddie	1905-1920	209	148	0.585	2.38	123	82	56.9	49.2
Powell, Jack	1897-1912	245	254	0.491	2.97	106	96	56.0	46.3
Sabathia, CC	2001-	200	112	0.641	3.57	122	82	54.0	60.5
Hudson, Tim	1999-	205	111	0.649	3.44	124	80	55.5	47.8
Wells, David	1987-2007	239	157	0.604	4.13	108	93	53.5	58.0
Pierce, Billy	1945-1964	211	169	0.555	3.27	119	84	53.1	54.7
Newsome, Bobo	1929-1953	211	222	0.487	3.98	107	95	51.7	62.2
Hershiser, Orel	1983-2000	204	150	0.576	3.48	112	89	51.7	45.2
Rogers, Kenny	1989-2008	219	156	0.584	4.27	107	93	51.1	47.2
Moyer, Jamie	1986-2012	269	209	0.563	4.25	103	97	50.2	47.5
Martinez, Dennis	1976-1998	245	193	0.559	3.70	106	95	49.5	45.7
Cooper, Wilbur	1912-1926	216	178	0.548	2.89	116	86	49.0	46.9
Lolich, Mickey	1963-1979	217	191	0.532	3.44	104	98	48.8	61.5
Harder, Mel	1928-1947	223	186	0.545	3.80	113	90	47.9	54.5
Pappas, Milt	1957-1973	209	164	0.560	3.40	110	92	46.8	46.3
Kaat, Jim	1959-1983	283	237	0.544	3.45	108	93	45.3	69.4
Blue, Vida	1969-1986	209	161	0.565	3.27	108	92	45.0	45.3
Uhle, George	1919-1936	200	166	0.546	3.99	106	94	44.4	49.2
Orth, Al	1895-1909	204	189	0.519	3.37	100	101	44.1	43.8
Morris, Jack	1977-1994	254	186	0.577	3.90	105	95	43.8	52.7
Welch, Bob	1978-1994	211	146	0.591	3.47	106	94	43.5	36.1
Mays, Carl	1915-1929	208	126	0.623	2.92	119	83	42.5	39.4
Jones, Sad Sam	1914-1935	229	217	0.513	3.84	104	97	40.4	46.0
Hough, Charlie	1970-1994	216	216	0.500	3.75	106	95	39.6	24.5
Derringer, Paul	1931-1945	223	212	0.513	3.46	108	93	39.0	60.7
Perry, Jim	1959-1975	215	174	0.553	3.45	106	94	38.7	32.2
Root, Charlie	1923-1941	201	160	0.557	3.59	111	90	38.0	36.4
Whitehill, Earl	1923-1939	218	185	0.541	4.36	100	99	36.3	49.2
Dauss, Hooks	1912-1926	223	182	0.551	3.30	102	98	35.2	39.9
Wakefield, Tim	1992-2011	200	180	0.526	4.41	105	95	34.5	38.9
Mullin, George	1902-1915	228	196	0.538	2.82	101	99	34.3	38.0
Fitzsimmons, Freddie	1925-1943	217	146	0.598	3.51	112	90	33.5	32.0
Reuss, Jerry	1969-1990	220	191	0.535	3.64	100	100	33.1	52.0
Niekro, Joe	1967-1988	221	204	0.520	3.59	98	102	28.7	26.9
Burdette, Lew	1950-1967	203	144	0.585	3.66	99	101	25.8	31.1

By using wins above replacement, or the contribution a player makes toward a team win over an average replacement player, to measure a pitcher's effectiveness, the order of these pitchers changes significantly—because a pitcher is credited with a high number of wins does not mean that he is actively contributing to those wins as much as a pitcher who might not register as many wins but is contributing more in comparison.

To be sure, there is some correlation: In this sample, Mike Mussina is third in wins and second in bWAR; Tommy John tops the wins list and is ninth in bWAR (FanGraphs favors John more highly—he would be fifth in an fWAR sort); and Jack Quinn (whose career is quietly intriguing), seventh in wins, is tenth in bWAR. But several pitchers near the bottom of the wins list now shoot to the top of the bWAR list: Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling, Kevin Brown, Rick Reuschel, John Smoltz, and Roy Halladay, who reached 200 wins this season. Conversely, several pitchers with top-ten win totals in this sample—including Jim Kaat, Jamie Moyer, Jack Morris, and Andy Pettitte—fall out of the top ten when measured by effectiveness.

Pitchers' Profiles: Who Is a Hall of Famer?

I've written previously about the Hall of Fame chances for Pedro Martinez (eligible in 2015), Mike Mussina (eligible in 2014), Curt Schilling (eligible in 2013), and John Smoltz (eligible in 2015): Two years ago, I labeled Martinez's and Smoltz's inductions as "no brainers" while I called Mussina's and Schilling's candidacy "tough sells" only because of the overcrowded ballot—both are Hall of Famers in my view; I also had Schilling picked as the fourth-best prospect on this year's ballot; he received 38.8 percent of the vote, seventh-best in the embarrassing mess that was this year's voting.

Because I have written at length about all four, I will summarize each briefly. Martinez in his prime had a string of seasons to rival Sandy Koufax for sheer dominance—with Pedro's even more impressive because it occurred right in the teeth of the Steroids Era and its inflated offense. (By contrast, Koufax's dominance occurred during a period in the 1960s when conditions favored pitchers.) The wiry right-hander's .687 winning percentage is second only to Whitey Ford's in the post-World War Two era (it is sixth all-time) while his ERA+ of 154 is second only to Mariano Rivera's. Right-handed Smoltz is the only man to combine 200 or more wins with 150 or more saves while, like Martinez, getting to the 3000-strikeout plateau. Schilling too reached 3000 strikeouts with an insanely stingy 711 walks, which yields an eye-popping strikeout-to-walk ratio of 4.38, second all-time. Oh, and the intense right-hander might have a reputation as a big-game pitcher—do I have to mention the bloody sock? Mussina's knock is a high ERA, but he pitched his entire career in the American League East, the toughest division in Major League Baseball, during a high-offense period while posting a losing season only twice; in fact, the righty won at least 11 games for 17 consecutive seasons, an AL record, while his .638 winning percentage is 39th all-time.

Schilling is currently eligible while the other three will soon be, and barring a complete meltdown among the writers in what is already promising to be a very eventful next few years of voting—between the PEDs backlash and the overstuffed ballot, the writers have much to occupy them—both Martinez and Smoltz will be elected fairly quickly, Schilling will have to wait a few ballots, and Mussina will be a struggle much as Bert Blyleven's campaign was.

As for the six remaining pitchers in the top ten list ranked by bWAR, five have already had their chances on the ballot and one is still active. Those five are at the mercy of the Veterans Committee while the active pitcher, Roy Halladay, might be eligible sooner than he might have expected to be.

Kevin Brown was a one-and-done in 2011, his first year on the ballot, probably because a) he is implicated with PEDs, b) he is seen as not having lived up to the huge contract the Los Angeles Dodgers threw at him (although that is debatable), and c) he is not very likeable. All three reasons overlook how good this intense right-hander really was. Including his only 20-game season in 1992 for the Texas Rangers (he went 21–11 with a 3.32 ERA), Brown for the next decade averaged, per season, 14 wins and 9 losses with a 3.00 ERA in 31 games started, with 217 innings pitched, 6 complete games, and 2 shutouts while striking out 172 batters and walking only 54 for an excellent strikeout-to-walk ratio of 3.18. During that ten-year period, he generated a bWAR of 54.7—an all-star average of 5.5 every year—while averaging an ERA+ of 140, and he finished in the top-ten of Cy Young voting in six of those ten years; he was runner-up to John Smoltz in National League Cy Young voting in 1996 although he was superior to Smoltz in bWAR (7.98 to Smoltz's 7.28), ERA (1.89 to 2.94), and ERA+ (215 to 149), leading the NL with those latter two categories.

