It seems each generation has a handful of starting pitchers that are head and shoulders regarded as the best.

Working backwards, who am I missing....

Kershaw
Verlander
Scherzer

Maddux
Johnson
Pedro
Clemens

Seaver
Ryan
Palmer
Carlton

Gibson
Koufax
Drysdale
Marichal

Spahn
Wynn
Roberts
Newcome

Feller
Trout
Newhouser

Definitely worth considering

We'll leave that full commentary to the Official Hall of Fame Discussion thread

Smoltz has a decent argument to be there with the Maddux group. His time as a reliever kind of throws a wrench into things.

Gaylord Perry too. Not sure which grouping. A lot of these guys played 20 years so there is a bunch of overlap.

texasaggie2015 said:

---

I would consider DeGrom. When healthy he was just as good as the others in that group.

---

Maybe you start a new group after JV, Scherzer, etc with deGrom and Sale.

Jack Morris should be at least in the running.

strangely enough...Scherzer did not pop into my mind as a generational pitcher

the likes of Tom Glavine and Catfish Hunter seem to have had more memorable careers -- because they were in the postseason so much

I don't think Catfish would be considered generational. Glavine is iffy. Second-best left-handed pitcher of the 90's

W said:

---

strangely enough...Scherzer did not pop into my mind as a generational pitcher

the likes of Tom Glavine and Catfish Hunter seem to have had more memorable careers -- because they were in the postseason so much

I don't think Catfish would be considered generational. Glavine is iffy. Second-best left-handed pitcher of the 90's

---

Scherzer has two World Series and pitched in 30
Games in 20 series across 10 postseasons while Glavine has one World Series and pitched in 35 games across 24 series across 12 postseasons.

Difference isn't really that much. It's probably more to do with Glavine being part of the Braves "dynasty" while Scherzer has moved around.


Catfish wasn't in the postseason nearly as much as either. He just won 5 World Series in a short time span.

Santana was well on his way - he was just phenomenal

Was gonna suggest Schilling too. If you include Clemens with his issues, you have to at least consider Curt.

I think Schilling should a HOFer (along with Glavine and Smoltz and Holliday) but I think that even amongst HOF caliber players there is a sizeable gap between Maddux/Johnson/Clemens/Pedro and the next tier

That's kinda what I'm trying to flush out with this initial question and I probably didn't phrase it well enough initially.....but across the generations who are in the TOP tier

file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/64/04/0AE3480D-B41F-4110-8B9C-9ECCD6B26F57/IMG_5134.jpeg
What about this guy? Three consecutive world championships. Seems worthy to me.
*gawd I suck at posting pics*
It's Vida Blue

Just MLB or Negro leagues too?

Satchel Paige? Most of his best years were in the Negro leagues.

I think the best way to answer this question is the "you need to win game 7, who are you giving the ball to" hypothetical.

You can't go wrong with Unit, Pedro, Mad Dog in that situation, and honestly Smoltz has been there done that as well. I hold Smoltz in high regard that he was able to thrive as a high leverage reliever as well. He and Eckersley both are unicorns in that regard. Schilling proved he was money in October as well, although the weird bloody sock thing works against him for me. Personally I'd wear a bandaid. Let's just say, even though I'm not the biggest schilling fan, he probably isn't going to let me down in a big game. I leave Rocket out here because he's a dewsh.

For our current generation I think I'd take Scherzer, Verlander and Greinke in that situation. I love Kershaw... but for whatever reason he melts in October and can't get it done. He's still an easy HoFer for me, but no way in hell would I put him on the mound in game 7. Likewise, I love deGrom, but he's not giving me more than 6 or 7 innings and I'd have to think about that if he's in my TOP echelon of guys.

I only saw old Nolan, Seaver etc. so I don't think I can comment quite as definitively there re: the game 7 hypothetical.

Twisted Helix said:

---

file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/64/04/0AE3480D-B41F-4110-8B9C-9ECCD6B26F57/IMG_5134.jpeg
What about this guy? Three consecutive world championships. Seems worthy to me.
*gawd I suck at posting pics*
It's Vida Blue

---

Blue was a heavily-recruited high school QB. His senior year he had 3,400 yards passing and 1,600 yards rushing.

AggieEP said:

---

I think the best way to answer this question is the "you need to win game 7, who are you giving the ball to" hypothetical.

You can't go wrong with Unit, Pedro, Mad Dog in that situation, and honestly Smoltz has been there done that as well. I hold Smoltz in high regard that he was able to thrive as a high leverage reliever as well. He and Eckersley both are unicorns in that regard. Schilling proved he was money in October as well, although the weird bloody sock thing works against him for me. Personally I'd wear a bandaid. Let's just say, even though I'm not the biggest schilling fan, he probably isn't going to let me down in a big game. I leave Rocket out here because he's a dewsh.

For our current generation I think I'd take Scherzer, Verlander and Greinke in that situation. I love Kershaw... but for whatever reason he melts in October and can't get it done. He's still an easy HoFer for me, but no way in hell would I put him on the mound in game 7. Likewise, I love deGrom, but he's not giving me more than 6 or 7 innings and I'd have to think about that if he's in my TOP echelon of guys.

I only saw old Nolan, Seaver etc. so I don't think I can comment quite as definitively there re: the game 7 hypothetical.

---

I think that's an interesting question, but different from the OP. I'd take Schilling in that scenario from the 90s/00s but ai don't think he was in the same tier as the other four I listed.

I don't think he should be added per se, but in looking through all time WAR lists, I am always surprised Mike Mussina is so high at 23 all time, ahead of a lot of guys listed above.

texasaggie2015 said:

---

I would consider DeGrom. When healthy he was just as good as the others in that group.

---

DeGrom if he could have stayed healthy would have most definitely been an all-time great, but if you add up all his time healthy and active it is only about 7.5 seasons total.

For different reasons obviously, but he's in that JR Richard category.

That's a pretty good list OP. I guess I had never thought about this before, but as many great, generational hitters that played during the 40s, there weren't that many pitchers in that same category during that time were there?

Jenkins and Blyleven were every bit as good as Perry.

Jenkins would be a near unanimous first ballot selection today. At the time he was black-listed for being caught with a joint or some such nonsense.

It's different, but not much different. My take on it is that to be generational your name needs to come up immediately as the kind of pitcher that you want on the mound no matter what when it's a big game, and the kind of names that pop into my head are guys who proved that's who they were over the course of like 15 years.

That's why someone like Jake Arrieta wouldn't make my list even though for one season he was Bob Gibson good.

In separate pitching related news, Skubal continues to build his resume. Just set the Tigers record with 12 starts this year of 6 innings or more with zero runs given up. With one more he'd match Bob Gibson 13 starts like that from his historic 1968 season.

I think one who, at least from 2010-2016, I'd take over Kershaw, Verlander, or Scherzer, would have to be Madison Bumgarner in a big game.

Until his dirt bike accident in 2017, he was as good as any of those three, and probably the best in the MLB in the post-season over that stretch. (Keep in mind Verlander's meltdown in Game 1 against the Giants in 2012. Pretty sure the Giants also beat Scherzer at least once in the playoffs during that stretch. I know they beat his team.)

Edit: Scherzer got a No Decision in Game 4 of the 2012 WS, which the Giants won in 10 innings.

It's interesting that these seem to be falling out in groups of 4 (for the most part). The next guys (Smoltz/Schilling/Glavine) are all vying to be the 5th starter, so to speak.

Give me Smoltz as my 5th 90s starter and Hoffman as my closer.

Morris and Eck in the 80s.