Teams With Most Pitchers Over .500 Min. 10 Decisions
Posted by Steve Lombardi on March 25, 2011
How many teams had 8+ pitchers in a season where the pitcher won more games than he lost and had at least 10 decisions?
Here's the list:
| Rk | Year | Lg | Tm | #Matching | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1943 | NL | St. Louis Cardinals | 9 | Al Brazle / Harry Brecheen / Mort Cooper / Murry Dickson / Harry Gumbert / Howie Krist / Max Lanier / Red Munger / Howie Pollet |
| 2 | 2004 | AL | New York Yankees | 8 | Kevin Brown / Jose Contreras / Tom Gordon / Orlando Hernandez / Jon Lieber / Mike Mussina / Paul Quantrill / Javier Vazquez |
| 3 | 1988 | AL | Boston Red Sox | 8 | Mike Boddicker / Oil Can Boyd / Roger Clemens / Wes Gardner / Bruce Hurst / Dennis Lamp / Mike Smithson / Bob Stanley |
| 4 | 1980 | NL | Montreal Expos | 8 | Stan Bahnsen / Woodie Fryman / Bill Gullickson / Charlie Lea / David Palmer / Steve Rogers / Scott Sanderson / Elias Sosa |
| 5 | 1979 | NL | Montreal Expos | 8 | Ross Grimsley / Bill Lee / Rudy May / David Palmer / Steve Rogers / Scott Sanderson / Dan Schatzeder / Elias Sosa |
| 6 | 1978 | NL | Cincinnati Reds | 8 | Doug Bair / Bill Bonham / Pedro Borbon / Paul Moskau / Fred Norman / Manny Sarmiento / Tom Seaver / Dave Tomlin |
| 7 | 1977 | AL | Kansas City Royals | 8 | Doug Bird / Jim Colborn / Larry Gura / Andy Hassler / Dennis Leonard / Mark Littell / Marty Pattin / Paul Splittorff |
| 8 | 1975 | NL | Cincinnati Reds | 8 | Jack Billingham / Pedro Borbon / Clay Carroll / Pat Darcy / Don Gullett / Clay Kirby / Gary Nolan / Fred Norman |
| 9 | 1967 | NL | St. Louis Cardinals | 8 | Nelson Briles / Steve Carlton / Bob Gibson / Dick Hughes / Al Jackson / Larry Jaster / Ray Washburn / Ron Willis |
| 10 | 1953 | NL | Brooklyn Dodgers | 8 | Carl Erskine / Clem Labine / Billy Loes / Russ Meyer / Bob Milliken / Johnny Podres / Preacher Roe / Ben Wade |
| 11 | 1942 | NL | St. Louis Cardinals | 8 | Johnny Beazley / Mort Cooper / Harry Gumbert / Howie Krist / Max Lanier / Howie Pollet / Lon Warneke / Ernie White |
| 12 | 1941 | AL | New York Yankees | 8 | Tiny Bonham / Marv Breuer / Spud Chandler / Atley Donald / Lefty Gomez / Johnny Murphy / Red Ruffing / Marius Russo |
| 13 | 1939 | AL | New York Yankees | 8 | Atley Donald / Lefty Gomez / Bump Hadley / Oral Hildebrand / Monte Pearson / Red Ruffing / Marius Russo / Steve Sundra |
.
That's it. As you can see, this hasn't been done very often.
March 25th, 2011 at 10:59 am
Not often, true, but from '75 - '80 it seemed fairly prevelant with the Expos and Reds.
March 25th, 2011 at 11:17 am
I started collecting baseball cards in the late 80's, and the first team set I got was the '89 Topps Red Sox. Good to see the likes of Wes Gardner and Mike Smithson on a list.
March 25th, 2011 at 11:19 am
OIL CAN
OIL CAN
March 25th, 2011 at 11:35 am
How could the 2001 Mariners not be on this list (haven't looked at the stats)?