Brown's appearance in the Mitchell Report on the use of performance-enhancing drugs, and his refusal to talk to the investigators, all but quashed his Hall of Fame chances, and his fate rests with some future Veterans Committee. Brown's career bWAR of 68.5 ranks 31st among pitchers and 108th among all players, while his fWAR of 73.8 ranks 26th among pitchers. Based on numbers alone, Kevin Brown is better qualified for the Hall of Fame than some pitchers already enshrined, but his involvement with PEDs and baseball's current attitude toward their influence will keep him on the outside for some time to come.

Right-hander Rick Reuschel is an anomaly, and critics of sabermetrics can point to him as the result of crunching abstract numbers instead of "looking with your eyes." Reushel's traditional career numbers are solid but not spectacular: a 214–191 record (.528) with a decent 3.37 ERA and a strong though not elite ERA+ of 114 while he got to 2000 strikeouts (2015) and threw 26 career shutouts. But "Big Daddy" posted double-digit wins—and losses—while toiling for some dismal Cubs teams during the 1970s. With the Cubs, he endured 55 of his 81 career tough losses as his run support was just below the league average. Late in his career, he became the veteran presence for the San Francisco Giants in the late 1980s, including a 17–8 (.680), 2.94 ERA, 115 ERA+ 1989 season that saw the Giants go to the World Series, where they were swept by the Oakland Athletics in a Bay Area series notable primarily for its Game Three being interrupted by the .Loma Prieta earthquake

In his first appearance on a Hall of Fame ballot in 1997, Reuschel garnered exactly two votes and was quickly forgotten. His further chances rest with some future Veterans Committee, and while the Hall has several pitchers whose qualifications are conspicuously suspect—Catfish Hunter, Rube Marquard, and Herb Pennock are non-elite pitchers who all benefited from pitching for strong teams—it is difficult to justify the case of Rick Reuschel for the Hall of Fame despite the impressive bWAR he compiled partly while pitching for sub-par teams.

A solid if not sterling starting pitcher for his entire career, particularly for the Boston Red Sox teams of the 1970s, Luis Tiant, pitching for the Cleveland Indians, experienced a curious reversal between his 1968 season and his 1969 season: In 1968, the last year of the 15-inch-high pitching mound and a year that saw St. Louis Cardinals ace Bob Gibson set the live-ball-era record for ERA with 1.12 and Detroit Tigers hurler Denny McLain become the last pitcher to win 30 or more games in a single season (he won 31), "El Tiante" posted an outstanding 21–9 (.700) record with an American League-leading 1.60 ERA (he also led the league, retrospectively, with his 186 ERA+) while also leading the AL in shutouts with 9, with 4 of those consecutive shutouts, for an Indians team that won 86 games. However, in 1969, as the Indians fell to 62 wins, he effectively reversed his record from the previous year: Tiant won just 9 games while leading the AL in losses with 20 as his ERA rose to 3.71 and he led the AL in home runs allowed (37) and walks (129). Injuries might have plagued him during the season—although he pitched in and started more games than in the previous season—but he eventually found his way to Boston and a new lease of life.

During his eight seasons with the Red Sox, Tiant in 274 games (238 of those starts) and 1774.2 innings pitched amassed a 122–81 win-loss record (a .601 winning percentage) while reaching the 20-games-won plateau three times; during that period, his ERA was 3.36 as he notched 113 complete games including 26 shutouts and compiled 1075 strikeouts, a 118 ERA+, and a bWAR of 36.4, all quite impressive for a pitcher between his age-30 and age-37 seasons. With Boston, the right-hander with the distinctive, deceptive delivery did win another ERA crown with his 1.91 ERA in 1972 (his ERA+ of 169 also led the AL). Tiant survived every year of eligibility on the Hall of Fame ballot; his inaugural year of 1988 saw his strongest support with 30.9 percent of the vote, but he never rose above 20 percent again, finishing with 18.0 percent of the vote in his final year of eligibility, 2002. Tiant is strong both qualitatively and quantitatively, but he is not elite in either respect, and without a dominant stretch in his record, he is not a Hall of Fame pitcher.

More instructive of how starting pitchers will come to be evaluated for their Hall of Fame worthiness is the case of Roy Halladay. In an era of high talent compression, in which players in aggregate are very good and it is harder than it had been in previous eras to stand out, "Doc" Halladay has been both dominant and a workhorse. In the ten-year period from 2002 to 2011, the right-hander led the league in innings pitched four times, in games started once, and in complete games seven times as he averaged, per season, 30 games started, 219 innings pitched, 6 complete games, and 2 shutouts as he won 170 games over that ten-year period against only 75 losses for an outstanding .694 winning percentage, winning at least 20 games three times while falling one shy of 20 games won in two other seasons. Qualitatively, Halladay posted an excellent 2.97 ERA over that ten-year period while generating a 148 ERA+ and a bWAR of 62.4, reaching an MVP-level of 8 wins above replacement per season three times and an All-Star-level of 5 WAR eight times.

Halladay has won a Cy Young Award once in each league, in 2003 with the AL Toronto Blue Jays and in 2010 with the Philadelphia Phillies, his first year in the National League. During that ten-year period, he finished in the top ten of Cy Young voting seven times total including two second-place finishes in 2008 and 2011, when it was a virtual toss-up between Halladay and the Los Angeles Dodgers' Clayton Kershaw. In 2010, Halladay threw two no-hitters, one a perfect game during the regular season, the other a no-hitter in which he allowed just one walk during the Phillies' National League Divisional Series against the Cincinnati Reds—the only no-hitter thrown in the postseason other than Don Larsen's perfect game for the New York Yankees in the 1956 World Series.

In a time of such high talent compression, players not only have a harder time distinguishing themselves from the pack, but the window to be able to distinguish oneself is shrinking: Players do not hit their prime until their mid-20s (barring outlier cases such as Bryce Harper and Mike Trout), and once a player leaves his prime in his early- to mid-30s, that high talent compression usually means that players' skills and effectiveness drop off significantly, enough to force many players out of the game. That looks as if it might be the case with Halladay, whose effectiveness fell off a cliff during the 2012 season. Much of that could be attributed to shoulder trouble, which continued to plague him during this season as he underwent surgery; he has not pitched a game since early May, and seeing that this is his age-36 season, Roy Halladay might have already established his Hall of Fame legacy.

Another pitcher whose career was impacted by surgery was southpaw Tommy John—although his surgery in hindsight prolonged his career to the point that he could actually be considered for the Hall of Fame. In 1974, John's career looked to be cut short when, in the midst of an otherwise-excellent season, he permanently injured an elbow ligament in his pitching arm, the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL). Later that year, Dr. Frank Jobe performed a surgery to replace the UCL with an undamaged tendon; at the time of the surgery, the odds of John returning to major-league pitching were very low; John spent the entire 1975 season rehabilitating. However, he did return in 1976 in his age-33 season to post a 10–10 record for the Los Angeles Dodgers, albeit with a decent 3.09 ERA—but the following season, John won 20 games for the first time in his career (20–7 [.741] with a 2.78 ERA). And when John signed as a free agent with the New York Yankees in 1978, he posted two more 20-game seasons on his way to 288 lifetime wins.

