Last time, we went through the lower half of the top 100 starting pitching careers of the period from 1901-2022 according to the GSDev rating system. This time, we’ll go through most of the top 50, starting with pitchers 50-41:
|
Rank |
Pitcher |
Years |
RSS |
WtSum |
Combo |
bWAR Rnk |
|
50 |
Luis Tiant |
1964-82 |
34.97 |
93.0 |
35.62 |
37 |
|
49 |
Red Ruffing |
1924-47 |
35.12 |
93.1 |
35.71 |
63 |
|
48 |
Dwight Gooden |
1984-2000 |
35.83 |
91.3 |
35.71 |
94 |
|
47 |
Dave Stieb |
1979-98 |
35.68 |
92.1 |
35.79 |
61 |
|
46 |
Johan Santana |
2000-12 |
36.85 |
89.8 |
35.94 |
79 |
|
45 |
Tim Hudson |
1999-2015 |
35.28 |
93.9 |
35.95 |
62 |
|
44 |
Ed Walsh |
1904-17 |
36.94 |
90.1 |
36.03 |
40 |
|
43 |
Felix Hernandez |
2005-19 |
36.02 |
93.5 |
36.24 |
86 |
|
42 |
Hal Newhouser |
1939-54 |
36.62 |
92.2 |
36.28 |
50 |
|
41 |
Bret Saberhagen |
1984-2001 |
36.39 |
95.5 |
36.81 |
53 |
Ed Walsh and Johan Santana are a fun combination. They pitched a century apart, and that gap is evident both in their pitching styles (Walsh specialized in the spitball, which would be banned shortly after his career ended, while Santana’s pitch mix included a slider, which hadn’t been invented when Walsh was active) and in their results (Walsh’s career-high in innings was nearly double Santana’s, while Santana’s strikeout rate was over 60% higher). But they also both dominated the league over relatively brief peaks (five #1 finishes between them, not including Santana’s #2 placement in 2004 which ranks among the 50 highest GSDev scores ever). Walsh is in the Hall of Fame (having the lowest ERA of all time probably helped), while Santana was summarily dismissed from the ballot after one appearance. But I enjoy having them not only nearly tied overall, but nearly tied in both components of the combined score.
There are
85-90 primary pitchers in the Hall of Fame, including pre-1900 pitchers, Negro
Leaguers, and relievers; limiting the field to MLB starting pitchers from 1901 to present puts the total at roughly 60. Pitchers ranked around 50 should therefore be on the high end of the Cooperstown borderline. But
only three of these ten pitchers are in the Hall, and of the ones who aren’t,
only Hernandez has an active candidacy. It’s just a collection of guys who have
either a very strong peak or a solidly productive career, but not both. Whatever you think about the candidacies of Santana, Hudson, Saberhagen, and Tiant, they’re
at least comparable to prior inductees who are seen as deserving.
Next group, 40-31:
|
Rank |
Pitcher |
Years |
RSS |
WtSum |
Combo |
bWAR Rnk |
|
40 |
Don Drysdale |
1956-69 |
36.59 |
95.2 |
36.86 |
47 |
|
39 |
Cy Young |
1901-11 |
37.44 |
93.7 |
36.99 |
27 |
|
38 |
Jim Bunning |
1955-71 |
36.77 |
96.0 |
37.10 |
49 |
|
37 |
David Cone |
1987-2003 |
37.31 |
97.4 |
37.64 |
46 |
|
36 |
CC Sabathia |
2001-19 |
38.43 |
102.5 |
39.20 |
45 |
|
35 |
Tom Glavine |
1987-2008 |
39.22 |
103.7 |
39.83 |
23 |
|
34 |
Carl Hubbell |
1928-43 |
39.31 |
103.7 |
39.87 |
28 |
|
33 |
Sandy Koufax |
1955-66 |
41.31 |
98.7 |
39.90 |
71 |
|
32 |
Phil Niekro |
1965-87 |
39.52 |
104.5 |
40.15 |
9 |
|
31 |
Juan Marichal |
1960-75 |
40.15 |
104.6 |
40.47 |
44 |
There is a
gap of 1.56 points between Cone and Sabathia. Not only is that easily the
largest single-spot separation in the rankings that we’ve seen so far, it is larger
than the margins between the top and bottom pitchers in any of the first six groups of ten on the list. And even that understates how impressive
it is; each successive point in these scores becomes more difficult to achieve,
so gaining 1.56 points starting from a score of 37 is tougher than the same increase starting from 30.
It is also placed in a narratively convenient spot. Not every pitcher who outranks Sabathia on this list will be in the Hall of Fame (even among those who are eligible). But none of the pitchers ahead of CC who haven’t been inducted have been kept out primarily due to a lack of on-field accomplishments. Which is to say, we’ve reached the point at which you generally have to have a specific reason to be kept out of the Hall rather than a specific reason to get in.
