I don't think Oswaly plans on playing that long so you can probably take him off.

I think you failed to mention one by the name of Cole Hamels ,pitches for the Phillies he is basically a rookie and just might make it to 20 wins this year

I don't see why Buehrle's one bad half season questions his ability. He's been one of the best pitchers in the AL this seasons as well. He's the kind of guy who could pitch into his 40s.

About Garland, people feel that he really turned his career around in 2005, and in 2006, he had a deadarm period in the first half. This year his ERA is inflated because of two or three bad starts. Perhaps this is a disturbing trend where he'll be a one-half pitcher, or maybe he'll become dominant.

Buehrle has a much better shot, but Garland isn't out of the question.

wow i didnt know Bonderman had that many wins he's pretty good, but i think both Sabathia and Zambrano will reach it. I like Santana so i hope he does too, i would like to include Jake Peavy but his chronic arm problems although none this season makes me question him, but how about his teammate Young i wonder how his numbers matched up.

Unbreakable records.....how about Pete Rose's 4,256 hits? Think about it, someone comes up at the very young age of 20, has to have 200 hits for 20 years and, at the age of 40 still needs 257 hits to surpass Rose...

Where's Cole Hamels?????

Isn't Roy Halladay and his 108 WINS not good enough to make your list?

the only one with a shot is a *healthy* randy johnson.

thanks to the 5-man rotation, none of today's young pitchers will ever win 300.

250 will become the new benchmark for HOF inclusion...

I think Halladay should definately be there

I think Oswalt will play that long, and get there (to 300, I mean). I know he said he doesn't plan on playing any longer than his existing contract, but I bet he does. If he does, I think all he needs to do is stay healthy, and he'll reach 300 - and I don't say that lightly. But he's one of those very rare guys that will not only beat you on days when he doesn't have his good stuff, but he'll completely dominate you with or without his good stuff. I don't think he'll ever throw a no-hitter, because he challenges in the strike zone nonstop to all hitters all the time. It's nothing to see the guy go 2 or 3 innings without getting to 3 balls on any hitter - with so aggressive an approach, he likely won't get any no-nos - but he'll get win after win after win as long as he's playing. If Houston didn't have those long stretches where their entire line up just takes the day off, he'd never fail to reach 20 wins - he would have won 22 last year if Houston could have scored at least 2 runs in 7 of his starts. He's clearly the best starter in the bigs, I think.

You might as well put Halladay there, if you are going to put the likes of Zito(who probably is going to suck for the next 7 years).

I think Roy Halladay does not get enough credit by the american media

Halladay is better than Buerle, Zito and Hudson.

How can you not have halladay on the list???? If it weren't for injury plagued seasons (in which he still won over 10 games) halladay would have at least 20 more wins. He still has ace stuff and has a better chance that barry zito.

Halladay should be there (this is my first comment in case you are wondering if I'm the guy that;s been ranting about him). I also think Hamels, Carmona and Liriano should be there.

Why did you mention Phil Hughes and the Red Sox prospect on the bottom of your article? sure they're talented but they have yet to prove anything.

none of these guys will win 300 games.the next 300 game winner probably isnt even born yet

cole hamels anyone??

If it weren't for Kevin Mench in 05 Halladay would have been there because it he were able to finish that season it would have been statistically better than his Cy young year.

Does the person that said 250 is gonna be the new 300 for hof inclusion think that Clemens, Maddux, or Glavine ever played in anything but a five man rotation. Do your research pal!

C.C I think has the best chance because he is not just a power pitcher. He can pitch into his 40's

If Bonderman can get past whatever is going wrong with him right now in this, his first post-postseason season (I'm a little worried he's hurt), and come out on the other side unfazed...write this down...he will break out big-time next year. Before his last four starts have destroyed his numbers, he was dead even with Verlander in most categories, with his W, L, WHIP, K, K/9, etc. virtually identical. The only difference between the two was that Bonderman's ERA was about 0.3 points higher, and his K/BB was right around DOUBLE Verlander's...well above 4. I hope he's just tired right now or something and just needs his second wind. If he stays healthy and continues to blossom into his prime over the next couple years, on this Tigers team, he's got a very, very good shot at 300 someday.

I didn't realize that Glavine, Maddux, and Clemens ever pitched in a 4-man rotation. I'm glad some of these postings cleared that up for me.

I love how you left out Cole Hamels, he is absolutely above and beyond better than Linceum. Guy is a stud, and he's extremely young!

Garland IS out of the question. Two or three bad starts shouldn't inflate one's ERA that much at this point in the season. Garland is what he is...mediocre.

Just how old is Roy Halladay?

And about Rose's record for hits: if Ichiro had played his entire career in MLB, he would be on his way to crushing that record as he is good for greater than 200 hits/year. I think the only untouchable records are Cy Young's 511 wins, and Joe D's 56.

Neither here nor there, but Lou Gehrig's consecutive games streak never looked like baseball's most unbreakable record. Neither has 714/755 HR, 60/61/70/73 HR, DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak, Pete Rose's 4,200+ hits...or any other record you can name, unless you preface it with "excluding Cy Young's 511 career wins."

There are only 15 other pitchers who have ever won as many games as he lost in his career. 827 total decisions - 292 more than Clemens, 275 more than Maddux.

Someone will reach 300 again. Someone will break all those other records. No one will touch 511 without medical science taking a huge leap forward.

I think that Sabathia and Peavy will make it, with maybe Buerhle as well making a run at 300, considering that he has been an innings horse for years.