Dr. Jobe's surgical procedure soon became a career-saver for several pitchers afflicted with arm trouble, and because Tommy John was the first successful recipient of the surgery, the procedure has come to be known as "Tommy John surgery." This year, Dr. Jobe was named to the Baseball Hall of Fame for his contribution to the sport.

Ah, but does Tommy John himself deserve to be enshrined in the Hall? As we have seen, John has the highest number of wins of all pitchers in the modern era who did not reach the 300-win plateau. His surgery certainly prolonged his career—he pitched for 12 seasons before the surgery and for 14 seasons after the surgery. His final game was on May 25, 1989, three days after his 46th birthday. As the story goes, he decided to retire after Mark McGwire got two hits off him; McGwire's father was John's dentist, and as John put it, "when your dentist's kid starts hitting you, it's time to retire!"

The following table lists John's performance in the 12 years before his 1974 surgery, the first 7 years following his surgery, and the final 7 years of his career. The Totals rows reflect John's first 20 years in the Major Leagues (19 seasons—he did not play in 1975), John's seasons following his surgery, and his entire career.

Tommy John's Pitching Performance by Period
Period	W-L (Pct.)	GS	ERA	ERA+	ERA–	bWAR	fWAR
1963–1974	124–106 (.539)	318	2.97	116	85	31.0	34.2
1976–1982	113–65 (.635)	217	3.15	120	83	24.7	28.6
Totals, 1963–1982	237–171 (.581)	535	3.05	118	84	55.7	66.8
1983–1989	51–60 (.459)	165	4.43	92	112	6.6	12.4
Totals, 1976–1989	164–125 (.567)	382	3.66	107	98	31.3	41.0
Totals, Entire Career	288–231 (.555)	700	3.34	111	90	62.3	75.2

John's surgery undoubtedly prolonged his career, and for the first seven years following his return from surgery, he pitched at the same level that he had done prior to his surgery. The surgery was a success, and the patient thrived.

But although hindsight is a luxury, it also shows that John prolonged his career to the detriment of his overall effectiveness. From 1983 to 1989, his age-40 to age-46 seasons, John was a below-league-average pitcher, scratching to add to his win totals as the quality of his pitching plummeted. Had Tommy John retired following the 1982 season, or even the 1983 season as he realized that, at age 40, he was no longer a top-flight pitcher, reconstructed arm or not, he might have appeared to be a more promising Hall of Fame candidate. Or perhaps not. John's best showing on the Hall of Fame ballot was in 2009, his 15th and final year on the ballot, when he got 31.9 percent of the vote.

John was runner-up for the Cy Young Award twice, in 1977 and 1979, and in 1979 he might have had a better case than the winner, the Baltimore Orioles' Mike Flanagan—although John's Yankees staff mate Ron Guidry probably outclassed them both. John is 8th in games started (700), 20th in innings pitched (4710.1), and 26th in shutouts (46) in addition to being 26th in wins with 288, but his ranking of 48th in bWAR (62.3) among pitchers (he is 158th among all players) reinforce that Tommy John was a compiler and not an elite pitcher, no matter the lease of life he got from the surgery named for him.

Then there's the enigmatic Jack Quinn, who didn't even begin his Major League career until his age-25 season in 1909; played for two seasons in the short-lived Federal League in 1914 and 1915, and when that league folded, toiled in the Pacific Coast League for two seasons before getting a roster spot with the Chicago White Sox in 1918 when the PCL suspended operations for the First World War; and pitched in his final game days after he turned 49 in 1933; Quinn is one of the few players to have played in four decades. Born in modern-day Slovakia and having come to the United States as an infant, Quinn's life was a quiet, almost mysterious one, with a number of his biographical details shrouded for many years.

But his playing record is fairly clear: The right-hander was never a star pitcher but he was a surprisingly solid one, and while he is not a Hall of Fame pitcher, he does match up with a number of pitchers who are already in the Hall of Fame. His 247 career wins, 49th all-time, is higher than several Hall of Fame pitchers including such high-profile names such as Juan Marichal, Whitey Ford, and Catfish Hunter. More importantly, Quinn's career bWAR of 59.0, 61st all-time, bests that of many Hall of Fame pitchers including Red Ruffing, Mordecai Brown, Ford, Waite Hoyt, Sandy Koufax, and Early Wynn, whose 300 wins is an auspicious milestone. Jack Quinn does underscore the need to look at pitchers both qualitatively and quantitatively.

On the qualitative front, of the top ten pitchers ranked by bWAR above, six are Hall of Fame-caliber pitchers: Pedro Martinez, Mike Mussina, Curt Schilling, Kevin Brown, John Smoltz, and Roy Halladay. Halladay is still technically an active pitcher, although whether he returns from shoulder surgery is to be seen. But what about the other active and recently retired pitchers?

Pitchers' Profiles: Who Is Not a Hall of Famer?

Not to cut right to the chase, but if four of the ten pitchers in the top-ten ranking by bWAR are not Hall of Fame pitchers, then what chance do the next ten in that ranking have? The short answer is, not much—at least for the seven pitchers who have already retired and have had their chance on the Hall of Fame ballot. However, the three currently active pitchers could have the possibility of making the Hall.

First, one pitcher in the next ten has no chance of entering the Hall of Fame unless Major League Baseball reverses a decision that has stood for close to a century. Right-handed knuckleballer Eddie Cicotte was in 1921 declared permanently ineligible to play Major League baseball by Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis for his participation in the infamous "Black Sox" scandal of 1919 in which eight players from the Chicago White Sox, including Cicotte, consorted with gamblers to throw the World Series and enable the underdog Cincinnati Reds to win the Series. It would be another 15 years from Landis's ruling before the inaugural class of the Baseball Hall of Fame would even be inducted, but Cicotte would not appear on any Hall of Fame ballot.

Interestingly, there had been no explicit prohibition of players such as Cicotte from the early ballots. Other players who had been banned from baseball, such as Hal Chase—a notorious gambler, though not one of the Black Sox—and "Shoeless" Joe Jackson, Cicotte's 1919 Black Sox teammate and the one with the best chance to make the Hall, actually received a handful of votes. Eddie Cicotte had the next-best chance to make the Hall: He had a very good winning percentage (.585) and ERA (2.38), 24th all-time albeit garnered during the dead-ball era, while his ERA+ of 123, 84th all-time, is equal to Hall of Famer Juan Marichal's and is a tick higher than Hall of Famer Bob Feller's, and his bWAR of 56.9 is 68th all-time, ahead of Hall of Famers Mordecai Brown, Whitey Ford, and Sandy Koufax.

Another dead-ball pitcher, Jack Powell, ranks 52nd all-time in wins with 245—but he also ranks 8th in lifetime losses with 254 and thus has the dubious honor of having the most wins by a pitcher with a losing record. (Call him the Connie Mack of starting pitchers.) The right-hander had the misfortune of pitching for the often-woeful St. Louis Browns for much of his career, a team that in Powell's last three seasons struggled to win as many as 50 games in only one of those seasons. Unfortunately, statistics are not available to evaluate the kind of run support—or lack thereof—Powell got, but he did post a career ERA of 2.97.

