Who had the better career....?

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,725
For various reasons, these four are the four that I want to compare. Who do you all think had the better career, and why? If you could choose one of these guys' MLB careers, which one would you have picked, and why?

(a) Mike Mussina
(b) Curt Schilling
(c) Andy Pettitte
(d) David Cone

All essentially contemporaries (considerable overlap, anyway).

Mussina (1991-2008)
- RS: 3562.2 ip, 270-153 (.638), 3.68 era, 3.57 fip, 123 era+, 1.20 whip, 7.1 k/9, 82.8 bWAR
- PS: 139.2 ip, 7-8 (.467), 3.42 era, 1.10 whip, 9.3 k/9
- 0 CYA, 5x All-Star
- 0 WS champion
- Hall of Famer

Schilling (1988-2007)
- RS: 3261.0 ip, 216-146 (.597), 3.46 era, 3.23 fip, 127 era+, 1.14 whip, 8.6 k/9, 80.5 bWAR
- PS: 133.1 ip, 11-2 (.846), 2.23 era, 0.97 whip, 8.1 k/9
- 0 CYA, 6x All-Star
- 3x WS champion, 1x WS MVP

Pettitte (1995-2013)
- RS: 3316.0 ip, 256-153 (.626), 3.85 era, 3.74 fip, 117 era+, 1.35 whip, 6.6 k/9, 60.6 bWAR
- PS: 276.2 ip, 19-11 (.633), 3.81 era, 1.30 whip, 6.0 k/9
- 0 CYA, 3x All-Star
- 5x WS champion

Cone (1986-2003)
- RS: 2898.2 ip, 194-126 (.606), 3.46 era, 3.57 fip, 121 era+, 1.26 whip, 8.3 k/9, 61.6 bWAR
- PS: 111.1 ip, 7-2 (.778), 3.80 era, 1.36 whip, 7.6 k/9
- 1 CYA, 5x All-Star
- 5x WS champion
 

RIrooter09

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2008
4,445
Mussina. He pitched the majority of his career in the AL East during the height of the steroid era.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
34,443
Rotten Apple
Other than Roger's friend, the strike hurt these guys and took out a prime year of their career. I'd prefer to be a WS hero like Schilling but not the person he turned out to be.
 

Ale Xander

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
22,191
Schilling, mainly because of the K/BB rate. Rings don't hurt either (compared to Mussina). Judging on on the field performance only.

I think there's a large gap between 2 (Moose) and 3.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,725
I feel like the right answer is Mussina. Although he is the guy with the fewest big time postseason moments.
Each guy has his own merits, I think, which is what makes this kind of conversation fun. To me, the argument for and against each guy...

Mussina
- For: Already a HOFer. Most wins (and yeah we know wins are not necessarily indicative of ability and performance, but damn, 270 wins is a LOT of wins). Excellent postseason numbers in terms of era, whip, and k/9. And @RIrooter09 made a good point about the steroid era. Also, the most bWAR of the group.
- Against: Zero CYAs. And zero WS titles. Didn't have many "signature" moments, despite a HOF career. Never, not once, was he the best pitcher in his league at any point in his career, even during his best seasons.

Schilling
- For: Legendary big-game pitcher. Bloody sock. Incredible postseason numbers. A true, old-fashioned horse. WS MVP. Elite WHIP numbers. More AS appearances than anyone else on this list.
- Against: Not as many wins as you'd expect, given his longevity. Not as good a winning % as well. Never won a CYA.

Pettitte
- For: Steady and solid for a long, long time. 256 wins is a ton. Outstanding postseason resumé. 276.2 career postseasons innings pitched - are you KIDDING me?? That's insane. And did so in outstanding fashion. Won an ALCS MVP. 5x WS winner, and he had a lot to do with those - didn't just ride other peoples' coattails.
- Against: Never even close to the best pitcher in his league at any point. 0 CYAs. "Only" 3 all-star appearances. Fewest bWAR in the group.

Cone
- For: Perfect game was legendary. 5x all-star. 5x WS champion. Only member of this group to win a CYA. A bunch of signature moments.
- Against: "Only" 194 wins. Postseason stats worse than his regular season stats (only guy in the group that could be said for). Didn't log nearly as many innings as the other three.

I think it's really hard to pick. (which is one reason I put them all together)
 

GoJeff!

Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2007
408
Los Angeles
Seems like Schilling easily. The fact that this is even a question indicates how crappy his post baseball life/image has become.

