MLB: Ranking the Top 7 Starting Rotations in Baseball

Use your ← → (arrows) to browse


Mar 11, 2013; Surprise, AZ, USA; San Francisco Giants starting pitcher Madison Bumgarner (40) pitches during the second inning against the Texas Rangers at Surprise Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports

As the old saying goes, pitching wins championships. Well with the San Francisco Giants winning two out of the last three World Series on the strength of their arms, we can safely assume the old saying is alive and well. Big sluggers put butts in seats but stellar mound’s men really do lead to victory parades, and celebrations all winter. There are a lot of amazing rotations in baseball, it’s no secret pitching has completely dominated in the post steroid area, but the question remains who has the best?

The three biggest things I considered when deciding on my list is how deep a rotation is from the ace to the number 5, how dominate the pitchers can be when they are at their best, and how healthy you can expect the starters to remain.

Use your ← → (arrows) to browse

Tags: Atlanta Braves Cincinnati Reds Detroit Tigers Featured Los Angeles Dodgers Oakland Athletics Philadelphia Phillies Popular San Franciso Giants Tampa Bay Rays Tim Lincecum Toronto Blue Jays Washington Nationals

  • Baily Deeter

    Great article! I could nitpick and say to flip the Nats and Giants and put the Phillies lower, which is what I would do, but the facts are good and I like the rankings in general. Nice work!

    • http://www.facebook.com/christopher.cooper.5030 Christopher Cooper

      Thank you for reading. I agree with you that the Nats have more talent than the Giants but I also don’t trust that they will all stay off the DL.

      • Baily Deeter

        Good point, but I think Strasburg will be fine. We’ll see about Jordan Zimmerman though.

  • Curt

    Good article, but as a Dodger fan I feel I should remind you that they have Josh Becket penciled in the rotation. Probably # 3 behind Zack. Who was signed for $147 mil, not $159.