Gregory Gewirtz

Any argument that Glavine is a worthwhile starter in a game of importance went out the window on the last day of the 2007 season, as much as one game can mean anything. There is no longer any reasonable argument that Glavine's experience or veteran status can supercede his diminished ability, but I don't think I'm saying anything contrary to MOFO opinion here.

Anyway, I thought you all might find this article amusing given how Glavine's Mets career ended.

ESPN: Chat with Jayson Stark - SportsNation

Talk about your rough choices: a 303-game winner or a 347-game winner. That's like asking which you would rather drive: a classic Rolls or a classic Bentley.

Then again, separating Greg Maddux from Tom Glavine has never been easy. Born 20 days apart in 1966. Teammates and rotation-mates for 10 years. Combined to win all but two of the eight National League Cy Youngs handed out between 1991 and '98. Known as much for their IQ as their MPH.

But making the rough choices is what we do here in Hot Stove Heater-ville. So let's examine the arguments for two of the greatest pitchers of our lifetimes:

The case for Glavine
This will come as a shock to all Mets fans who can't forget the last game Glavine ever pitched in New York, but he's still one of the most dependable left-handed starters alive. Yeah, still.

He made more quality starts last year (23) than any left-hander in the league and was second in the majors to C.C. Sabathia (25). He also led all NL left-handers in quality-start percentage (68 percent). And he has been no worse than second in the league in that department for three straight years. (He was at 69 percent and 70 percent the previous two seasons.)

Glavine may not be what he used to be. But if you view him over the six-month long-haul, as opposed to the messy-start-you-can't-forget short haul, he remains a terrific keep-you-in-the-game option. And that's what all those quality starts reflect.

He had more quality starts last year than Johan Santana, Brandon Webb or Matt Cain. And over the last three years, the Glavine-versus-Maddux quality-start standings are no contest:

2007: Glavine 23, Maddux 18
2006: Glavine 22, Maddux 17
2005: Glavine 23, Maddux 18

The case for Maddux
Just because Maddux now averages under 80 pitches a start, some people have the mistaken impression that he has become a guy who taxes his bullpen. Uh, look again. He pitched 198 innings last year. And he now has worked at least 198 in 20 straight seasons. So who else has done that, you ask? Nobody. (Cy Young was the old record-holder, with 19.)

Obviously, Maddux is no longer the chisel-that-Cy-Young, 1.56-ERA machine he used to be. But while Glavine has morphed into a nibble-maniac, Maddux attacks hitters more than ever.

Only seven pitchers in the live-ball era have walked as few hitters as Maddux did last year (25) in a season of 198 innings or more. (It's the third time he's done that, of course.) And at one point last season, the Mad Dog went 244 consecutive hitters between walks -- a sign of just how aggressive he is in the strike zone.

Finally, don't underestimate how effective this guy is, even in his twilight years. Over the last three seasons, Maddux has more wins (42) than Mark Buehrle, Barry Zito or Brad Penny. He has thrown more innings (633) than Roy Halladay, Jake Peavy or Sabathia. He has allowed fewer base runners (11.23 per 9 IP) than Roy Oswalt, Carlos Zambrano or Tim Hudson. And he has a better strikeout-walk ratio (4.19) than Josh Beckett, Brandon Webb or John Smoltz.

The choice
What is it about Greg Maddux, anyway? Even though his numbers don't look much better than Glavine's -- and, in many cases, actually look worse -- nearly everyone I surveyed said they'd rather have Maddux than Glavine. And much as I respect Glavine the pitcher and human being, I'm with them all the way.

Maddux had to make a mid-career readjustment a few years back. But since he made it, he has been the same guy, year-in and year-out, for three straight seasons. (ERAs those last three years: 4.24, 4.20 and 4.14). Glavine, on the other hand, is trending in the wrong direction; his ERAs over the last three years look like this: 3.53, 3.82 and 4.45.

Glavine gives you more quality starts over the course of a season. But he also gives you more starts that turn into utter disasters. Maddux, on the other hand, is one of those rare commodities in this sport: a guy who almost always gives his team exactly what it expects.

Oh, and there's one more thing we shouldn't overlook here. Everyone who has ever played with Greg Maddux looks at him as, essentially, a genius. The ripple effect of that genius on everyone around him is incalculable. As an executive from one of Maddux's old teams put it, "Glavine might win more games, but in the big picture, Maddux will win more games for your team."

__________________

Seaver41

This is the biggest hodge-podge of nonsensical statistics I can ever remember reading. Maddux has thrown 198 innings for 20 straight years and Cy Young has only done that for 19. Funny, I thought the benchmark was 200 innings. I guess we'll just make up a new benchmark to try to prove a point.

And the selective comparisons are also wonderful. But would anyone in their right mind trade Oswalt, Halladay or any of the other comparative pitchers for Greg Maddux or Tom Glavine straight-up today?

Must have been a slow day at Stark's typewriter...

Gregory Gewirtz

Aside from a bunch of statistical nonsense, I also like how, in the chat, Stark has to turn the clock back a dozen years to cite examples of Glavine manning up in a big game, though to be fair, Glavine had some excellent starts down the stretch and in the playoffs in 2006. Nonetheless, when you're 57 years old and declining, your hallmark performances in your prime don't suggest that there's more on the way.

__________________

swataz

These writers must be suffering from cabin fever...is it February 15th yet?

__________________
www.DiscussGlobalWarming.com - Where do YOU stand?

Green Must Go

fixed

__________________
Obama's least favorite scripture: Even while we were with you, you gave you this rule: "Whoever does not work should not eat." - 2 Thes 3:10

FrankStylV7

that's like saying what you'd pick - a little pink pussy or a huge, throbbing co...

wait a second... that's not REALLY the analogy that we wanted there.

__________________
"The place where optimism most flourishes is the lunatic asylum." -

Havelock Ellis

Led, the Revenge

It's what DDP wanted.

Aside from that, it has to be Maddux all the way. Either now or in their respective primes.

Also - F*CK quality starts.

15 Day DL Alou

I dont think the case was ever intended to imply starting either of these guys in their current form.

If either pitcher ever worked with a closer of any significance during their peak years 1993 through 2000 they would be wearing more than one ring.

Led, the Revenge

If so he shouldn't have spent so much time waffling about their "achievements" over the last few years and comparing them to their current contemparies.

15 Day DL Alou

you are talking about Jayson Stark, I did not ever insinuate that he was not an idiot of epic proportions.

MetfanBren

Wasn't the whole debate framed as "Who's better now?" Anything with the words "Who's now?," in it from ESPN still kinda makes my skin crawl...

Mr. Met

I vote for none of the above. I'd rather go with Santana.

After watching Glavine pitch with the season on the line.... I never wish to think of him as a Met again. Ever. He can go rot somewhere.