The left-handed ace of the "Go-Go" White Sox teams of the 1950s, Billy Pierce is lost in the haze of baseball history, but he compiled a quietly impressive record including a 13-year stretch in which for each year, in seasonal averages, he posted a 15–11 record (.577) in 30 starts and 225 innings pitched, with 14 complete games—he led the American League in complete games three years in a row, from 1956 to 1958—while establishing a 3.16 ERA and 123 ERA+; Pierce led the AL in ERA in 1955 (1.97), and he posted back-to-back 20-game seasons in 1956 and 1957, leading the league in the latter year. During that 13-year period, he generated 50.5 bWAR, averaging 3.9 wins above replacement every season. Pierce is noted for his battles against a more celebrated southpaw, Whitey Ford of the New York Yankees, while being saddled with the inferior offense, certainly in comparison to those 1950s Bronx Bombers. Among left-handers in the Hall of Fame already, Pierce ranks higher in bWAR than Lefty Gomez, Rube Marquard, and Herb Pennock, and higher in ERA+ than Gomez and Marquard, but it is hard to count Pierce as one of the elite—even if no less than Bill James has a soft spot for him. Certainly, Hall voters felt that way in 1970, during Pierce's first and only year on the ballot, as he got precisely five votes.

Toiling in the shadow of his more famous teammate Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman in his first full season, 1968, made an auspicious impression when he posted a 19–12 record (.613) with a 2.08 ERA and 145 ERA+, completing half his 34 starts while notching 7 shutouts and striking out 178 against only 69 walks for an excellent strikeouts-to-walks ratio of 2.58. The lefty was runner-up for Rookie of the Year honors to a Cincinnati Reds catcher named Johnny Bench, although based on bWAR, "Koos" was the more valuable player. The following year saw the "Miracle Mets" win the World Series against the heavily favored Baltimore Orioles, and Koosman, who practically replicated his 1968 performance during the 1969 regular season, earned two victories against the Orioles including a complete-game win in the clinching Game Five—and he was one out shy of a complete game in Game Two, which evened the Series and set the stage for the Mets' next three wins; his ERA in two Series games was 2.04 as he allowed only seven hits and struck out nine.

Then Koosman embarked on a solid though hardly Hall of Fame career, mixing a few strong seasons, such as his 1976 campaign that saw him with a 21–10 (.677) record, 2.69 ERA, and 200 strikeouts as he came in second to the San Diego Padres' Randy Jones for the National League Cy Young Award, with a number of league-average or below-league-average seasons, such as his campaign the following year, which saw him lose 20 games against only 8 victories, although the Mets had gone from winning 86 games in 1976 to winning only 64 in 1977. In his first year with the Minnesota Twins in 1979, Koosman again won 20 games as he finished sixth in AL Cy Young voting—not bad for a pitcher in his age-36 season—but that was his last strong year. Compiling his way to 200 wins—and 200 losses—along with 2,556 strikeouts, Jerry Koosman was a fine pitcher, just not a Hall of Fame-caliber one. No surprise, then, that he garnered just four votes on his debut on the ballot in 1991 and disappeared.

Another southpaw who made an early splash, Frank Tanana began as a fireballer for the (then-) California Angels. In his first five full seasons, from 1974 to 1978, he averaged, per year, 16 wins against 12 losses (.586 winning percentage), a 2.86 ERA and 124 ERA+, 259 innings pitched, 33 starts, 16 complete games, 4 shutouts, and 210 strikeouts against only 69 walks for an outstanding strikeout-to-walk ratio of 3.06. In 1975, Tanana led the American League in strikeouts with 269—no small feat considering his rotation mate was a guy named Nolan Ryan. (Ryan managed "only" 186 K's in 1975, breaking a consecutive string of at least 300 strikeouts from 1972 to 1977, including the single-season record of 383 in 1973.) Tanana also led the AL in ERA (2.54) and shutouts (7) in 1977 as he finished in the top ten in Cy Young voting in three of those five seasons.

Then Tanana developed arm trouble, and he had to learn to become a junk dealer as his repertoire went from throwing flames to an array of off-speed pitches including an excellent curve ball. From an elite beginning that saw him post three seasons, from 1975 to 1977, with bWAR values that put him near or at MVP-levels, Tanana toiled until the early 1990s as a survivor and a compiler, his 240 lifetime wins, 56th all-time, balanced by 236 losses, 17th all-time as he collected 2773 strikeouts, 21st all-time. Tanana's 57.5 bWAR is 65th lifetime, but his ERA+ of 106, mirrored by FanGraphs' ERA– of 94, marks him as a little better than league-average for his entire career, and with that early period of dominance being so short and not overpowering, Frank Tanana cannot be considered a Hall of Fame-caliber pitcher. Voters came to this conclusion as in his first and only appearance on the ballot, he got nary a vote—and in a cold twist of fate, his erstwhile teammate Nolan Ryan, on his first ballot that same year, walked away with 98.8 percent of the vote.

Yet another left-hander, and another one who pitched for the Angels, Chuck Finley could also bring the heat as he had ten seasons of 150 or more strikeouts and finished with 2610, 23rd all-time (and just two slots below Frank Tanana). Finley was a durable starter, averaging each season, over 15 years from 1988 to 2002, 31 starts, 204 innings pitched, 4 complete games, and one shutout, which during this period of interventionist bullpens is significant. During this period, Finley collected 195 of his 200 career wins as he reached double-digits in all but two of those seasons, again a significant achievement during this period in baseball. Finley led the American League in complete games (13) in 1993 as he pitched 251.1 innings, and he led the AL in innings pitched in the strike-shortened season of 1994 with 183.1.

But it is hard not to see Chuck Finley as little more than an innings-eater: durable, reliable, but not spectacular. True, Finley was a five-time All-Star, but he finished in the top-ten for Cy Young voting only once: He was seventh in 1990 when he went 18–9 with a 2.40 ERA, but while he might have been better qualitatively (7.63 bWAR, 158 ERA+) than winner Bob Welch (27–6, 2.95 ERA, 2.99 bWAR, 125 ERA+), Finley also faced stiff competition from Roger Clemens (21–6, 1.93 ERA, 10.6 bWAR, 211 ERA+), Bobby Thigpen (a then-single-season record 57 saves, 1.83 ERA, 211 ERA+) and Dennis Eckersley (48 saves; just 4 walks, 1 intentional, in 73.1 innings; a miniscule 0.61 ERA; and a simply ridiculous 603 ERA+). Voters must have felt the same way as well because in Chuck Finley's only appearance on the Hall of Fame ballot in 2008, he received precisely one vote—and I suspect it was cast by Orange County Register sports writer Bill Plunkett in a hometown nod to the man who had once been assaulted with a stiletto-heeled pump wielded by his wife, rock-video vixen Tawny Kitaen.

Can you believe we have another southpaw up next? David Wells might be tied with a Hall of Famer, Mordecai Brown, for 57th on the career wins list with 239, but as I detailed prior to the announcement of the 2013 ballot results, "Boomer" is at best a borderline candidate, and when the ballot results were announced, Wells had netted five votes on his first and only sojourn on the ballot. If you're too lazy to click the link, I'll sum up Wells for you here: Yes, he won a lot of games, but he pitched for some strong teams, including the Yankees, that provided him run support and mitigated that high 4.13 career ERA—albeit earned in the teeth of the Steroids Era—as his ERA+ of 108 and ERA– of 93 indicate a pitcher who is better than league-average but not enough to be enshrined among the best who ever pitched.

This leaves us with three pitchers still active who have all passed milestones this season: Andy Pettitte passed the 250-win plateau while Tim Hudson and C.C. Sabathia both became career 200-game winners.

Pitchers' Profiles: Who Might Become a Hall of Famer?

The active leader in wins, Andy Pettitte is also the active leader in games started, innings pitched, and strikeouts, and the left-hander will continue to add to those totals before he retires. Again. When he retires—again—and whether he will stay retired is another story; he retired following the 2010 season, but attending the New York Yankees' spring training camp as an instructor in 2012 renewed his desire to play, and he resumed pitching in the Major Leagues in May of that year. What might be the case is that even if Pettitte pads his résumé for another year or two, he has probably already written his legacy.

