—John Milton

A wreathed garland of deserved praise,
Of praise deserved, unto Thee I give

—George Herbert

Jon Garland won his 16th game yesterday beating the M's, 3-1, and allowing just one run, five hits, and two walks in 7.1 innings. He is just 4-4 in his last eight starts, dating back to June 26, but has lowered his ERA from 3.40 to 3.29 with (with a 3.04 ERA over the period).

Barring any rests the Sox give him down what appears to be a meaningless stretch run, Garland should get ten more starts, which means he could potentially win 26 for the year. Garland appears to be the front runner for the AL Cy Young award, which might help spur the Sox to get all his starts in, especially if he can top 25 wins, however, unlikely.

No pitcher has won 25 since Bob Welch fifteen years ago. He's actually the only pitcher do win that many games in the last 25 years (Steve Stone won 25 in 1980). Given that Garland has gotten a decision in all but one of his starts this year, it is not inconceivable (to quote Vizzini in "The Princess Bride") that he would be able to get a decision in his last ten, and what they hey, why can't they all be wins?

Should he reach 26 wins, he would be just the third pitcher since 1969 to do so. Only 21 have done it in the last 75 years, most of which were played before five-man rotations became de rigueur:

Of course, Garland's 3.29 ERA, though much lower than his career ERA to start the season 4.68), is a bit hefty for a Cy Young candidate. Should he keep that ERA and still win 26, he would have one of the highest ERAs for anyone who won as many games since the "Modern" era began. Here are the only men since 1900 to win 26 with an ERA of 3.00 or above (by the way, it was common in the nineteenth century with its one- or two-man rotations):

As for Cy Young winners, here are the only award winners with ERAs of 3.00 or above:

As I said earlier, Garland has had a decision in all but one of his 22 starts this year (95.45%). Should he win his final ten to give him 26 wins, he would also have a decision in 96.88% of starts, a remarkably high amount (and also a good indication of why he probably won't be able to win 26) That would be the highest ratio of decision per game pitched for a 20 game winner since Gaylord Perry's 1972 campaign. Here are all the men over 95% in the last 95 years:

Finally, Garland entered the season with just 46 wins against 51 defeats in his five seasons in Chicago. If Garland wins at least 25 games this year, he would have one of the lowest career win totals prior to winning 25 ever:

Pitcher	Yr	W	L	PCT	G	ERA	Pre W	Pre L	Pre G
Russ Ford	1910	26	6	.813	36	1.65	0	0	1
Larry Cheney	1912	26	10	.722	42	2.85	1	0	3
Bill Donovan	1901	25	15	.625	45	2.77	3	10	27
Bill James	1914	26	7	.788	46	1.90	6	10	24
George McConnell	1915	25	10	.714	44	2.20	12	29	61
Dick Rudolph	1914	26	10	.722	42	2.35	14	14	37
Togie Pittinger	1902	27	16	.628	46	2.52	15	25	52
Tom Seaton	1913	27	12	.692	52	2.60	16	12	44
Ron Guidry	1978	25	3	.893	35	1.74	16	8	48
Mel Parnell	1949	25	7	.781	39	2.77	17	11	50
Charley Root	1927	26	15	.634	48	3.76	18	21	69
Dave Ferriss	1946	25	6	.806	40	3.25	21	10	35
Wes Ferrell	1930	25	13	.658	43	3.31	21	12	46
Eddie Rommel	1922	27	13	.675	51	3.28	23	30	79
Johnny Morrison	1923	25	13	.658	42	3.49	27	18	68
Joe McGinnity	1900	28	8	.778	44	2.94	28	16	48
Jesse Barnes	1919	25	9	.735	38	2.40	28	37	101
Howie Camnitz	1909	25	6	.806	41	1.62	31	21	81
Tom Seaver	1969	25	7	.781	36	2.21	32	25	71
Walter Johnson	1910	25	17	.595	45	1.36	32	48	90
Rube Marquard	1912	26	11	.703	43	2.57	33	25	88
Christy Mathewson	1903	30	13	.698	45	2.26	34	37	80
Hal Newhouser	1944	29	9	.763	47	2.22	34	52	137
Jack Coombs	1910	31	9	.775	45	1.30	35	35	102
Dazzy Vance	1924	28	6	.824	35	2.16	36	31	84
Juan Marichal	1963	25	8	.758	41	2.41	37	23	77
Jeff Tesreau	1914	26	10	.722	42	2.37	39	20	77
Dizzy Dean	1934	30	7	.811	50	2.66	39	33	95
Jack Chesbro	1902	28	6	.824	35	2.17	42	32	87
Jeff Pfeffer	1916	25	11	.694	41	1.92	42	27	90
Mordecai Brown	1906	26	6	.813	36	1.04	42	35	82
Claude Hendrix	1914	29	10	.744	49	1.69	42	30	103
Tom Seaton	1914	25	14	.641	44	3.03	43	24	96
Jack Quinn	1914	26	14	.650	46	2.60	44	37	124