March 25th, 2011 at 11:49 am
How about the 79-80 Expos doing it in back-to-back years with only 3 of the pitchers overlapping?
Talk about some serious staff turnover. . . . .
March 25th, 2011 at 11:50 am
@4
Only 5 players had 10 decisions. That's how.
Also, thinking about it, the late 70s make sense for the most of these - that's after the advent of the 5-man rotation, relief pitchers started being used heavily, but while staffs overall were smaller, so fewer players would have been getting decisions, which means there would have been more likely to have been a large number of players with more than 10 decisions. It's the perfect storm.
March 25th, 2011 at 11:54 am
@4 RE: 2001 Mariners - they were actually erlatively healthy through the rotation. Because of the 10 decision minimum, I would suspect the list above is dominated by teams that had starters in and out of the rotation all year. THe 01 Mariners had 3 guys make 33+ starts and another make 27 starts so while almost everybody had a winning record, only 5 guys meet the 10 decision threshold
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/SEA/2001.shtml
March 25th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
The 1943 Cardinals pitching staff was affected by WWII. Howie Pollett didn't pitch after July 10 and , and two pitchers (Harry Gumbert and Ernie White) pitched very little in the summer months, maybe due to a military obligation. Manager Billy Southworth added rookie Al Brazle to the starting rotation in late July, and converted two relievers/spot starters (Harry Brecheen and Red Munger) to regular starters. In all, 11 pitchers started games for the team that year. That's a lot of turbulence for a team, especially a pennant-winning team, but I guess all teams were dealing with personnel disruptions that year.
March 25th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Seeing the 1970's Reds on there twice doesn't surprise me.
But if you had told me that Ross Grimsely was on the list, I would have been real sure that he would have been on there as a Red. Memory is funny.
March 25th, 2011 at 2:04 pm
'86 Mets had six pitchers with a > .500 record, with more than 10 win, let alone decisions.
5 of them had a winning% > .600
and 5 of them < 7.5 H/9
March 25th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
@1, @5 and staff turnover.
The four teams on this list who managed this trick in proximate years all had significant turnover.
- '39 & '41 Yanks: 4 pitchers on both lists
- '42 & '43 Cardinals: 5 pitchers on both lists
- '75 & '78 Reds: 2 pitchers on both lists
- '79 & '80 Expos: 4 pitchers (not 3) on both lists
Should remember, though, that there may be more overlap than appears because some pitchers may have had a sub-.500 year, or fewer than 10 decisions, in the other season.
If there were to be a repeat team today, very likely the same or a greater level of turnover would be evident. For example, based on the free-agent lists on this site, year-to-year turnover level for MLB is nominally approaching 90% as I count 675 free agents, signed or unsigned, out of 750 MLB roster spots (25 spots X 30 teams).
Of course, the actual turnover is a bit lower than this because a number of free agents re-sign with their current teams, and some of the unsigned guys may have been out of the game for a while and are FAs only because they haven't formally retired. Nevertheless, it still indicates an enormous level of roster volatility on a yearly basis.
March 25th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
This is a completely different subject, but I was looking at the 2008 Rays pitching staff. They had only 2 pitchers who were under .500 (Wheeler at 5-6 and Glover at 1-2). The 2 pitchers below .500 is impressive, but how many other teams can claim that they had ZERO pitchers who were more than 1 game below .500?
March 25th, 2011 at 2:43 pm
@12.
Since 1901, there have been nineteen teams with zero pitchers with sub-.500 records.
March 25th, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Those Expos teams just broke your heart every year.
March 25th, 2011 at 3:43 pm
Even though every team on this was good (including 5 WS winners), you still don't want to see your team on it.
March 25th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
How about the 1906 Cubs? Every pitcher with >10 decisions had a winning record...by at least 9 games over .500!
March 25th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
@15.
5 WS winners here. So, why don't you want to see your team on this list?
While this list does suggest instability in the starting rotation, it also indicates depth in the pitching staff and an ability to overcome injuries (which may be the principal contibuting factor to the unstable rotation).