The question becomes: Still-active or not, is that legacy strong enough to put him into the Hall of Fame? Pettitte's career, which began in 1995, coincides with the rise of the Yankees as a powerhouse that saw them appear in the World Series seven times between 1996 and 2009, winning five of those Series, and it might not be such a coincidence: Along with shortstop Derek Jeter, catcher Jorge Posada, and relief pitcher Mariano Rivera, Pettitte is considered to be one of the "Core Four" of those championship Yankees. Indeed, Pettitte is the lifetime leader in postseason wins (19), games started (44), and innings pitched (276.2), and is second in strikeouts (183), and fifth in games pitched (44). This also includes his postseason appearances with the Houston Astros in 2005, for whom Pettitte pitched from 2004 to 2006 before returning to the Yankees.

Pettitte has been in double digits in wins for 14 of his 18 seasons, and for a 14-year period, from 1996 to 2009, he averaged 16 wins against 9 losses (.633 winning percentage), winning 21 games twice and 19 games once; 31 games started (he led the league in this category three times); 197 innings pitched; and 145 strikeouts while generating a 3.89 ERA, a 117 ERA+, and a 3.6 bWAR. With Rivera, Pettitte holds the Major League record for win-save combinations, in which Pettitte earned the win and Rivera the save, with 81 (70 during regular-season games, 11 in the postseason), which also points to a curious fact about Pettitte's career: in 510 games started, Pettitte has only 25 complete games.

Pettitte began his career after interventionist bullpens had been established as part of contemporary pitching strategy, and he ranks seventh (tied with Tim Hudson) among active pitchers. So, it is no demerit to Pettitte that he is not a starting pitcher from a bygone era who battled through the entire game—baseball is simply not played like that any longer. Yet it is curious that Pettitte isn't the leader in complete games among active pitchers, particularly since the runner-up to him in games started, Tim Hudson, who is tied with Pettitte in complete games, has made 83 fewer starts than Pettitte. The active leader in complete games, Roy Halladay (67), has made 125 fewer starts, and if Halladay is an outlier (which, as we have seen, makes him a probable Hall of Famer), consider that a number of pitchers, all of whom have started fewer games than Pettitte, have either more complete games than Pettitte or have a higher proportion of complete games than Pettitte.

The following table lists, in descending order, the active pitchers with the most starts who have at least 20 complete games. "Years" indicates the number of seasons each pitcher has played. Also included are the career shutouts for each pitcher. (To be credited with a shutout, a pitcher must not only prevent the opposition from scoring but must pitch the entire game.) (Statistics for still-active pitchers are current through August 4, 2013.)

Active Pitchers' Complete Games, Ranked by Games Started
Pitcher	Years	Rank	GS	Rank	CG	Shutouts
Andy Pettitte	18	1	510	7	25	4
Tim Hudson	15	2	426	7	25	13
Mark Buehrle	14	3	416	5	28	8
C.C. Sabathia	13	5	406	2	37	12
Bartolo Colon	16	6	395	3	35	12
Roy Halladay	16	7	384	1	67	20
A.J. Burnett	15	9	357	10	22	10
Roy Oswalt	13	15	339	12	20	8
Chris Carpenter	15	17	332	4	33	15
Cliff Lee	12	25	300	6	27	12
Felix Hernandez	9	30	259	9	23	9
Justin Verlander	9	32	253	12	20	6
James Shields	8	40	238	11	21	8

Several pitchers with 100 or fewer starts than Pettitte have already passed Pettitte in complete games (Pettitte's last complete game, by the way, came in 2006), while Cliff Lee with 200 fewer starts than Pettitte has already passed him. Meanwhile, Felix Hernandez, James Shields, and Justin Verlander are only a few complete games back of Pettitte with half as many starts.

The point is not to show which pitchers are willing or able to "gut it out," but this comparison suggests indirectly that Pettitte might not have been such a dominant or "big-game" pitcher over his career. It is instructive that in this sample Pettitte ranks last in shutouts; next-to-last is Verlander, who has already passed Pettitte in this category in half as many starts (and two of Verlander's blanks were no-hitters). Over his career, Pettitte has averaged 6.3 innings per start and 101 pitches per start, giving the impression that he is something of a "hothouse flower," designed only to get his team to the later innings.

Five times Pettitte has placed in the top ten for Cy Young voting, with his best showing in 1996 when he was runner-up to the Toronto Blue Jays' Pat Hentgen, but neither in 1996 nor in any other year was Pettitte robbed of the award. In 18 seasons, Pettitte has been named to an All-Star team only three times, which is not necessarily an indictment as the honor is subject to partiality and is based only on a half-year's performance. However, his seasonal-average bWAR during his 14-year peak was 3.6; a bWAR of at least 5.0 is considered to be at the All-Star level, and Pettitte generated a per-season bWAR of at least 5.0 only three times in his career. Pettitte posted an ERA under 3.00 only three times, and one of those seasons was his return season of 2012 when he started only 12 games and pitched 75.1 innings. As it stands, his career ERA of 3.88 would be the highest of any Hall of Fame pitcher unless Jack Morris, with a 3.90 ERA and also at the 250-win mark, is elected next year.

In fairness, though, Pettitte has pitched most of his career in the American League East, the toughest division in the Major Leagues, even if his Yankees were the toughest of those teams a number of times. Indeed, Pettitte has enjoyed career run support averaging 5.4 runs per game while the major-league average during his career has been 4.7 runs per game. Pettitte has had 40 career tough losses, meaning he pitched a quality start—at least six innings and allowing three earned runs or fewer—but his team could not score enough runs for him, and 11 of those came during his three seasons with the Houston Astros. He has 41 career losses saved, or games in which he was in line to get the loss when he left but the relief staff and his offense at least tied the game subsequently, against only 34 wins lost, or games in which he left the game with the lead but the bullpen allowed the opposition to at least tie the game.

Unmentioned until now has been the specter of PEDs that clouds examination of Pettitte's career. Having been named in the Mitchell Report in 2007, Pettitte admitted to using human growth hormone (HGH) twice in 2002, explaining that it was to enable him to heal more quickly from an injury. However, he admitted subsequently that he had used HGH again in 2004, and he also claimed that friend and teammate Roger Clemens had told him that he, Clemens, had used HGH in 1999 or 2000. Clemens then stated that Pettitte "misremembered" the comment, but by then the PEDs taint was enveloping them both, with Clemens becoming the face of drug cheating in baseball along with Barry Bonds.

Leaving aside how Andy Pettitte will be regarded with respect to PEDs come voting time, he could be elected to the Hall of Fame for his 250-plus wins and his postseason pitching record, but both underscore his dependence on his team: As has been the theme throughout this article, wins are a team-dependent statistic, and a pitcher has to be on a winning team in order to get to the postseason in the first place.

However, it could be a while before we see another pitcher reach 250 wins. Both Roy Halladay and Tim Hudson, who reached 200 wins this season, have sustained injuries that have ended their seasons. Halladay is 36 and Hudson is 37, with scant few seasons left in their careers provided they can return from their surgeries. C.C. Sabathia also reached 200 wins this season, and as he is in his age-32 season he still has a few years in which to compile more wins.