I can see an argument that Mussina is better, but Schilling has much better moments and a few standout starts. The other two are not close.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
2,358
I hate that I actually like a MFY more than a Red Sox post-season hero that helped to bring a WS to Boston after 86 years and I'm pretty sure that if Mussina was on the '04 they would still have won though.
As just a pitcher though.... unfortunately Schilling is the best and should end up in the HoF. The other 3 are borderline with Mussina likely just on the "in" side.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
9,855
The stats in the opening post speak for themselves, Schilling had the best career and was also a phenomenal post-season pitcher. He's hurt a bit in wins and win percentage because those mid to late 90's Philadelphia teams were trash. All of these guys also suffer from peaking while Pedro/Maddux/Johnson were in their prime and Clemens' second wave.

In 1997 Schilling had a FIP of 2.62 and struck out 319, and finished fourth in the Cy Young voting, behind two incredible Pedro/Maddux seasons and somehow Denny Neagle. In 2002 Schilling went 23-7, struck out 316, had a FIP of 2.40 and a WHIP of .0968, and wasn't even the best pitcher on his own team (The Big Unit, with an ERA+ of 195 and 334 Ks, 10.7 WAR).
 

jmm57

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,303
If you take the off field stuff away it’s clearly Schilling, people just hate him so much now. Mussina is close, but I think clearly behind Schilling.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,710
Maine
I hate that I actually like a MFY more than a Red Sox post-season hero that helped to bring a WS to Boston after 86 years and I'm pretty sure that if Mussina was on the '04 they would still have won though.
As just a pitcher though.... unfortunately Schilling is the best and should end up in the HoF. The other 3 are borderline with Mussina likely just on the "in" side.
If Moose had signed with the Sox instead of the Yankees, 2003 might have turned out differently, let alone 2004.

To the OP question, I lean toward saying Mussina, but it is close between he and Schilling. I say Mussina in part because of his durability and spending his entire career in the AL East. He never missed time with a significant injury and while Schilling was facing the pitcher 3 times a start, Moose had to deal some potent lineups across the AL. Not just the Red Sox and Yankees and Blue Jays, but the Indians and Rangers and White Sox boasted some formidable offenses.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,725
Just as a point of clarification...I asked who had the better career, not who was the better pitcher. I think we'd all pretty much agree that Schilling was the best pitcher of the group. Here were their respective best seasons:

Mussina (1992): 241.0 ip, 18-5, 2.54 era, 3.19 fip, 157 era+, 1.08 whip, 4.9 k/9, 8.2 bWAR
Schilling (2001): 256.2 ip, 22-6, 2.98 era, 3.11 fip, 157 era+, 1.08 whip, 10.3 k/9, 8.8 bWAR
Pettitte (2005): 222.1 ip, 17-9, 2.39 era, 3.07 fip, 177 era+, 1.03 whip, 6.9 k/9, 6.8 bWAR
Cone (1988): 231.1 ip, 20-3, 2.22 era, 2.58 fip, 171 era+, 1.12 whip, 8.3 k/9, 5.5 bWAR

But best *career* may be a different thing. It may still be Schilling, but I think best career is a little different question than best pitcher.
 

brs3

sings praises of pinstripes
SoSH Member
May 20, 2008
4,678
Jackson Heights, NYC
These guys are similar, but Schilling unquestionably picked it up a notch in the postseason again and again, giving him a clear edge IMO. 2.23 ERA in 133 innings, 2.06 ERA in 48 WS innings. He's tossed 2 shutouts in postseason play, including 1in the World Series. And he did a lot of it in his mid to late 30s and at 40.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,928
If I take away rooting interest, the most enjoyable guys to watch were Schil, Cone, Moose, AP. The first 3 are close, I did not enjoy AP.

Cone is the funniest guy of the group so that probably added to my enjoyment of watching him.

iirc, Mussina was more imposing when on the Os but I did not watch a lot of those games.
 

RGREELEY33

Potty Mouth
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
3,779
Orange County, CA
I would agree with others that Schilling is the best of that group, and it isn't particularly close when you factor in the postseason heroics.

Pettite and Cone are not really in the same conversation as Mussina and Schilling, and if Mussina is a Hall of Famer, then Schilling should go in yesterday.
 

drleather2001

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,522
That's an alternate reality I always wonder about.
The Sox signed Manny as a Plan B after losing out on the Mussina sweepstakes, so it's a fairly complicated think-piece. The Sox ultimately signed Nomo as their "big" 2000 offseason pitcher acquisition (hey, he threw a no hitter!) about a week after Mussina signed with the Yanks, but less directly I wonder if, had they gotten Mussina, Derek Lowe ever gets converted back to being a starter.