March 25th, 2011 at 6:16 pm
Wow! I just looked at Derick Jeter's page and it says he is ranked 1116 all time for position players just behind Hubie Brooks. Guy's getting ready to have 3000 hits and 500 doubles.
March 25th, 2011 at 7:22 pm
Thanks. It might be interesting to see a list of teams with the most pitchers over .500 with 6 or more wins as a constraint instead of 10 or more decisions. This would allow us to count pitchers with a 6-1 record, for example, instead of excluding them because they did not lose enough to qualify. I think that search would be consistent with the spirit of the original post.
March 25th, 2011 at 9:48 pm
@18
As off-topic as your point was, I'm glad you brought it up. He's #1114 now, but - c'mon people! Look, there's no bigger Jeter-basher than me, but the guy's a top-10 all-time shortstop, by even the most Jeter-unfriendly assessor. I know a lot of us are confused as to whether Jeter's overrated or underrated, but it appears his playing ability is being drastically underrated by the EloRater.
March 25th, 2011 at 9:50 pm
Also - Steve Rogers! What an underrated guy. He's pretty much always forgotten when thinking about late-70s/early-80s pitchers, but he was THE guy for the Expos on the mound, back when they had some pretty decent teams. Nice to see him getting some love on the chart above.
March 25th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
One thing I've heard said about the Big Red Machine of the 1970s is that they didn't have any one superstar pitcher, at least for as many years that some of their position players maintained superstar status. The appearance of this team in this list twice shows, in my opinion, that the pitching part of this team's success was due to spreading the victories among the staff.
@9 - Although I remember him playing for the Reds, I think of Ross Grimsley as an Oriole. I would not have expected any of the 1970s Oriole teams to be on this list because their top 3-4 starters picked up most of their victories. This was especially true in 1971.
March 25th, 2011 at 11:34 pm
I'm guessing the 42/43 Cards, and maybe already the 41 Yankees, reflect not just "any" turnover, but some from World War II. Actually kind of surprised there's not more teams from that era on the list.
March 25th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
@17, Doug -- I think you don't want your team on this list because you're better off with a strong, stable rotation than with 8 guys who collect 10 wins, which (I think) is more likely to reflect the strength of your offense than the depth of your pitching.
I'll be back in a little while with a report on the team ERA+ of those 13 teams.
March 25th, 2011 at 11:46 pm
P.S. to my #24 -- I mistakenly said "10 wins," when the list is actually about being over .500 with at least 10 decisions. That somewhat changes my expectation of what was going on with those pitching staffs, in the main -- but I'll just go ahead with checking their ERA+ for now.
March 26th, 2011 at 12:27 am
Team ERA+
I'm putting the WWII-era teams off to one side for the moment as special cases. I'll run the rest of the comments in groups of 3 to break up the posts. (I hope I don't bore anyone; you can always skip ahead!)
2004 Yankees: 96 ERA+ ranked 10th in the AL (tie).
SPs had a 4.82 ERA (5.21 RA; lots of unearned runs) and averaged 5.8 IP per start.
-- Their 6 main SPs all had at least 8 wins and a winning record, but only 2 had ERA+ over 100, and just 1 was over 110. None reached 200 IP. The team won 101 regular-season games (so plenty of wins to spread around the staff), but had the run differential of an 89-win team. And their pitching hurt them in the ALCS; even as they were building the 3-0 lead, they allowed 7+ runs in 2 of the wins.
1988 Red Sox: 104 ERA+ ranked 4th in AL (4-way tie).
SP ERA of 4.04 ranked 9th in the AL, but was about average.
-- 89 Wins; swept in the ALCS, but allowed 5+ runs just once. Had just 2 good SPs most of the year (Clemens & Hurst); they picked up Boddicker at the trade deadline and he pitched very well down the stretch, but got rocked in his ALCS start. Boyd and Smithson went 9-7 and 9-6, but with hideous numbers. They shifted Wes Gardner into the rotation at midseason with uneven results (4.12 ERA in 18 starts); he didn't start in the ALCS sweep.