To the poster that said Rose's hit record was unbreakable, keep an eye on Jeter, he is ahead of Rose's pace and he could break it at some point.

I think you're going to see one or more of these guys pitch deep into their 40s, and grind their way to 300 wins. 12 or 13 wins at a time for 25 years. The pitchers pitch fewer innings a year, but sports medicine and legalized steroids will add to their longevity.

Halladay shouldn't be there. He's a great pitcher when he's healthy. The problem is that he's been injury-plagued recently which doesn't bode well for the longevity needed to reach 300.

Who in 1996 would have said Tom Glavine would get 300 wins?

You never know.

In 1988 no one thought Doc Gooden wasn't going to get 300.


They got to stay healthy and be on winning teams and be focused.

I'm givin phil hughes and joba chamberlain 2:1 odds they reach 300, hughes maybe 400

Pitchers should not get credit for wins. Wins are a comment on the quality of the team a pitcher was on, not on the quality of the pitcher as an individual performer. So, I'm not impressed by Glavine's 300 wins as a fan of Glavine. I'm impressed by his career WHIP & ERA & strikeouts. the 300 wins is impressive because it says alot about the Braves (and Mets) teams he was on since those teams scored the runs that earned him the wins.

all a pitcher can do is prevent runs from being scored by the other team. but the pitcher's team still needs to score a run (at least) to win the game. Unless the pitcher drives in that run, there's no reason to credit the win to him and expect it to say something about his individual skills.

there are examples of pitchers with high win totals for a season that gave up tons of runs per game. (Jason Marquis in 06 had an ERA of 6, but 14 wins) Even though they 'won' the game it's simply because the OFFENSE scored tons of runs to offset the tons of runs given up. (Think about it -- would you want a pitcher on your team that gave up 5 runs per game and had 15 wins or 1 run per game and had 7 wins? I'd take the pitcher who only gave up 1 run per game. and then i'd find a bunch of guys that could drive in runs.)

All of the pitchers mentioned in this article have other stats that more clearly illustrate their greatness as individual athletes. Assigning a 'win' is misleading and pointless. there are other, lesser known pitchers who were good at pitching that don't get discussed because they had the misfortune of being on poor or mediocre teams. Even this article points out that Nolan Ryan might have had more wins during his years on the Astros.

pitchers should only be evaluated on how easily they get batters out. the stats we should look at for pitchers are earned runs allowed per start, WHIP, strikeouts and others along those lines. a pitcher can pitch a no hitter and still lose -- why is that fair? why should he get a loss when his team failed to get him a run?

one last way to look at it:
in football, does the DEFENSE get a win credit? no. the QB does (and the coach does). In basketball, the TEAM gets the credit. not the center. in hockey, there's a similar problem -- the goalie gets the win when all he does is prevent scoring by the other team. Yes it's important, but if you don't score a goal or a run, you don't win.

I'm not trying to dismiss this article or the achievement of 300 wins. I just think analysts need to look at more accurate ways to discuss individual talent particularly when they are voting for the Hall of Fame, since the Hall celebrates an individual's performance over their career, regardless of what their team did. If a guy is on the Tampa Bay Devil Rays for 20 years and they are in last place all 20 years, but he manages to post really low WHIP and ERA and strikes out tons of guys, will his mediocre win total keep him out of the hall? I would hope not.

what about andy pettitte? 194 wins at age 35 is a possibility...

Halladay turned 30 in may for the wanting to know

"Garland IS out of the question. Two or three bad starts shouldn't inflate one's ERA that much at this point in the season. Garland is what he is...mediocre."

Without the 3 bad starts I'm referring to, his ERA is 3.24, in U.S. Cellular Field. Do some research before posting something that absurd.

Oswalt, although the best starter in the MLBG this century in my opinion, probably wont play long enough, and started to late (23), to make it to 300. Sabbathia probably has the best shot since I can see him pitching into his 40s. He is, I think, overrated, I maybe he won't be able to get the same production from now on. I think anyone younger tan 25 should not be included yet becuase you never know what may happen. Halladay just started too late, and was to up and down early on to get there. He is almost 31, and needs 192 more wins. That would be amazing. I hope it does happen to someone, but it probably wont happen to anyone of these guys.

This blog is a lot of nothing. There's not a single decent arguement made for anyone getting to 300. If you don't have 150 wins by the time you're 30, you're not going to make it unless you're playing for 100 win a year teams. The Braves won what? 1050 games over 10 years?

And putting folks who are 21 years old on the list is frankly ridiculous.

"Garland IS out of the question. Two or three bad starts shouldn't inflate one's ERA that much at this point in the season. Garland is what he is...mediocre."

His ERA is 3.24 without them.

The Most Unbreakable Record In Baseball: Career Strikeouts. Nobody will even reach 5,000, much less the 5,700+ it would take to become the new career leader. And why is that, you ask? Because hitters are stronger and faster now, the baseball livelier, and pitchers don't throw 160 pitches in a game anymore.....and I doubt anyone will ever do that again.

I do not see what the big deal is about 300 wins. It is just glorifying mediocrity. A pitcher starts 30 games a year, averages
15 wins and 20 years later he is
a baseball god?!?!

If winning 15 games a year in MLB is so easy you go do it! Blyleven for the hall!

I want to say C.C. has a good shot at it, but Captain Cheeseburger may eat his way out of contention.

It's pretty idiotic to leave Roy Halladay off the list, he has 108 wins and is 30. He's having a below average season and still has 13 wins. And since he got back to the majors after his blowups when he was young his record is something like 97-35