The comparison is so inviting that even a world-class dunce like yours truly has made it: With Cliff Lee, the Phillies would seem to have a rotation capable of challenging the best ever, and I’m of the opinion the best rotation ever worked here in the ’90s. Yes, there’s a major caveat: The Braves of the ‘9os went out and did it, while the Phillies must go out and do it. That said …
Roy Halladay and Cole Hamels. Roy Oswalt and now Cliff Lee. On paper, that’s pretty stinkin’ good. (Apologies to Mark Richt for borrowing his line.)
And it’s not just this world-class dunce who thinks so. All the smart guys who crunch baseball numbers are saying so, too.
From Dan Szymborski of ESPN Insider (link requires registration): “The 2011 Philadelphia Phillies rotation isn’t meant to just win; it’s meant to demolish other teams … The Phillies’ new rotation could be the best one we’ve seen in more than 40 years — and beating out staffs with [Tom] Seaver, [Bob] Gibson, [Steve] Carlton, [Dwight] Gooden and ‘Greg] Maddux is no small matter.”
From Tom Verducci of SI.com: “It’s the rotation with the best pure stuff and proven track record since the 1966 Dodgers of Sandy Koufax, Don Drysdale, Don Sutton and Claude Osteen.”
From Buster Olney of ESPN Insider (requires registration): “On paper, it’s the best rotation we’ve seen in about 20 years.”
From Eric Seidman of Baseball Prospectus (requires registration): “The 1998 Braves [of Maddux, tom Glavine, John Smoltz and Denny Neagle] had the best rotation going into their season in baseball history, and with the addition of Cliff Lee, the Phillies rank second … Do not forget the dynamic Braves rotations of the 1990s. They are still the gold standard in starting rotations, though history may soon be rewritten.”
A dissenting note from Cliff Corcoran of SI.com: “The greatest rotations since 1954 … were those of the 1997 Braves and 1966 Dodgers, both of which were worth 33.6 wins above replacement. That shouldn’t come as any great surprise. The Dodgers of 1966 were the last team to feature Sandy Koufax and Don Drysdale and the first to include rookie Don Sutton. That’s three Hall of Famers to match the ‘97 Braves trio of Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and John Smoltz, all of whom are Cooperstown-bound … Where the Phillies’ four fall short is not on the back end, but up top. As great as Halladay is, he has never dominated over a full season the way Koufax or Maddux did.”
Projecting greatness, or the lack thereof, always makes for prime Hot Stove kindling. I know. In February 1993 I did a 100-inch story — for you lay people, that’s a long one — on where the Braves’ new rotation stacked up against the all-time best. I spoke with Bob Feller, who was part of a dandy one in Cleveland, and with Ray Miller, who was Earl Weaver’s pitching coach with the Orioles in the late ‘90, and with the aforementioned Sutton. Heck, I even went to the library — Al Gore hadn’t yet brought the Internet to the masses — to look stuff up.
And now I direct you to this fine (and lengthy) story by Jayson Stark of ESPN, in which he quotes Leo Mazzone, who knew the Braves’ rotations better than anyone. Rockin’ Leo employs a bit of revisionist history by saying the Braves “chose” to sign Maddux over Barry Bonds in December 1992 — actually, the Braves were devastated they didn’t land Bonds — but otherwise makes salient points. He likens Halladay to Maddux, Lee to Glavine, Oswalt to Smoltz and Hamels to Steve Avery.
Leo’s conclusion: “So these [Philly] guys all have signature pitches and stuff and makeup as good as anybody in the game in my opinion. And Lee, I think, is the best signing since Maddux in ‘93. But the one thing that Braves staff will always have is the longevity of greatness.”
And that’s the difference: The Braves’ rotation of the ’90s essentially stuck together. Maddux was 26 when he signed with the Braves. Lee is 32. Halladay and Oswalt are 33. These Phillies surely won’t have the staying power the Braves did. But they’re going to be mighty wicked in 2011.