1980 Expos: 103 ERA+ ranked 4th in the NL (3-way tie).
SP ERA of 3.47 ranked 3rd.
-- 90 Wins; tied with Philly going into a final 3-game set, but dropped the first 2 (the first was 2-1, the second went 11 innings) and finished a game back. This team really did have a deep staff; only Rogers and Sanderson reached 200 IP, but 4 other SPs made at least 18 starts, and 4 RPs had from 80 to 98 IP, including 3 of the 8 guys who made this list. Their top 4 SPs were all pretty good and about the same, with ERA+ from 115-120. I think this team could have done well in the postseason; their 4 best SPs were all available at season's end (Palmer having returned strong from a mid-year injury).
March 26th, 2011 at 1:13 am
1979 Expos: 117 ERA+ was #1 in the NL.
SP ERA of 3.35 ranked #2, as did their 13 shutouts; best control staff in the NL.
-- 95 Wins, finished 1 game behind Philly. (I'll spare the Expos fans any further comments on season-ending series against the Phils.) Thinking about the 1979-80 Expos makes me nostalgic for Strat-O-Matic; I'm a Tigers fan, but this club was fun to play with. The '79 team had ridiculous pitching depth: 9 guys had at least 90 IP (5 SPs, 2 RPs and 2 superb swingmen), and 8 of the 9 had an ERA+ of at least 107, with reaching 121 or better. Six guys had at least 10 wins, a feat that has been topped only by 3 of the greatest championship teams ever (1914 A's, 1939 Yanks, 1976 Reds). These Expos had lefty-righty balance; they had a great staff. OK, I'll move on.
1978 Reds: 94 ERA+ ranked 10th in the 12-team NL.
SP ERA of 3.77 ranked 9th.
-- 92 Wins; finished 2.5 GB the Dodgers, but had the run differential of an 83-win team. The rotation was Tom Seaver and 5 generic guys who mostly weren't too bad, but definitely weren't good. Their SPs threw the fewest innings in the league, but the offense was good, which created vulture win opportunities for the bullpen; 4 of the 8 guys who made this list were RPs, and 3 of them were bad. Just not a good staff at all.
1977 Royals: 115 ERA+ ranked 2nd in the AL.
SP ERA of 3.61 ranked 3rd.
-- 102 Wins; lost the ALCS in a heartbreaking game 5, when the visiting Yankees overcame a 9th-inning deficit against Dennis Leonard, pitching in relief. I'm undecided on how strong a staff this really was. Yes, the ERA+ is strong, but there's no truly outstanding pitcher in either the rotation or the bullpen; Dennis Leonard led with a 134 ERA+, and a couple of bullpen guys were close to that. Nine 9 guys did virtually all the pitching for KC, and the worst of them had a 97 ERA+. Five guys with 100+ IP had ERA+ between 105 and 114. Yes, many a championship has been without even one pitcher as good as Dennis Leonard. But it's just not the sort of staff you expect when you see the 115 ERA+.
March 26th, 2011 at 1:57 am
1975 Reds: 107 ERA+ ranked 3rd in the NL (tie).
SP ERA of 3.62 ranked 5th, but their IP ranked 11th.
-- 108 Wins, swept the NLCS, won the WS in 7. Don Gullett had a 149 ERA+ in 160 IP; the other 5 SPs had ERAs of 114, 101, 97, 88 and 77. All 6 won at least 10 games with a W% of .600 or better -- but the bullpen was the strength of this staff; 4 RPs had at least 90 IP and all had ERA+ of at least 122 (though only 2 made the 10-decision list).
1967 Cardinals: 108 ERA+ ranked 4th in the NL (but well behind the top 2 teams).
SP ERA of 3.00 ranked 2nd.
