Andy Pettitte vs. Mike Mussina

[White Knight]

I think this poll will be interesting. Both have similar records and great winning percentages, and some say both are just a little below HOF. Then again, some say both will be in, or one or the other.

[Bothrops Atrox]

I wonder what Mussina's record would look like if he played with the Yankees his whole career instead of spending huge chunk of it with poor Orioles teams

Either way, Mussina disallowed runs at a prodigious clip, saving over 450 runs compared to the average pitcher while Pettitte only saved around 280 compared to an average pitcher. A 6 point ERA+ gap and almost 400-500 innings advantage is huge. That doesn't even count WAR, if one would chose, which shoes Mussina with a massive lead.

[bluesky5]

Mussina

Pettitte is a notch short everywhere. Don't think he can catch him unless he pitches phenomenally the next 3-4 years.

A. Pettitte: 54.5 WAR, 245 W, 3.86 ERA, 117 ERA+, 1.352 WHIP | postseason: 44 G 3.81 ERA 19-11, 1.305 WHIP
M. Mussina: 78.1 WAR, 270 W, 3.68 ERA, 123 ERA+, 1.192 WHIP | postseason: 23 G 3.42 ERA 7-8, 1.103 WHIP

[fenrir]

Mussina, no doubt

[willshad]

I wonder what Mussina's record would look like if he played with the Yankees his whole career instead of spending huge chunk of it with poor Orioles teams

Either way, Mussina disallowed runs at a prodigious clip, saving over 450 runs compared to the average pitcher while Pettitte only saved around 280 compared to an average pitcher. A 6 point ERA+ gap and almost 400-500 innings advantage is huge. That doesn't even count WAR, if one would chose, which shoes Mussina with a massive lead.

Playing for the Orioles did not seem to hurt his winning percentage. From 1992-1999 his record was 132-61...a .681 winning %! Even in the years that he did not pitch well for the Os, he seemed to have a great record . I don't see how much better it could have gotten had he played for the Yankees.

[Bothrops Atrox]

Playing for the Orioles did not seem to hurt his winning percentage. From 1992-1999 his record was 132-61...a .681 winning %! Even in the years that he did not pitch well for the Os, he seemed to have a great record . I don't see how much better it could have gotten had he played for the Yankees.

I looked it up, and they were both 5.4 runs per 9 innings support compared to 4.8 for league average, so you are right - their run support was about even.

That, of course does nothing to change the fact that Mussina was light-years better than Pettitte at not allowing runs to score.

[Cowtipper]

Mussina by a mile here.

[PVNICK]

Look at their post season records v. ERA and then maybe the "woulda had a better record if he was a career Yankee" line of thinking looks a whole lot better. Pettitte is 19-11 Mussina 7-8 yet Mussina gives up 0.39 runs less per game. Mussina also is in the mix for top AL starter (or 3) or RHP for the 90s. Pettitte was not near the top after 98 other than maybe pone or two other random seasons.

[GiambiJuice]

I don't see how this is even close.

Mussina by a lot.

[Los Bravos]

I wonder what Mussina's record would look like if he played with the Yankees his whole career instead of spending huge chunk of it with poor Orioles teams

That seems like a bit of an overstatement, to me.

1992 89-73
1993 85-77
1994 63-49
1995 71-73
1996 88-74
1997 98-64 (Best team in the game that season)
1998 79-83
1999 78-84
2000 74-88

[GiambiJuice]

That seems like a bit of an overstatement, to me.

1992 89-73
1993 85-77
1994 63-49
1995 71-73
1996 88-74
1997 98-64 (Best team in the game that season)
1998 79-83
1999 78-84
2000 74-88

So they won 90 games once in nine seasons. That's pretty poor.

[csh19792001]

So they won 90 games once in nine seasons. That's pretty poor.

Only one mired in the Yankee-Centric Universe Model would/could muse as such.....

Here's a challenge: name even 10 pitchers who pitched at least 18 (full) seasons in MLB and had better teams behind them, overall, than Andy Pettitte.

And, of course, there's the obvious spectre of steroids.

The guy had massive advantages Mussina didn't have.

Mussina was better than Pettitte, and by a very wide margin, at that.

[Bothrops Atrox]

That seems like a bit of an overstatement, to me.

1992 89-73
1993 85-77
1994 63-49
1995 71-73
1996 88-74
1997 98-64 (Best team in the game that season)
1998 79-83
1999 78-84
2000 74-88

I never implied the Orioles were horrible, but the Yankees records over that same time-span was much better, right? Enough to garner an extra 30 wins? Maybe,

[Los Bravos]

I never implied the Orioles were horrible, but the Yankees records over that same time-span was much better, right? Enough to garner an extra 30 wins? Maybe,

'92 76-86
'93 88-74
'94 70-43
'95 79-65
'96 92-70
'97 96-66
'98 114-48
'99 98-64
'00 87-74

It's pretty even through '97, then the teams go in divergent directions.

I just objected to that term in reference to most of Mike's teams in Baltimore. I watched him pitch a lot of games then and they were generally a high level squad.

Still, your key point (that Pettitte benefitted much more from his team that Mussina did his) is indisputable.

[hairmetalfreek]

I voted Mussina. I believe he should be a Hall of Famer (though I'm afraid he'll get the Blyleven treatment). No way on Petitte.

And BTW, I'm glad Mussina played most of his career in Baltimore. I probably wouldn't like him as much if he was a career Yankee.