And I don't know who they get in place of Manny. My hunch is they sign Ken Caminiti on a 2 year deal like the one he signed with Texas.
 
Last edited:

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
16,032
where I was last at
Schilling was the best pitcher of the four, but in terms of career, Pettite being an integral part of 5-championship teams, and in general being a very relaible post-season starter, and often (IIRC) pitching the 2nd game in post-season series after the MFY's lost the 1st game is going under appreciated. He showed up BIG in the post-season.
 
The Sox signed Manny as a Plan B after losing out on the Mussina sweepstakes, so it's a fairly complicated think-piece. The Sox ultimately signed Nomo as their "big" 2000 offseason pitcher acquisition (hey, he threw a no hitter!) about a week after Mussina signed with the Yanks, but less directly I wonder if, had they gotten Mussina, Derek Lowe ever gets converted back to being a starter.

And I don't know who they get in place of Manny. My hunch is they sign Ken Caminiti on a 2 year deal like the one he signed with Texas.
To further extend it, if they had signed Bernie Williams after 1998 and Mike Mussina after 2000, instead of Manny, and went forward with Williams and Mussina.
The late 1990s/early 2000s were an interesting time.
 

drleather2001

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,522
To further extend it, if they had signed Bernie Williams after 1998 and Mike Mussina after 2000, instead of Manny, and went forward with Williams and Mussina.
The late 1990s/early 2000s were an interesting time.
Not to derail but Bernie was never going to sign with Boston. He used Boston as leverage to get more money out of Steinbrenner.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
5,725
Schilling was the best pitcher of the four, but in terms of career, Pettite being an integral part of 5-championship teams, and in general being a very relaible post-season starter, and often (IIRC) pitching the 2nd game in post-season series after the MFY's lost the 1st game is going under appreciated. He showed up BIG in the post-season.
Pettitte's career was incredibly good and successful. He was never the best pitcher in the league, and rarely even the best pitcher on his team. But he had a tremendous career. 3x all star, 5x WS winner, 256 wins (we all know wins is a flawed stat but it says something when you have racked up 256 of them)....the guy was very very impressive when all is said and done.
 

donutogre

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,725
Philadelphia
I'll readily recognize that Petttite wasn't as good as Mussina or Schilling -- but man, I really enjoy watching pitchers who are durable and reliable. He's not the kind of guy who would lead a rotation, but he's the kind of second starter that I always want the Sox to have. Lucky right now to have a top two of Sale and Price for sure, but (Yankees nonsense aside) Pettitte is the kind of guy I'd happy to have in the rotation for years.
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
7,767
The Yay Area
There’s not a planet in this galaxy where Pettitte is nearly as good as Schilling.
Yeah, but we didn't say "who was better." We said "who had the better career." I feel like I'm giving Schilling a lot of credit for 2004, being one of the 25, etc. It's not unreasonable IMHO to give Pettitte credit for winning a whole bunch of rings. That's a pretty damn good career.
 

drleather2001

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,522
Take away the postseason heroics and Pettitte still had a career about like Tim Hudson’s. That’s pretty solid. It’s not like the guy was a tagalong in those Yankees teams.

That being said, yeah he wasn’t anyone that ever dazzled me (though bias is a thing).
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,206
Yeah, but we didn't say "who was better." We said "who had the better career." I feel like I'm giving Schilling a lot of credit for 2004, being one of the 25, etc. It's not unreasonable IMHO to give Pettitte credit for winning a whole bunch of rings. That's a pretty damn good career.
Then how do you get to Mussina being clearly the best of the lot?
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,206
In 2002 Schilling went 23-7, struck out 316, had a FIP of 2.40 and a WHIP of .0968, and wasn't even the best pitcher on his own team (The Big Unit, with an ERA+ of 195 and 334 Ks, 10.7 WAR).
Those were some pretty hard-luck 7 losses.
 

BuellMiller

lurker
Mar 25, 2015
299
Yes, Cone was the only one with 1 CYA, but Schilling was the only one with more than one top 2 finish (he had three 2nds: 2001, 2002, 2004). No shame in losing to Randy Johnson two times in a row (when RJ had bWAR>10 in each season), and then losing to peak Johan Santana in 2004.
And his postseason numbers are even more impressive if you take away that Game 1 start in the 2004 ALCS when his ankle was all kinds of messed up. (eg ERA drops from 2.23 to 1.86)