-- 101 Wins; won the WS in 7. How many of you remember the ace of the '67 Cardinals? It wasn't Bob Gibson or Steve Carlton, who each had a 110 ERA+ that year and less than 200 IP, nor was it Ray Washburn. The man who led the team in Wins, ERA, IP, WHIP, CG and SHO was Dick Hughes, who came out of nowhere at age 29 (he had 21 prior innings in the majors) and returned to oblivion thereafter (only 64 more IP in the bigs). Anyway, it was a good pitching staff, but there's nothing special about them; they just happened to spread the wins around. (BTW, the 1967 Cards are one of two modern teams that had 5 SPs make between 23 and 28 starts; I wonder if they're the only title team in a full season without a 30-start pitcher?)
1953 Dodgers: 105 ERA+ ranked 3rd in the NL (but well behind the top 2).
SP ERA of 4.23 ranked 4th.
-- 105 Wins (but projected to "only" 99); lost the WS in 6. Carl Erskine was pretty good (121 ERA+). The other 4 SPs were interchangeably average, with ERA+ from 94 to 102. The bullpen was good. But the starting lineup carried this team.
It's getting late, so I'm going to skip the '39 Yanks. They had an outstanding 133 ERA+, but only Red Ruffing reached 200 IP. (I'm not quite persuaded that it was a truly good staff; a lot of guys pitched well with DiMaggio and the rest of that fine defense behind them, but not so well otherwise. But I can't argue the results.)
Bottom line -- Some of these teams did have really good pitching staffs. A few had pretty lousy rotations, and a few just spread the wins around. I wouldn't say this is strong support for my statement that "you don't really want your team to make this list." I probably should have focused more on the offense of these teams; I suspect that most of them were significantly stronger on that side of the ball. All I can really say is my opinion: I think your chances are better with 3 good, durable starters and 2 or 3 good, durable relievers.
March 26th, 2011 at 2:07 am
A quick look at the runs scored rankings of these teams:
5 were #1 in scoring; 5 were #2; 1 each at 4th, 5th and 6th.
Of the 5 WS winners, 3 were #1 in scoring and 2 were #2.
Thus, I say the list reflects more about the teams' offense than about their pitching/defense.
March 26th, 2011 at 5:14 am
@John (27): re: '78 Reds: "-- 92 (my note: "real") Wins; finished 2.5 GB the Dodgers, but had the run differential of an 83-win team." Wow! Is the 9-win difference, some sort of a record, in itself?? That seems like an enormous gap.....
Or, has that post been done already? ;-p
March 26th, 2011 at 6:56 pm
[...] Teams With Most Pitchers Over .500 Min. 10 Decisions » Baseball … [...]
March 27th, 2011 at 10:59 pm
@30, Nash Bruce -- Great question, but I don't think the Play Index can compare team wins (real) to expected wins (based on run differential).
However, I know the +9 figure by the '78 Reds was far from a record. The 2004 Yankees were +12.
Often, when a team is significantly above their expected win total, you'll find that they won a very high percentage of their 1-run games; but the '04 Yanks were 24-16 (.600), slightly below their overall W%.
One highly unusual split for the 2004 Yankees: They had a losing record in blowouts (games decided by 5+ runs), at 27-28. Very good teams almost always have substantially more wins than losses in blowouts. The high number of blowout losses for NYY '04 may be the main reason for the gap between expected and actual wins.
March 28th, 2011 at 4:55 am
Thanks, John(#32) for the response. It would figure that the '04 'Yanks, broke the mold, given the historic collapse that followed, in the ALCS, against Boston. However, this information, even in 2004, would not have made MN's '04 ALDS loss, against them, any easier for me to stomach. (It was our best shot at them, out of all these years!!!!!)
For that matter, it would not have patched up the resulting holes in the sheetrock, either. (Although, in 2011, I am much older, and considerably more mature......or, do I mean to say, "resigned"?????)