By Mark Bradley
162 comments Add your comment
Heisenberg
December 16th, 2010
12:53 pm
For all of those hoping the Philly trio of 30 somethings will loose their stuff as they age, I would not count on that meaning they will be less effective. None of these guys are classic power pitchers who once they drop a couple MPH off the fastball are no longer effective. They know how to pitch and will make adjustments just like another famous trio of 30 something pitchers did in the 90s. The injury part is unpredictable and could happen to anybody at anytime. So barring injury, expect these guys to be able to pitch effectively (maybe not dominating) into their late 30s.
Hoping for them to loose their stuff is not how to compete. Stepping up to the challenge is what is called for.
Ronald Millsaps
December 16th, 2010
12:56 pm
“Jinx Master”–Kindly examine the payrolls of those two Florida championship teams, and learn how to spell Werth’s first name.
By the way, I don’t judge teams/seasons by simply who won the title. Each team has “x” amount of talent, and the best TEAM last season might’ve been the Royals under Ned Yost or the Orioles under Buck Showalter.
Heisenberg
December 16th, 2010
1:05 pm
Best team Royals? Orioles? The smokey mountain rain could be clouding your vision. Oh never mind you are blind. Just kidding – no personal attacks. Could not resist the puns!
Ronald Millsaps
December 16th, 2010
1:05 pm
In response to the Michael Vick comment, yeah, he only made the playoffs twice when here. Remember that he only played in 2003 when the Falcons already were mathematically eliminated, though, so scratch that year off, and while he was uninspired in 2005 and 2006, he also had the inexcusable West Coast offense strapped around him.
You can ask ajc.com employees; I bashed the idea of using him in this offense about a million times. The only on-air person I ever heard bash it was Joe Theismann.
Dan Reeves was a fine influence on him; Mora and Blank were not, and why would they never address the offensive-line issues? Pretty unwise strategy.
No need for profanity or irreverence on here, folks.
Back to the Phillies’ rotation, people are spinning the question too much. Is this conglomeration of pitchers at a higher plateau than the Braves’ from the early-mid 90s? How long they have been together is a moot point.
GaryinBham
December 16th, 2010
1:56 pm
Phillistein, go find your cousin Franken and ask him about getting your bolts tightened. Besides, your name on here is a clever little play on the people of Goliath in the Bible. Hey, maybe that’s your role model for this team–big blowhard who goes down from a single stone to his clunker and gets his head lopped off by his own sword. It resembles your overpowering appearance with your “unbeatable team” in last year’s playoffs–a no-hitter, a roar, and an exit home. Go away.
Don
December 16th, 2010
2:26 pm
Stop with “Phillies bought their starting pitching” nonsense. The only free agent among the starters is Lee. The rest were traded for using home-grown talent. Can the Braves say that?
Heisenberg
December 16th, 2010
3:04 pm
Don, I believe they can. Lowe was FA signing. Hudson acquired in trade with Oakland, then extended. JJ, Hanson, Medlen, Minor, Beachy all came up via farm system.
Mark Bradley
December 16th, 2010
3:07 pm
Jurrjens came from Detroit in the Edgar Renteria trade, FYI
Heisenberg
December 16th, 2010
3:16 pm
I stand corrected there. Thanx MB.. But we still used our own assets to get him. Thus the construction of Braves staff is similar. Nobody is buying anything except Yanks & Sox. At the end of the season, does that really matter how you put it together? So long as what was assembled got the job done.
James
December 16th, 2010
3:42 pm
I like the Phillies rotation better I think they will help the Phillies win more championships than what Smoltz, Glavine & Maddux did with the Braves.
LawDawg
December 16th, 2010
4:38 pm
Not…even…close.
Oswalt is done, Hamels is average, and Lee is nowhere close to the Big 3. Only Halladay really compares favorably over both the long term and looking to the future.
Army Strong
December 16th, 2010
4:44 pm
Baseball is played on fields, not paper. I’ll take proven winners together over a long period of time over individual winners over maybe one year