Also, I promise this entire post won’t be a giant discussion of the Hall of Fame. Let’s talk about Cy Young! He does pretty well for someone whose career is only half-covered by our current data. Retrosheet has recently released box scores for the 1898-1900 seasons, which means I’ll be able to pull GSDev numbers for those years as soon as Baseball Reference grabs that information (which should be some time this offseason); hopefully there will be more pre-1900 releases moving forward. I’m not sure how far I’d want to take these rankings, as pitching in the 1870s bore almost no resemblance to the early 1900s, let alone the early 2000s. But something like the establishment of the modern pitching distance in 1893 seems like a reasonable starting point, and that would allow me to get a more complete picture of Young as well as some of the other turn-of-the-century aces who miss out on this list. Guys like Rube Waddell, Joe McGinnity and Vic Willis might still miss out, for reasons we’ve discussed at length already, but it would be good to know for sure.
Niekro vs.
Koufax is a fun matchup. Going by total bWAR, Niekro is #9 and Koufax is #71; I
suspect that would be almost exactly the opposite of the conventional wisdom on these two pitchers. There is some WAR vs. GSDev difference here; if you just look at
total GSDev, Niekro ranks lower than in WAR (#22) and Koufax is higher (#60). But the far more
important factor is adjusting for peak, a category that treats Koufax very well
and Niekro less so. By GSDev, Koufax has more seasons in the all-time top 30
(three) than Niekro does in the top 300 (two). (WAR isn’t as down on Niekro’s
peak; as a rubber-armed knuckleballer, his best years had exceptional volume and good effectiveness. GSDev prefers good volume and exceptional effectiveness, as
we’ve discussed previously.)
On we go to our next set of 10:
|
Rank |
Pitcher |
Years |
RSS |
WtSum |
Combo |
bWAR Rnk |
|
30 |
Dazzy Vance |
1915-34 |
40.78 |
103.4 |
40.56 |
41 |
|
29 |
Zack Greinke |
2004-22 |
39.99 |
106.5 |
40.76 |
25 |
|
28 |
Robin Roberts |
1948-66 |
40.40 |
107.2 |
41.11 |
17 |
|
27 |
Jim Palmer |
1965-84 |
41.01 |
109.1 |
41.79 |
32 |
|
26 |
Don Sutton |
1966-88 |
42.67 |
110.3 |
42.85 |
29 |
|
25 |
Kevin Brown |
1986-2005 |
42.50 |
112.5 |
43.18 |
30 |
|
24 |
Ferguson Jenkins |
1966-83 |
42.47 |
112.8 |
43.24 |
19 |
|
23 |
John Smoltz |
1988-2009 |
43.09 |
113.7 |
43.72 |
36 |
|
22 |
Bob Feller |
1936-56 |
43.15 |
113.7 |
43.76 |
39 |
|
21 |
Warren Spahn |
1942-65 |
44.10 |
115.2 |
44.52 |
12 |
If there’s
ever a social media-style recommendation algorithm for baseball
history enthusiasts, I suspect that Dazzy Vance would become one of the chief “You may also
like” options for fans of Sandy Koufax. Both were strikeout artists for the
Dodgers (Vance led the NL in K’s for seven straight years). Both performed
brilliantly in ERA and FIP (Koufax led the NL 5 and 6 times, respectively;
Vance, 3 and 7). And both had comparatively short careers for pitchers of their
historical stature (Koufax had 321 starts, Vance 349; nobody ahead of them had
fewer than 395). But both of them dominated their leagues enough over their brief
tenures to stand up to pitchers who lasted over twice as long.
As a bonus
note, if you compare their careers by age, there’s virtually no overlap; Koufax
retired at age 30, while Vance had his first season as a regular starter at 31. It’s
like Koufax retired in 1966, time traveled 44 years to the past, learned to
pitch with his other arm, and didn’t miss a beat.
Speaking of
Vance, it’s worth pointing out that we’re starting to see pitchers who were
“best of the decade” show up (we’ll evaluate this by sum of squares as this is much
easier to apply over limited timespans than weighted sum). Technically we’ve
already had the best pitcher of 1900-09 (Cy Young), 1940-49 (Hal Newhouser),
and 1980-89 (Dave Stieb). This group adds the best pitcher of the 1920s (Vance)
and 1950s (Robin Roberts), plus Bob Feller, who surpasses Newhouser in the ‘40s
if you give him any credit at all for nearly four years in the military, and Warren
Spahn, who’s a close second behind Roberts in the ‘50s. (Of course, using only
decades that run from 0 to 9 is somewhat artificial, and at some point I may
look at “pitcher of the decade” for a wider variety of options.)
We’ve already spent some time discussing pitchers who may be underrated on this list due to making a significant number of relief appearances. John Smoltz is more recent than most of those pitchers, but
famously served as a closer for a few years in the middle of his career. As
such, it may be a bit surprising to see him ranked higher by GSDev than by bWAR,
which credits him for that relief work. However, Smoltz was also famously an
outstanding postseason pitcher (187.1 innings of 2.55 ERA in 27 starts), and
had a particularly exceptional postseason in 1996 (5 starts, 0.95 ERA, 2.55
FIP) on the heels of his best regular season, which is always a helpful
combination for your GSDev peak rating.
Let’s close
this one out with pitchers 20-11:
|
Rank |
Pitcher |
Years |
RSS |
WtSum |
Combo |
bWAR Rnk |
|
20 |
Christy Mathewson |
1901-16 |
43.90 |
115.9 |
44.55 |
8 |
|
19 |
Max Scherzer |
2008-22 |
43.90 |
116.0 |
44.57 |
26 |
|
18 |
Mike Mussina |
1991-2008 |
43.88 |
116.1 |
44.58 |
18 |
|
17 |
Roy Halladay |
1998-2013 |
44.41 |
116.0 |
44.82 |
38 |
|
16 |
Gaylord Perry |
1962-83 |
46.11 |
121.9 |
46.84 |
11 |
|
15 |
Justin Verlander |
2005-22 |
46.91 |
124.1 |
47.66 |
22 |
|
14 |
Bert Blyleven |
1970-92 |
47.25 |
124.1 |
47.83 |
10 |
|
13 |
Clayton Kershaw |
2008-22 |
47.63 |
125.9 |
48.37 |
24 |
|
12 |
Bob Gibson |
1959-75 |
48.52 |
128.5 |
49.32 |
20 |
|
11 |
Steve Carlton |
1965-88 |
48.76 |
129.2 |
49.57 |
15 |
Half of these pitchers have pitched in this century, and three of them were still active as of 2025. With the exception of Mussina (who joins #59 Jerry Koosman as the two pitchers whose rankings are exactly the same in GSDev and bWAR), all of them fare notably better in these rankings than by total WAR. And the active pitchers have all made at least some progress over the three seasons that we can’t yet fully include in the rankings. (I do feel pretty confident that Scherzer has at least passed Mussina, given the margin of 0.01 points of combined score between them.)
If you’re
following the detailed numbers in the table especially fervently, you may also
notice that in this group of pitchers, all ten have combined scores higher than their RSS. The primary group of pitchers whose RSS score exceeds their weighted sum
is short-career, high-peak pitchers (Vance, Koufax, the half of Cy Young’s
career we have available), and we’re now at a point in the rankings where that
style of pitcher just can’t keep up, no matter how high their peaks are. If you give the active pitchers credit for their 2023-25 seasons, the shortest careers in
this group are Halladay’s and Mathewson’s, and both of them still had eleven
seasons as aces and eight in the top quartile.
Halladay and Mathewson are an interesting analog, actually. They pitched about a century apart, but both threw high-volume innings for their time (leading their leagues in shutouts four times apiece), both had excellent control (Halladay led his leagues in BB/9 three times, Mathewson seven), both had famous postseason feats (Mathewson’s three shutouts in the 1905 World Series, Halladay’s playoff no-hitter), both would be somewhat overshadowed historically by greater aces who arose toward the end of their careers, and both passed away at young ages (Mathewson died at 45 and still outlived Halladay by five years).
Finally, let’s extend the table we used to break down the various seasonal achievements from each group of the bottom 50 – seasons as an ace, top-half ace,
top-quartile ace, and #1 ranked pitcher in MLB:
|
Group |
Ace |
THA |
TQA |
No1 |
|
100-91 |
54 |
33 |
17 |
2 |
|
90-81 |
68 |
41 |
21 |
3 |
|
80-71 |
60 |
37 |
24 |
5 |
|
70-61 |
71 |
53 |
22 |
2 |
|
60-51 |
81 |
45 |
20 |
4 |
|
50-41 |
76 |
50 |
33 |
11 |
|
40-31 |
84 |
61 |
43 |
11 |
|
30-21 |
103 |
78 |
44 |
13 |
|
20-11 |
120 |
96 |
71 |
17 |
This table makes the accelerating improvement between groups significantly more obvious than it was last time. In particular, pitchers 20-11
are responsible for more combined #1 finishes than pitchers 100-51. The
breakdown: Gibson and Kershaw with four apiece, Carlton, Verlander, Halladay, and
Mathewson with two each, and Perry with one. Blyleven, Mussina, and Scherzer have no
seasons at #1, and Mussina in particular is the highest-ranked pitcher without
a top-two finish (he reached #3 three times, in 1992, 1995, and 2001). In case
you’re curious, the best pitcher never to crack the top 3 is #36 CC Sabathia,
the best never to reach the top 4 is #45 Tim Hudson, and the next several
options are all covered by #66 Dennis Martinez, who peaked at #9 seasonally.
(If you’re wondering how he made the top 100 with that limitation, it helped to
have six finishes between 9 and 13.)
There is a
lot more that could be said about this group. I haven’t brought up the
long-running, ultimately successful campaign to get Blyleven into the Hall of Fame,
or the way Gibson’s exceptional 1968 season and playoff record somehow result in the
rest of his extended, high-level prime being underrated, or the whole discussion of
why renowned cheater Gaylord Perry is regarded differently than other renowned
cheaters. Honestly, we’ve reached the point at which every pitcher practically
deserves his own miniature essay.
And next
time, as we go through the top 10, that’s exactly what they’ll be getting.