With 8 seasons in which he notched at least 15 victories while posting double-digit losses in only 3 of his 15 seasons, right-hander Tim Hudson has earned his reputation as a winning pitcher. That started with his stint as one of the "Big Three," along with lefties Mark Mulder and Barry Zito, of the Oakland Athletics from 1999 to 2004 before being traded to the Atlanta Braves, with whom he has garnered 113 of his 205 career wins. Yet Hudson has pitched for mostly winning teams for his entire career, and while it can be argued that his performance is one of the factors as to why the team was a winner, he has always enjoyed run support around the league average; only in 2009 did he get run support of 3.6 runs per innings pitched, against the league average of 5.0 runs, although Hudson pitched only 42.1 innings in 7 starts in 2009 as he was still recovering from the Tommy John surgery he had undergone near the end of the previous season.

Hudson has always been an excellent pitcher, with 274 of his 426 career starts being quality starts (64 percent). Recall that a quality start requires a pitcher to pitch at least six innings while surrendering three or fewer earned runs. In Hudson's career, he has allowed only 94 unearned runs more than earned runs, 1077 of his 1171 total runs allowed are earned runs. (An unearned run is a run that scores as a result of a defensive error at some point during an inning.)

As a sinkerball pitcher with 1896 strikeouts in 2813.2 innings pitched, a ratio of 16.2 percent, Hudson has relied on his defense to help him get outs, particularly his infielders—indeed, his ground-out-to-air-out ratio of 2.01 is nearly twice the MLB average of 1.08. Yet for a ground-ball pitcher to have been charged with only 94 unearned runs in more than 2800 innings is remarkable. Hudson's career ERA is 3.44, and his FIP, or fielding-independent pitching ERA, is 3.77, indicating that without defensive help, his ERA would be higher. (FIP measures the factors a pitcher can control—walks, strikeouts, home runs—against league-average ERA and FIP.) Over his career, Hudson has averaged 2.7 walks per nine innings pitched and 0.7 home runs per nine innings pitched, both relatively low ratios, and his 3.77 FIP is above-average but not exceptional. Furthermore, Hudson's lifetime average leverage index, or the measurement of the overall pressure he faced while pitching, is 0.98, with average pressured measured at 1.00, meaning that he was not unduly pressured by the offenses he faced over the course of his career.

Tim Hudson finished in the top five in Cy Young voting three times (he was sixth in 2001), with his best showing a runner-up finish in 2000. However, Hudson has hardly been robbed of the award in any of those years; in 2000, he placed second to Pedro Martinez, who had had a phenomenal year: for instance, Martinez's ERA was 1.74—none of the other six candidates posted an ERA under 3.00, and three, including Hudson, had ERAs over 4.00. Hudson attained a seasonal bWAR of 5.0 or higher, considered to be at an All-Star level, only three times; coincidentally, he has been selected to three All-Star teams, although in the same year in which his bWAR was at the All-Star level only once, in 2010.

Pitching for teams that scored runs for him and played well defensively behind him, Tim Hudson has reached the 200-win plateau, which as we have seen is an exceptional honor for a pitcher in the contemporary era. But as we have also seen, wins are a team-dependent statistic and do not accurately reflect the effectiveness of the pitcher individually. Hudson is an excellent pitcher—he has amassed a career bWAR of 55.5 and ERA+ of 124—but he has never shown that he is a dominating or elite pitcher. He has led the league in starts twice, indicating durability, and he led the league in wins and winning percentage in 2000, his only 20-game season, and one in which he was runner-up in American League Cy Young voting. His 2000 win-loss record was 20–6 (.769) while AL Cy Young winner Pedro Martinez posted an 18–6 (.750) record; however, Hudson's ERA was 4.14, translating to an ERA+ of only 113 and bWAR of 4.0—by contrast, Martinez's ERA was 1.74, which translated to an unearthly ERA+ of 291 (by this measurement, he was nearly three times better than the average AL pitcher) and bWAR of 11.7.

Tim Hudson might recover from his 2013 season-ending ankle surgery to pitch a couple more seasons, and depending on his effectiveness he could then add to his counting numbers. He would need three 15-win seasons to reach 250 career wins, which is not inconceivable, but neither is it likely given that he is a) returning from surgery, b) in his late-30s, and c) playing in a period of high talent compression with many young arms competing for his slot in the rotation. Again, though, as we have been examining, wins in and of themselves are not an accurate indicator of pitching greatness. Thus, Tim Hudson's Hall of Fame legacy is already established, and he falls short of the greatness required of a Hall of Fame-caliber pitcher.

A few years younger than Halladay, Hudson, or Pettitte, CC Sabathia has already posted a promising record as he reached the 200-win mark this season. In fact, with eight seasons with at least 15 wins, including one with 21 wins and three with 19 wins, the big left-hander has never posted a losing full season—although he has experienced a swoon this season as his velocity has dropped, resulting in several ineffective and disappointing starts. Whether this indicates difficulties generated by his return from elbow surgery last year, a coincidental off-year, or, in his age-32 season, a notable decline as he struggles to stay afloat in an environment of high talent compression, remains to be seen.

Up until 2013, though, Sabathia was the very definition of a workhorse. In his first year in the majors, he posted for the Cleveland Indians a 17–5 record (.773) with a 4.39 ERA in 33 starts and 180.1 innings, finishing second behind the Seattle Mariners' Ichiro Suzuki for American League Rookie of the Year honors. He went on to demonstrate his durability for the first 12 years of his career: From 2001 to 2012, Sabathia has averaged, per season, 32 starts in 214 innings pitched with three complete games and one shutout while exhibiting both dominance and command with 184 strikeouts against only 64 bases on balls for an excellent 2.88 strikeout-to-walk ratio. He has notched nine season with 150 or more strikeouts and three seasons with 200 or more (and has fallen three shy of 200 in back-to-back seasons, in 2009 and 2010). Sabathia's qualitative stats over this period, per season, are a 3.50 ERA, a 125 ERA+, and a 4.5 bWAR. He won the AL Cy Young Award in 2007 with a 19–7 record (.731); 3.21 ERA, 141 ERA+, and 6.3 bWAR; and four complete games, one shutout, and 209 strikeouts in 241 innings pitched—which, against only 37 walks, yielded an eye-popping major-league leading 5.65 strikeout-to-walk ratio—and although Sabathia garnered a substantial number of votes, that year was a toss-up among Josh Beckett, Erik Bedard, John Lackey, and Sabathia's teammate Roberto Hernandez.

Following his Cy Young season, Sabathia was traded to the Milwaukee Brewers in the middle of 2008 as Cleveland went on to have a dead .500 season but the Brewers secured the National League wild-card slot. Sabathia made an auspicious impression in the NL as in 17 starts for the Brewers, he went 11–2 (.846) with a 1.65 ERA, a 255 ERA+, and a 4.9 bWAR while striking out 128 in 130.2 innings against only 25 walks for a remarkable 5.12 strikeout-to-walk ratio. With both Cleveland and Milwaukee, Sabathia pitched 10 complete games, leading the NL with seven, while with five shutouts, two for the Indians and three for the Brewers, he managed to lead both leagues in shutouts in 2008. But although Sabathia helped the Brewers get to the postseason, he was disappointing in his only start in the NL Division Series against the Philadelphia Phillies, giving up six hits and five earned runs while walking four in only 3.2 innings as the Brewers lost the series; the Phillies went on to win the World Series for the first time since 1980.

