Talk:300-win club

message: Glavine was a member of the NY Mets when he achieved his 300 wins.
I will update the page accordingly.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.65.149.55 (talk) 12:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Glavine is currently a free agent. He has yet to announce his retirement from MLB. Take him off only after he announces his retirement. Darwin's Bulldog (talk) 06:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's the definition of retired, not non-active.  Anybody not currently playing or under a signed contract is non-active. The criteria for bolding is being active (ie currently playing professional baseball) not simply non-retired. Glavine, despite not having announced retirement is clearly not currently playing professional baseball. Otherwise, we'd both count as active players, as neither of us have announced retirement. 216.121.141.237 (talk) 12:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then by your definition every player would be retired during the off season. Until Glavine announces his retirement, he remains active. Darwin's Bulldog (talk) 20:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, because they're still under contract.  Glavine is non-active.  If you want to change bolding criteria to un-retired do so, but it's a different thing. 216.121.141.237 (talk) 12:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, by your definition players who file for free agency during the off season would be retired. And no, neither of us would be considered active players since neither of us have been signed. Therefore, neither of us are able to retire from a job that we've never worked. Darwin's Bulldog (talk) 03:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Glavine

message: The team listed on the page appears to be the last team the pitcher was with, an odd choice.  Randy Johnson is listed as a SF Giant, where he won 8 games.  Maddux was 194-88 for the Braves, yet he's listed as a Cub, where he was 133-112. Clemens won 192 for Boston, but he's listed as a Yankee, where he won 83.  The better policy would be to list either the team for whom he won the most games, or the team he entered the Hall of Fame under, if that is different.  Johnson won 130 for Seattle and 118 for Arizona, so that is a close call, but listing him as a Giant is ridiculous.  Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 01:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see now that the team listed is who the pitcher won his 300th game with.  Still an odd choice, illustrated by Johnson's numbers.  I'm having trouble finding the actual number, but I'm betting he *beat* the Giants more times than he won as one. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 01:46, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure he did. But as you see, there's a column for the date of the 300th win, so it only makes sense to say what team he pitched for when getting that 300th win as opposed to what team he won the most games for, or went into the Hall of Fame representing. Those two facts can be easily found on the player's page and the Hall of Fame page respectively. This page is only about the 300 win club, and the 300th win. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yet, 300-wins is a *career* mark.  Where he was for particular win is not as important as where he compiled the bulk of the career wins. It simply creates an odd identifier for some of these pitchers, especially Johnson. (And, btw, how many games they won for each team is not listed on the pages of the pitchers I mentioned; I had to go to Baseball-Reference for that.) Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 01:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Team listing

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 300 win club. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130925165825/http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=acwd6Kb2NIgk&refer=us to https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=acwd6Kb2NIgk&refer=us
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:13, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified