>>
>>IMO when you're looking at a career, winning close to 100 more games means more than a small difference in inside-baseball stats like WHIP.
>
>
>Mike, I understand what you are saying, but the dynamics of the game are such that WHIP can still potentially be important.
>
>There's a statistic I wish were available (I'm assuming it's not)....W/L record of the team in which the starter begins the game, even if he didn't factor into the decision.
>
>For instance...years ago the Phils had Joe Blanton. Blanton didn't have a fantastic W/L record, but he kept the Phils in plenty of games that they eventually won.
>
>By contrast, a higher WHIP can POTENTIALLY mean a pitcher had a no-decision in the game where his team lost. I do recall a few games the Phils played against Glavine over the years where Glavine left with an ND in a game where Philly won. (Yes, I know that's not scientific, hence my interest in such a stat).
>
>Again, Glavine was a great pitcher and deserves the HOF. But aside from career wins, Schilling is better than Glavine in every category.

Pretty sure Glavine was the starter for the Mets on the last day of the 2007 season. The Mets and Phils were tied for the division lead, after the Phils had been down 7 with 17 to go. The Mets game started at 1, while the Phils started at 1:30. Glavine gave up something like 7 in the first inning, so by the time the Phils started, it looked awfully good. (Just checked and my memory on this seems to be accurate.)

Obviously, that was not typical of his career.

Tamar