In 2009, Sabathia signed as a free agent with the New York Yankees, and in the majors' toughest division, the American League East, he had been outstanding until this season, leading the AL in wins twice while finishing in the top five for Cy Young voting his first three seasons with the Yankees. Sabathia earned a World Series ring in 2009 as his Yankees defeated the defending-champion Phillies, with the burly southpaw pitching better against the Phillies than his record might indicate—in two starts against Philadelphia, his record was only 0–1 but he pitched 13.2 innings, allowing 11 hits and 5 earned runs (3.29 ERA) while fanning 12—although he was sparkling in both the American League Divisional and Championship Series: In the former, he beat the Minnesota Twins in his only start, allowing one earned run in 6.2 innings (1.35 ERA) while striking out eight; in the latter, he beat the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim twice, allowing just nine hits and two earned runs over 16 innings (1.13 ERA) while fanning 12.

Yet apart from a brilliant performance against the Baltimore Orioles in the 2012 Divisional Series—in two starts, Sabathia won both games, coming one out shy of pitching a complete-game victory in Game One while getting the complete-game victory in the clinching Game Five, posting a 1.53 ERA while striking out 16 against only three walks in 17.2 innings—Sabathia's subsequent postseason performance has been middling at best. In last year's AL Championship Series against the Detroit Tigers, Sabathia lasted only 3.2 innings in his Game Four start, coughing up 11 hits, two home runs, and six runs, five earned, as the Yankees looked dismal overall.

Throughout his career, CC Sabathia has enjoyed run support of about a half-run better than the major league average: In runs support per games started, Sabathia has received 5.1 runs per game against the 4.6 MLB average, and in runs support per innings pitched, he has gotten 5.0 runs per game against the 4.6 MLB average. In nearly 13 seasons, he has had just 30 tough losses against only 25 cheap wins while his wins-lost total of 32 (games in which he was in line for the win when he left the game but his bullpen lost that lead) is balanced by his losses-saved total of 34 (games in which he left while his team was behind but in which his team subsequently rallied to at least tie the score). In addition to the support he has received from his team, Sabathia has a career average leverage index of 0.99 (average leverage index measures the pressure a pitcher faces, with an index of 1.00 indicating average pressure), signaling that Sabathia has enjoyed relatively comfortable environments when he pitches, with offensive and fielding support aiding his chances to win.

Sabathia has been named to six All-Star squads, but curiously he has pitched in only two of those games, with each appearance lasting one inning; in 2004, he gave up four hits and three earned runs, while in his 2007 appearance he allowed only one hit. The All-Star Game is an exhibition game, so a player's performance shouldn't be indicative of his career, but it is instructive that Sabathia has only three seasons in which his bWAR was at or above the All-Star level of 5.0 wins above replacement player per season—his 2007 Cy Young year (6.3), 2009 (6.2), and 2011 (7.5). In 2008, he did generate 1.9 bWAR with the Indians and 4.9 bWAR with the Brewers, although his performance with the Indians before he was traded, after the All-Star Game, was hardly All-Star quality.

To date, Sabathia has generated a career bWAR of 54.0 and an ERA+ of 122. Perhaps his less-than-stellar 2013 season is an aberration and he might recover from it, or perhaps it is an indication of his declining skills and effectiveness. As the youngest of the active pitchers we have examined so far, CC Sabathia could have significant chapters of his career yet to be written. However, at this point, he has been a strong, though not dominating, starting pitcher whose Hall of Fame credentials are anything but convincing.

Pitchers' Profiles: Other Active Pitchers

Two active pitchers are within 20 wins of 200 total wins for their careers. Bartolo Colón, who won the 2005 American League Cy Young Award while with the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, is currently at 185 wins and in his age-40 season Colón is enjoying a stellar 14–3 (.824), 2.50 ERA season with the Oakland Athletics. Following his Cy Young year, Colón missed a lot of baseball because of injuries and "personal matters" he attended to in his native Dominican Republic; he missed the entire 2010 season. Had it not been for that, the big right-hander might already be at 200 career wins—between 1998 and 2005, he won 135 games against only 75 losses for a .643 winning percentage—and we might be considering Colón for Hall of Fame enshrinement.

However, performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) will dog Colón for some years to come. Last year, he was suspended for 50 games for testing positive for synthetic testosterone, and he is among the high-profile names, along with Ryan Braun and Alex Rodriguez, associated with the ongoing Biogenesis of America scandal. Not that Colón has much of a Hall of Fame case at any rate, but the suspension expected to be levied against him (as of this writing), and both this stigma and his age make further employment in the major leagues fairly unlikely.

Four wins behind and six years younger than Colón, Mark Buehrle seems to be a sure bet to reach 200 wins even if he is currently having a middling season in his first year with the disappointing Toronto Blue Jays. The big left-hander is another workhorse, averaging 33 starts and 219 innings pitched in the twelve full seasons since 2001, when he became a full-time starter for the Chicago White Sox until he signed as a free agent with the Miami Marlins in 2012; in this period, his win totals have been in double digits every year, reaching a high of 19 in 2002—he has, however, been in double digits in losses in 8 of those 12 years. For his career so far, Buehrle owns a 181–139 win-loss record (.566) with a 3.84 ERA, a 118 ERA+, and 54.2 bWAR.

Buehrle won a World Series ring in 2005 with the White Sox, who swept the Houston Astros—he pitched a no-decision in Game Two and picked up the save in the 14-inning Game Three—and he has pitched two no-hitters, one of them a perfect game in 2009, all the more remarkable as Buehrle is a pitch-to-contact pitcher who has managed more than 150 strikeouts only once, in 2004 (165). Not surprisingly, the southpaw has allowed 126 unearned runs in his career while he is the active career leader in home runs allowed with 316 (coincidentally, Colón is next with 304). Yet Buehrle holds the major league record for most consecutive batters retired with 45 in a row, and is the only pitcher to win multiple Gold Gloves while throwing multiple no-hitters.

Already in his age-34 season, Mark Buehrle is likely to reach 200 wins before he retires, provided he can stay healthy and not have his skills deteriorate too significantly. Whether that will help his Hall of Fame case remains to be seen although based on the evidence so far, he does not seem to be a likely candidate.

Among remaining pitchers with less than 200 wins, Derek Lowe retired this season with 176 career wins while five pitchers with at least 140 wins—Barry Zito (164), Roy Oswalt (163), Freddy Garcia (155), Chris Carpenter (144), and A.J. Burnett (141)—are in their age-35 or older season this year. Several pitchers in the age-31-to-age-34 range have between 120 and 139 wins: Johan Santana (139), Jon Garland (136), John Lackey (135), Cliff Lee (135), Josh Beckett (132), Carlos Zambrano (132), Jake Peavy (129), Dan Haren (125), Kyle Lohse (125), and Jason Marquis (121).

Of the 30-and-under active pitchers, Justin Verlander, with 135 career wins currently in his age-30 season, would be the odds-on favorite to reach 200 wins as his averaging 13 wins over the next five seasons would do the trick. Felix Hernandez, at age-27 and 109 wins; Jared Weaver, at age-30 and 108 wins; Ervin Santana, at age-30 and 103 wins; Zack Greinke, at age-29 and 99 wins; and Cole Hamels and Jon Lester, both at age-29 and 95 wins, have the best outside chances to make it to 200 wins, although you could also widen the net to include James Shields and Adam Wainwright, both with 93 wins in their age-31 seasons, and Matt Cain, with 92 wins in his age-28 season.

But as we have seen so far, not only is it an endurance contest to get to 200 wins, let alone 250 wins or, even more chimerically, 300 wins in an age of high talent compression and interventionist bullpens, but high win totals do not indicate how effective a pitcher is to his team—a win is a team effort and often unfairly rewards, or in the case of a loss penalizes, a pitcher by awarding him the sole credit. Wins have never been a strong metric for evaluating a pitcher's qualifications for the Hall of Fame. We turn now to one method for such an evaluation.

