Has anyone ever heard of a Horrible Team with a Great Pitching Staff? And don't give me the Cubs with Zambrano, Wood and Prior with no Bullpen and Medical Bills higher than the Pirates Payroll.
2007-02-01 15:03:09 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
San Diego Padres...
Jake Peavy
Greg Maddux
Chris Young
David Wells
Clay Hensley
2007-02-01 15:07:37 · answer #1 · answered by ? 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think in answering your question I am not sure about what your looking for. Is it a bad team with a great starting rotation or a bad team with good rotation and great middle relief and closer? There are teams that have had a roster boasting many great pitchers and the team had a horrible season and then wind up winning a championship, or playing for one, later on in time. For instance the 2003 Detriot tigers who had Mike Maroth Jeremy Bonderman Nate Robertson Wilfredo Ledezma Jamie Walker Chris Spurling and Fernando Rodney were 49-113 and all these players wound up on the 2006 World Series bound Tigers. Also the1990 Braves were 65-97 with 10 pitchers who were on the 1991 World Series team including Steve Avery Tom Glavine John Smoltz Mike Staton Charlie Leibrant and Kent Merker most of whom were vital in their 1995 World Series Championship. In the end if a team had a great pitching staff they end up being playoff contenders down the road, even the Expos had World Series potential in 1994 before the Strike ended the season. I also think consideration must be made of a pitchers experience and maturation as classic examples of teams with great pitchers and horrible seasons These pitchers are young and haven't reached their prime and potential. Otherwise, teams with great productive non-injured in their prime pitching staffs have strong seasons and this also includes the understanding relief pitching is included in the argument. Even the Astros with pathetic offensive production were still playoff contenders. There are no examples of teams with two, healthy, top of the Rotation pitchers having more than two consecutive sub-five hundred or non-contending playoff teams.
2007-02-01 17:18:09 · answer #2 · answered by mrc678 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How about this one? They may not have been great but they were pretty darn good.
1. A future HOF'er with a 16-12 record and a 2.20 ERA
2. A 19-game winning rookie with a 2.08 ERA
3. Another future HOF'er with 133 Ks in 134 IP and an ERA of 3.0i9
4. The three remaining starters with ERAs of 2.96, 2.28, and 2.76
5. The two most used relievers with ERAs of 2.41 and 2.70
This team finished in 9th place in a 10-team league. Who were they? The 1968 New York Mets.
(1. Tom Seaver 2. Jerry Koosman 3. Nolan Ryan 4. Don Cardwell, Jim McAndrew, Dick Selma 5. Cal Koonce, Ron Taylor)
Also of note, the 1968 Chicago White Sox : Joel Horlen, Tommy John, Gary Peters, Wilbur Wood, Hoyt Wilhelm, Don McMahon, et al. Four pitchers with an ERA under 2.00. Finished 9th of 10 by losing 95 games.
2007-02-01 15:20:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think there has ever been a great pitching staff on a horrible team. The Marlins and the Astros had pretty good pitching staffs last year but htey weren't what you would consider horrible. Oswalt-Clemens-Pettite is pretty good. If a team has a great pitching staff they can't be horrible-unless they were injured or had no run support but even with little run support, they shouldn't be horrible. Just like there haven't been any horrible pitching staff's on great teams.
2007-02-01 15:13:14 · answer #4 · answered by Bob Loblaw 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There have been great pitching staffs on bad offensive teams (check 2005-2006 Astros). Its hard to call a pitching staff great if the team as a whole stinks though. Great pitching staffs should equal wins in my book.
2007-02-01 15:14:17 · answer #5 · answered by greenhat1981 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