JAWS: Putting the Bite on Pitchers' Performances

Sabermetrician Jay Jaffe has developed his JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score system) measurement system to evaluate players by position against Hall of Fame players at that same position, using their career bWAR averaged with the bWAR from their seven-year peak (not necessarily in consecutive years). The intention is to evaluate players on an even keel including those who might be overvalued by high counting numbers (recall Early Wynn and his 300 wins) and those who might be undervalued by not posting such high counting numbers (recall Pedro Martinez and his 86.0 bWAR).

The table below lists many of the starting pitchers discussed in this article so far, including big win-total pitchers Jim Kaat, Jack Morris, and Jamie Moyer, in descending order of their JAWS ranking. (Statistics for still-active pitchers are current through August 4, 2013.)

Starting Pitchers by JAWS Ranking
Pitcher	Rank	bWAR	bWAR7	JAWS	Wins	ERA	ERA+
Martinez, Pedro	21	86.0	58.2	71.1	219	2.93	154
Schilling. Curt	27	80.7	49.0	64.4	216	3.46	127
Mussina, Mike	28	82.7	44.5	63.8	270	3.68	123
** Average of 57 Hall of Fame Pitchers **	—	72.6	50.2	61.4	—	—	—
Halladay, Roy	42	65.5	50.6	57.6	201	3.37	131
Reuschel, Rick	45	68.2	43.8	57.0	214	3.37	114
Brown, Kevin	46	68.5	45.4	56.9	211	3.28	127
Tiant, Luis	51	66.1	44.6	55.7	229	3.30	114
Smoltz, John	58	66.5	38.7	54.1	213	3.33	125
Cicotte, Eddie	66	56.9	44.0	51.0	209	2.38	123
Finley, Chuck	73	58.5	39.8	49.1	200	3.85	115
John, Tommy	78	62.3	34.7	48.3	288	3.34	111
Tanana, Frank	79	57.5	38.5	48.2	240	3.66	106
Hudson, Tim	82	55.5	38.4	47.7	205	3.44	124
Sabathia, CC	83	54.0	40.4	47.7	200	3.57	122
Powell, Jack	88	56.0	36.8	46.8	245	2.97	106
Pettitte, Andy	89	58.9	34.1	46.4	252	3.87	116
Quinn, Jack	94	59.0	33.2	45.6	247	3.29	114
Pierce, Billy	96	53.1	37.8	45.6	211	3.27	119
Koosman, Jerry	99	57.1	36.6	45.2	222	3.36	110
Kaat, Jim	100	45.3	38.4	44.9	283	3.45	108
Buehrle, Mark	101	54.2	35.8	44.6	181	3.84	118
Wells, David	118	53.5	31.4	42.5	239	4.13	108
Moyer, Jamie	124	50.2	33.2	41.8	269	4.25	103
Colón, Bartolo	149	44.2	34.5	39.1	185	3.96	114
Morris, Jack	158	43.8	32.8	38.4	254	3.90	105

bWAR: Career Wins Above Replacement as calculated by Baseball Reference. Note: To be consistent with its usage throughout the article, I used the bWAR value for the pitcher's pitching performance. Jaffe uses the pitcher's overall performance bWAR, which has a slightly different value.

Rank: The pitcher's standing in Jaffe's ranking of starting pitchers throughout baseball history. Note: Jaffe's ranking includes both Hall of Fame pitchers and non-Hall of Fame pitchers.

bWAR7: Sum total of the pitcher's best seven seasons by bWAR; does not have to be consecutive years.

JAWS: The pitcher's career bWAR averaged with his seven-year bWAR peak.

Of the 20 pitchers ranked ahead of Pedro Martinez, 16 are already in the Hall of Fame; of the four who are not in the Hall, two are Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux, both of whom should be elected in their first year of eligibility, one is Roger Clemens, who would have been elected in his first year of eligibility (which was this year) if PEDs were not an issue, and one is Jim McCormick, a 19th-century star who might be selected by a future Pre-Integration Committee.

Of the 29 pitchers ranked behind Martinez, up to and including Red Ruffing at the 50th spot, 18 pitchers, including Ruffing, are already in the Hall, with three not yet eligible (Mike Mussina, Tom Glavine, Roy Halladay) and one being Curt Schilling, whose first year of eligibility was this year.

Jaffe's scoring system is based on wins above replacement, and as he acknowledges, it does not account for postseason play, awards won, career milestones, or league-leading in key categories. JAWS is, in essence, a refinement of the bWAR assessments we have examined previously, emphasizing a pitcher's peak and keyed to pitchers already enshrined in the Hall of Fame. What emerges, though, is that a pitcher's effectiveness, his contribution to his team's ability to win, is more valuable than whether he is credited with a win.

Conclusion: Closing for the Starter

We began by examining the traditional assumption that the number of wins a pitcher earned over his career is an indicator of his worthiness for the Hall of Fame. This examination was prompted by milestones that have occurred this season: Roy Halladay, Tim Hudson, and CC Sabathia all reached 200 wins this season, while Andy Pettitte reached 250 wins. In an age of interventionist bullpens, with starting pitchers leaving a game often before a final decision is reached, it is harder for starting pitchers to earn a victory. Thus, the charmed circle of 300 wins could be out of reach for pitchers for many years to come, and now win plateaus of 250 wins or even 200 wins could become "the new 300 wins."

However, just as pitching strategy has changed, so has the evaluation of a pitcher's effectiveness—a win is no longer considered to be a reliable indicator of how well a pitcher performs. There are too many factors that contribute to a win (or the lack of a win) that are out of a pitcher's control, notably the run support he gets from his team's offense and the fielding support he gets from the team's defenders. Instead, metrics such as wins above replacement (WAR) and adjusted earned run average (or ERA+) attempt to isolate a pitcher's individual contribution to his team's ability to win.

As a result, pitchers with high win totals might look like Hall of Fame-caliber pitchers because they have quantitative strength: Tommy John, Jim Kaat, Jamie Moyer, and Jack Morris have all collected at least 250 wins, as has Andy Pettitte, still pitching in the major leagues. But pitchers with qualitative strength—having amassed high WAR totals or high ERA+ ratings—compare favorably with Hall of Fame pitchers who have also demonstrated qualitative strength, pitchers such as Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling, and Roy Halladay, who have reached the 200-win plateau even though several pitchers not already in the Hall of Fame have considerably more wins, although Mike Mussina is that rarity—a pitcher who has posted a high win total and high qualitative statistics.

Martinez did not amass a great number of wins compared to earlier Hall of Fame pitchers, but he did generate peripheral statistics that are better than many of them. The evaluation of Martinez signals the change in thinking about a pitcher's effectiveness (a change that was heralded by the eventual election of Bert Blyleven to the Hall of Fame). Martinez reeled off several seasons of pitching dominance all the more impressive for occurring both in a period of high talent compression and inflated offensive statistics. Conversely, high win totals do not automatically indicate strength; for example, Andy Pettitte has reached the 250-win plateau—he might be the last pitcher to do so for some time to come—but he has benefited from playing on excellent all-around teams throughout his career, and he never exhibited a streak of pitching dominance even close to that of Martinez's.

Both Martinez and Pettitte exemplify the change in thinking occurring now with respect to evaluating pitching effectiveness. Traditionally, Pettitte with the high win total and postseason success would have been considered to be the better bet for the Hall of Fame. But Martinez's overall effectiveness, exemplified by his streak of dominance, makes him the more worthy candidate.

Or to put it another way, this is the lesson we learned way back on the grade-school playground: It's not whether you won or lost, it's how well you played the game.